An insurgency swells, but Pakistan focuses on India

[InExile]

I think we could say that Pakistan initiated aggression against India in 1965, 6 years before 1971. Given that and the mass slaughter of innocent Bangladeshis by the Pakistan military; I feel little regret for the Indian intervention in East Pakistan; though I would generally agree that it is not acceptable to intervene in the internal affairs of another nation; but there are exceptions that are laid out quite clearly in the UN charter; namely genocide, ethnic cleansing and nuclear proliferation to name a few.

Look, we could go on all day playing aggressor and victim over and over and over again. The past is past; Bangladesh would have broken away in any case without Indian intervention; probably after much more slaughter and the UN being forced to intervene.

We should look at realities in the present situation; not focus on alleged wrongs in the past; because lets face it; you are never going to convince me, and I am never going to convince me. You can condemn me morally for it and I will do the same to you.

End result.....nothing.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I dont have any sources with which to counter those claims, but I think I will accept your 'meddling' concern. Both sides did it, happens the world over. You false sense of bravado covered your eyes to the ground realities and Pakistan did initiate a pre-emptive strike on India thus precipitating its dismemberment. But all things considered, that was bound to happen, it was only a matter of time - Indian intervention or not - and you people really helped hasten the process. Anyway, didnt you start it with Kashmir?

Nothing is set in stone -had India not exacerbated the situation with her support for the separatists/terrorists in East Pakistan, perhaps the need for a military crackdown would not have been felt, there would not have been open violent civil war, and nowhere close to the refugees we saw - and so you cannot remove the Indian factor and still claim the result was inevitable.

And no, we did not start it with Kashmir since Kashmir was disputed territory, and the reasons for attempting to spark an insurrection in 1965 I have already pointed out. East Pakistan was sovereign undisputed Pakistani territory.

Lets see, giving visas to mountaineers to climb peaks in disputed territory, claiming it as ones own, shopping for extreme winter clothing for troops, preparing for an impending assault- now if THAT isn't considered provocation in international diplomacy, then pray, what is? Now China is doing it with Kashmiris today. Does not bode well for provocateurs, all I can say.

No, none of that was a military provocation, and the whole 'arctic gear' story has only one poor source - and if you had concerns, then you should have utilized the mechanism endorsed in the Simla Pact, of raising the issue with Pakistan diplomatically.

In fact Siachen was a blatant violation of Simla, and no surprise that it occurred under the watch of Indira Gandhi - there you have your 'backstabbing example' as well.

Agree with your UN resolution, and Indian act of annexing kashmir, but still it doesnt dilute the fact that Pakistan has always been the aggressor, militarily. All (mis)adventures ended in disasters! Most learn from their mistakes and form up. AM, What happened?

Continue to repeat a lie after the lie has just been debunked?

I just showed you how India, with her support for terrorism in East Pakistan, was the aggressor in that conflict - the same in Siachen, and that 1947 was in fact not against India, but the Maharajah and his atrocities against Kashmiris who rose in rebellion against a dictator. And on that count, while criticizing Pakistan, don't forget India's own military interventions in Junagadh and Hyderabad, to ensure that those states acceded to India, though it appeared the rulers might choose Pakistan.

The conditions behind 1965 I have already explained.

Of course, people were livid about a country - where people of different hues lived together in relative peace for more than a millenia - carved into two, that too on a communal basis, leading to mass genocides and atrocities on both sides. But if you think Indian leaders wanted to destroy Pakistan, they could have easily done it, both covertly and overtly back then (like Bangladesh happened) and even today. You seriously underestimate India's clout and muscle if you are under the impression that there were/are sinister designs on pakistan but not the will power to do it.

As do Indians need to apologize and repent their actions in East Pakistan instead of eulogizing their nations role in supporting separatism and terrorism in another nation, and endorsing Indira Gandhi's hatred, so too do they need to stop the canard of a 'country split in two'. There was no country to split.

The British were leaving a region they had occupied and out of that region the people chose to form two nations - learn to live with and respect that decision. Hindu nationalist canards about "Akhand Bharat ' are not an excuse for the hatred and non-acceptance displayed by Indira Gandhi and some other Indians - it was never one country and never will be. It was always land that belonged to the people who inhabited it, and those people chose to form first two, and then three nations on it.

No sir, you overestimate India's power and the ability of her leadership.

That Pakistan has not been broken further is not from lack of trying on the Indian (and Afghan) part, but because in the North there never was much support for separatism, and in Baluchistan, despite the various insurgencies over the years, the demographics just did not, and do not, exist to make it successful.

You were successful in EP because of a variety of factors - huge Bengali nationalist population, geographical separation from WP etc. - that just cannot be replicated in the Pakistan of today.

Fortunately for all of us Desis, that aint the case. Congress, unlike BJP or other Ultra-Hindu Nationalistic parties, is made up of very weathered, pragmatic leaders with their fingers on the public's pulse. When people were braying for blood post 26/11, the govt in power exercised great restraint, when any other bozo would have had a kneejerk reaction precipitating an unwanted conflict. Didn't happen and you should be really assured that Indian interests lie in a stable Pakistan.

Its your country which is on fire. Introspection is a word you people need to introduce in your dictionaries and practice everyday - so as to save yourselves.
Indian society is not Pakistan centric, Indians love money and gold and bollywood and food and are busy with those things! Guns and religious fundamentalism - nope sir, not part of our society!

The true test of whether Indians have rejected the hatred and non-acceptance personified by Indira Gandhi will be when Indians can apologize for their nation's actions in East Pakistan, not eulogize them. Till then I don't buy it.

Our country is on fire, but that does not mean we ignore everything else in the world, especially the threat from an extremely hostile neighboring State, either, especially as that state makes noises about war and deploys greater and greater troops and equipment on our border.

Indian 'restraint' after 27/11 indicates nothing - it could very easily be an attempt to garner global sympathy and support so that at the next pretext a war against Pakistan is launched.

After all, for years Nehru was also swearing that India would hold a plebiscite in Kashmir and allow the Kashmiris to determine their destiny, and for years India was committed to the UNSC resolutions, before the commitment was violated, as was the Simla Accord when Siachen was occupied.

Sorry, but precedence shows that even official Indian commitments aren't worth the paper they are written on, and you want Pakistan to believe India has changed because of some sort of 'restraint' after 27/11?

Ludicrous.

 

[rajeev]

Again, some thought bytes.

India is involved with GHQ bombing too! No introspection, again. The sage continues

 

[Skeptic]

It was a liberation force dispatched at the request of the Kashmiri people themselves when their Hindu tyrant betrayed his own people.

Who exactly was the person interacting and communicating these request to Pakistan??? The insurgents were the reason Maharaja came running to India remember not the other way round, where does betrayal come in here??

Pakistan provdes moral support to Kashmiris freedom fighters. The fact that the West, as stated above, has decided to parrot the Indian spin does not make the Indian blather any more credible.

Moral???? what is moral in killing civilians. LeT was set-up and nurtured by ISI and it was declared a terrorist organization by GoP. It still continues to run its shop even after being banned and "Moral Support" is the excuse that you could come up with. Seems like either I really need to keep-up with changing Oxford. It is not the west but Pakistani govt itself which has admitted by banning LeT and similar organizations.

These were military incusrions and, effectively, acts of war. You better go find that dictionary of yours to educate yourself on the difference.

LoLz Milletary incursions, when dead bodies of several dead terrorists was ******* in Indian soil after Kargil, no-one had the courage to accept them as their citizens leave alone as soldier. Just by having them on Payroll does not make one a soldier. They were fighting without Uniforms and the govt. abandoned them once dead. Yeah, what analogy was given for American's treatment of Pakistan - A used condom, well this was even worse as not even proper disposal of bodies was conducted.

The issue is not when an event occured but why India gets a pass on its terrorism.
Do try to keep up.

Still to hear of acts of terrorism by India on Pakistan leave alone the timing and its effect.

On the contrary, India's support for LTTE terrorists, its forceful annexation of Sikkim, and bullying of Nepal are only some of the skeletons in India's closet.

How come Pakistan govt always seems to know more about LTTE than Sri Lanka??
Forceful Annexation of Sikkim - Yeah and Alice really went to wonderland
Bullying of Nepal - WTH even foreign relations of a nations are skeletons in closet. Even if true (which its not) does not hold any water.

Sri Lanka depends totally on India for many critical resource, including oil. They have been bullied by India long enough, which is one of the reasons they are so friendly with Pakistan and China.

National integrity in never higher than economic dependence. If they felt India was causing trouble through LTTE they would have certainly pressed the issue. It never happened. They can have friendly relations with any nation they choose to, they are out friends not slaves.

The Bangaldeshis have been quite vocal about Indian terrorism within their country even before 1971.

Yeah that's why they preferred parting away from Pakistan with Indian support. a very intelligent argument (*sarcastic)

Rediff quoted "The News" as the source. In case you did not realize its a Pakistani Daily

Uh huh. Next time you get your "Incredible India" bubble burst, try not to take it so personally.

keep blowing your own bubbles and bursting them its your personal past-time why would I care.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Again, some thought bytes.

India is involved with GHQ bombing too! No introspection, again. The sage continues

[url="

- Attack on GHQ Pakistan EXPOSED by General Hamid GuL, Indian R&AW and MOSAD backed Talibans Involved[/url]

[url="

- Indian's terrorist Attack On GHQ Rawalpindi[/url]

No different from India (through her ministers and PM even I believe) blaming Pakistani institutions for the Mumbai attacks.

AFAIK, the GoP has not officially blamed India for the GHQ attacks, and neither have several other commentators - many have pointed the finger at the TTP in SW.

Clean your own house first, perhaps?

 

[gubbi]

Nothing is set in stone -had India not exacerbated the situation with her support for the separatists/terrorists in East Pakistan, perhaps the need for a military crackdown would not have been felt, there would not have been open violent civil war, and nowhere close to the refugees we saw - and so you cannot remove the Indian factor and still claim the result was inevitable.

Yup, we were supposed to take in all those refugees kicked out of the 'erstwhile' EP and assimilate them without a protest. We didnt and we acted. The results are there for everyone to see. Accept it and move on. Else remain in that time warp, dreaming of what things could be.

And no, we did not start it with Kashmir since Kashmir was disputed territory, and the reasons for attempting to spark an insurrection in 1965 I have already pointed out. East Pakistan was sovereign undisputed Pakistani territory.

You people made it a disputed territory. For all intents and purposes, India considers Kashmir an integral part of the country. Period. You got a problem with that, you got to deal with it. Sorry bro, no help there, you invaded, considered it a disputed territory, you wanted to internationalize it, YOUR PROBLEM, not ours! See where that took you. Oh what a shame.
I do agree with you about East Pakistan. It was a sovereign undisputed Pakistani territory. But, you lost it due to your own policies, we just happened to be in the right place at the right time - for us i.e.

No, none of that was a military provocation, and the whole 'arctic gear' story has only one poor source - and if you had concerns, then you should have utilized the mechanism endorsed in the Simla Pact, of raising the issue with Pakistan diplomatically. In fact Siachen was a blatant violation of Simla, and no surprise that it occurred under the watch of Indira Gandhi - there you have your 'backstabbing example' as well.

Treading on a country's sovereignty by issuing visas to tourists to visit areas which are "disputed" amounts to a provocation. Pakistan started it. Its very clear that Pakistan's policy is forever going to be seen though Kashmir tainted glasses. No wonder, the picture is so unclear.
Backstabbing, no sir, I prefer to call it tit-for-tat. You did pre-emptive strikes on India, we found an excellent opportunity to act and act we did. Followed by a resounding military and diplomatic victory. The Victorious write the History, sir.

Continue to repeat a lie after the lie has just been debunked?

now what lie were you talking about?

I just showed you how India, with her support for terrorism in East Pakistan, was the aggressor in that conflict - the same in Siachen, and that 1947 was in fact not against India, but the Maharajah and his atrocities against Kashmiris who rose in rebellion against a dictator. And on that count, while criticizing Pakistan, don't forget India's own military interventions in Junagadh and Hyderabad, to ensure that those states acceded to India, though it appeared the rulers might choose Pakistan.

The conditions behind 1965 I have already explained.

No matter how you want to explain it, no matter what facts you want to post, the truth is that Pakistan wants/covets/wishes for/pines for KASHMIR! At what cost? Even if you lose everything, Pakistan will never let go of Kashmir issue, and till the time you will cling to that dead horse, Pakistan will not progress. That my friend is the naked truth.

As do Indians need to apologize and repent their actions in East Pakistan instead of eulogizing their nations role in supporting separatism and terrorism in another nation, and endorsing Indira Gandhi's hatred, so too do they need to stop the canard of a 'country split in two'. There was no country to split.
The British were leaving a region they had occupied and out of that region the people chose to form two nations - learn to live with and respect that decision. Hindu nationalist canards about "Akhand Bharat ' are not an excuse for the hatred and non-acceptance displayed by Indira Gandhi and some other Indians - it was never one country and never will be. It was always land that belonged to the people who inhabited it, and those people chose to form first two, and then three nations on it.

Hatred, Akhand Bharat, 'No country to split' - keep on harping on those tunes and you will end up writing a piece for a symphony orchestra. None of those words mean anything to Indians.
Hate Pakistan? What for? Why?
Akhand bharat - only some fringe elements - aka 'non-state actors' or fanatics dream of it. But hey, living in a democratic country with a secular constitution has its perks. Morons enjoy them too.
No country to split - believe in whatever fancies you or keeps you happy. truth is far from your wishes and dreams. Doesnt change anything.

No sir, you overestimate India's power and the ability of her leadership.

You wish. Wait and watch...its already begun.

That Pakistan has not been broken further is not from lack of trying on the Indian (and Afghan) part, but because in the North there never was much support for separatism, and in Baluchistan, despite the various insurgencies over the years, the demographics just did not, and do not, exist to make it successful.
You were successful in EP because of a variety of factors - huge Bengali nationalist population, geographical separation from WP etc. - that just cannot be replicated in the Pakistan of today.

Excuses for not being able to keep your country intact. That's how everyone sees it. When a state cannot extend its writ in an area, more so when its own armed forces cannot exercise martial control, the state should not/cannot claim those lands as its sovereign territory.

The true test of whether Indians have rejected the hatred and non-acceptance personified by Indira Gandhi will be when Indians can apologize for their nation's actions in East Pakistan, not eulogize them. Till then I don't buy it.

Why should Indians apologize for your incompetence? Pakistan provoked India into multiple conflicts, Indian found an opportunity to strike back and India did it. Whats there to apologize?

Our country is on fire, but that does not mean we ignore everything else in the world, especially the threat from an extremely hostile neighboring State, either, especially as that state makes noises about war and deploys greater and greater troops and equipment on our border.

Indian troop deployments post 26/11? India threatening to invade Pakistan? Sources or you are lying. Like I said, Rome burns while Nero plays his fiddle.

Indian 'restraint' after 27/11 indicates nothing - it could very easily be an attempt to garner global sympathy and support so that at the next pretext a war against Pakistan is launched.

We achieved what we wanted. Didnt we? Now didnt that restraint come in handy?

After all, for years Nehru was also swearing that India would hold a plebiscite in Kashmir and allow the Kashmiris to determine their destiny, and for years India was committed to the UNSC resolutions, before the commitment was violated, as was the Simla Accord when Siachen was occupied.

You need to look into why such a thing happened. Nothing happens out of the blue in international diplomacy.
And yes, Kashmir is an integral part of India. It was Pakistan who considers it as 'disputed' territory.
As for Shimla agreement, how much did Pakistan stick to its promises?

Sorry, but precedence shows that even official Indian commitments aren't worth the paper they are written on, and you want Pakistan to believe India has changed because of some sort of 'restraint' after 27/11?
Ludicrous.

Ok, dont trust us. We are not the ones who are on the verge of losing things for which brave men laid down their lives. Its not our country that's on fire. Its not we who are suspicious of an 'impending' invasion when all actions point to the contrary. Its not us who are paranoid. Ludicrous? Dont think so.
But remember, your choices at this critical juncture will dictate as to how you will be perceived as a nation in the future and will be dealt with accordingly. Gotta earn it, my man.

 

[rajeev]

No different from India (through her ministers and PM even I believe) blaming Pakistani institutions for the Mumbai attacks.

AFAIK, the GoP has not officially blamed India for the GHQ attacks, and neither have several other commentators - many have pointed the finger at the TTP in SW.

Clean your own house first, perhaps?

You must be kidding right? Pakistanis were responsible for Mumbai attacks, right? Commando action training was illustrated by their actions and so media accused it. GoI said they had suspicions but alleged that LeT was involved. And what did Pakistan do - released the criminals (so-called moral support of Jihadis in other nations, I suppose)

And what cleaning up are you talking about? No terrorists from India is out there exploding in your country. But there are many terrorists that come from your country that explode in India. This is beyond the so-called moral support that somehow you feel is justified!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Yup, we were supposed to take in all those refugees kicked out of the 'erstwhile' EP and assimilate them without a protest. We didnt and we acted. The results are there for everyone to see. Accept it and move on. Else remain in that time warp, dreaming of what things could be.

The refugees came AFTER India had started supporting the terrorists and separatists - India bore blame for exacerbating the situation to that extent. As I have already pointed out, Indian support for the East Pakistani separatists and terrorists started in the sixties, long before any refugee exodus took place.

Accept the creation of Bangladesh we have - I have no ill will for Mujib or those who argued for an independent Bangladesh. The Indian role is another matter - India must some day apologize for supporting terrorism and separatism in East Pakistan to reject the ideology of hatred and non-acceptance of Pakistan personified by Indira Gandhi.

You people made it a disputed territory. For all intents and purposes, India considers Kashmir an integral part of the country. Period. You got a problem with that, you got to deal with it. Sorry bro, no help there, you invaded, considered it a disputed territory, you wanted to internationalize it, YOUR PROBLEM, not ours! See where that took you. Oh what a shame.

Does not matter what India thinks or Pakistan thinks - the fact is that the issue was taken to the UNSC, and the UNSC ruled it disputed territory, which was accepted by the international community, Pakistan and India, and still is by the former two.

The current Indian position of 'integral part of India' is really just one akin to that of someone who steal land, gets a judgment against him in court, but continues to forcibly occupy that land. The Indian position has no standing legally or morally. As I often point out, if one day India decides to include California in her constitution as an 'integral part of India' that does not make it so.

I do agree with you about East Pakistan. It was a sovereign undisputed Pakistani territory. But, you lost it due to your own policies, we just happened to be in the right place at the right time - for us i.e.

As I pointed out to Developereo - two issues - one Pakistan's internal tensions with respect to poor governance and devolution of powers. Two, the interference of an external state in those issues with the intent to exacerbate them through support for violence and terrorism.

The first does not justify the second - Indian intervention was wrong, and you know it, but you cannot admit it because it requires you admit India was wrong reject years of propaganda fed to you.

Treading on a country's sovereignty by issuing visas to tourists to visit areas which are "disputed" amounts to a provocation. Pakistan started it. Its very clear that Pakistan's policy is forever going to be seen though Kashmir tainted glasses. No wonder, the picture is so unclear.

It was disputed and there was nothing agreed between the two nations on issuing or not issuing Visa's - you cannot argue 'sovereignty' over Visa's for trekking. You could have issued your own visa's. You could have raised the issue diplomatically, instead you chose to violate the Simla Accord and covertly invade Siachen. Unprovoked Indian aggression.

Backstabbing, no sir, I prefer to call it tit-for-tat. You did pre-emptive strikes on India, we found an excellent opportunity to act and act we did. Followed by a resounding military and diplomatic victory. The Victorious write the History, sir.

What pre-emptive strikes occurred in Siachen? And the 'pre-emptive strike' in East Pakistan had occurred with Indian support for terrorism and separatism in EP. If you do not see that as 'aggression', then why should a similar attempt by the PA to stoke an insurrection in dispute Kashmir be considered 'aggression'? By that standard you started the 1965 war, not Pakistan, since the overt military strikes were initiated by India, not Pakistan.

You are not only 'writing history', you are inventing it as you go along.

now what lie were you talking about?

About India not being the initial aggressor in any conflict with Pakistan - East Pakistan, Siachen, Junagadh, Hyderabad - you have plenty of examples debunking that point.

No matter how you want to explain it, no matter what facts you want to post, the truth is that Pakistan wants/covets/wishes for/pines for KASHMIR! At what cost? Even if you lose everything, Pakistan will never let go of Kashmir issue, and till the time you will cling to that dead horse, Pakistan will not progress. That my friend is the naked truth.

Oh but the explanations are important, since history is being 'invented' as we go along, and lies about 'India never being the aggressor are bandied about.

kashmir is not Pakistan's down fall, and we do not have to let go of it. Why should we cave into injustice?

Hatred, Akhand Bharat, 'No country to split' - keep on harping on those tunes and you will end up writing a piece for a symphony orchestra. None of those words mean anything to Indians.
Hate Pakistan? What for? Why?
Akhand bharat - only some fringe elements - aka 'non-state actors' or fanatics dream of it. But hey, living in a democratic country with a secular constitution has its perks.
No country to split - believe in whatever fancies you or keeps you happy. truth is far from your wishes and dreams. Doesnt change anything.

You claim there was a 'country that was split' in 1947? What country was that, and what ideology does that represent if not the ideology of an "Akhand Bharat"? You yourself claimed that Indians were 'livid' over this 'split' - why were they 'livid' if not over 'Akhand Bharat'?

And the hatred is in Indira Gandhis' own words, it is in her actions, and those that eulogize them.

You wish. Wait and watch...its already begun.

Thanks, but neither is Indira Gandhi alive, nor are the circumstances of East Pakistan in existence in today's Pakistan.

Don't be absurd by bandying about ridiculous threats against a nation.

Excuses for not being able to keep your country intact. That's how everyone sees it. When a state cannot extend its writ in an area, more so when its own armed forces cannot exercise martial control, the state should not/cannot claim those lands as its sovereign territory.

Does not matter how its is viewed - the fact is that the attempts by India and Afghanistan to further break Pakistan have failed, despite your claims of India's 'clout and muscle'. Again, leave the inane threats for the third grade playground.

And we will claim what is ours and lay waste to those that seek to destroy it. Unfortunately for India, FATA and Baluchistan are not separated from Pakistan by thousands of miles of Indian territory, nor are any Indian armies stationed in Iran or Afghanistan to march into those lands, nor will Afghanistan have an army in the next several decades, if ever, to be able to accomplish that.

Why should Indians apologize for your incompetence? Pakistan provoked India into multiple conflicts, Indian found an opportunity to strike back and India did it. Whats there to apologize?

We provoked no one - you refused to settle Kashmir as agreed and committed to in the UNSC resolutions. You closed the doors to dialog. You chose to support terrorism and rebellion in East Pakistan, and chose to occupy Siachen in violation of Simla.

The apology is precisely for that - for supporting terrorism and separatism in East Pakistan, unprovoked, and rejecting Indira Gandhis ideology of hatred and non-acceptance of Pakistan.

Indian troop deployments post 26/11? India threatening to invade Pakistan? Sources or you are lying. Like I said, Rome burns while Nero plays his fiddle.

All in the threads here (which I'll dredge up if you truly have selective amnesia) - and the IAF Chief was himself quoted a few months ago admitting that India was considering strikes into Pakistan after the Mumbai attacks.

You need to look into why such a thing happened. Nothing happens out of the blue in international diplomacy.
And yes, Kashmir is an integral part of India. It was Pakistan who considers it as 'disputed' territory.
As for Shimla agreement, how much did Pakistan stick to its promises?

It happened because the Indian leadership acted like land grabbers. The entire international community considers J&K disputed, only India considers it 'integral', again, the example of declaring California to be 'an integral part of India'.

Ok, dont trust us. We are not the ones who are on the verge of losing things for which brave men laid down their lives. Its not our country that's on fire. Its not we who are suspicious of an 'impending' invasion when all actions point to the contrary. Its not us who are paranoid. Ludicrous? Dont think so.
But remember, your choices at this critical juncture will dictate as to how you will be perceived as a nation in the future and will be dealt with accordingly. Gotta earn it, my man.

The fires in our nation can be put out without trusting you, and in fact are being put out without trusting you. Trust for India will come when apologies for past wrongs are given, and the glorification of hate mongers such as Indira Gandhi and her actions is stopped.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You must be kidding right? Pakistanis were responsible for Mumbai attacks, right? Commando action training was illustrated by their actions and so media accused it. GoI said they had suspicions but alleged that LeT was involved. And what did Pakistan do - released the criminals (so-called moral support of Jihadis in other nations, I suppose)

I am referring to the accusations made by the Indian leadership, without evidence, that Pakistani institutions were involved.

Your comments validate my point - clean your own house first before pointing fingers over here.

No criminals have been released - Shah, Lakhvi (masterminds) and 4 or five others are still under arrest and undergoing trial.

Evidence against Saeed has not been provided.

And what cleaning up are you talking about? No terrorists from India is out there exploding in your country. But there are many terrorists that come from your country that explode in India. This is beyond the so-called moral support that somehow you feel is justified!

Again, I am referring to the knee jerk reactions by your government and media in blaming Pakistani institutions, not Pakistani nationals.

And when the US can stop illegal immigration across the US Mexico border you can complain about Pakistan abetting terrorists.

 

[gubbi]

The refugees came AFTER India had started supporting the terrorists and separatists - India bore blame for exacerbating the situation to that extent. As I have already pointed out, Indian support for the East Pakistani separatists and terrorists started in the sixties, long before any refugee exodus took place.

And West Pakistan was blameless. You so easily divert blame onto others. Own up to your mistakes past. Can you point out credible sources for Indian support for separatists in the 60's? Or is that just another part of your blame game?
AFAIK, the bengalis were dissatisfied with your central govt right from 1950's. Wasnt Mukti Bahini formed in the 70's just prior to the war of Independence? Again don't blame us for YOUR INCOMPETENCE!

Accept the creation of Bangladesh we have - I have no ill will for Mujib or those who argued for an independent Bangladesh. The Indian role is another matter - India must some day apologize for supporting terrorism and separatism in East Pakistan to reject the ideology of hatred and non-acceptance of Pakistan personified by Indira Gandhi.

Ah, nice to know you accept Bangladesh - like you had any other options!
And you stick to two little words which Indira Gandhi uttered, take it out of context and create a furor over it accusing a whole country of hate-mongering!
BTW, again sources to support your claim of Indian support for Terrorism? Funny, your army terrorized a population and the population fought back and you accuse others of terrorism?

Does not matter what India thinks or Pakistan thinks - the fact is that the issue was taken to the UNSC, and the UNSC ruled it disputed territory, which was accepted by the international community, Pakistan and India, and still is by the former two.

So what? We don't. Period. (personally I respect your opinion about UN's neutrality)

As I pointed out to Developereo - two issues - one Pakistan's internal tensions with respect to poor governance and devolution of powers. Two, the interference of an external state in those issues with the intent to exacerbate them through support for violence and terrorism.

Exactly. Now concerning number two- it goes both ways, dont it? hint: Get out of Kashmir!

The first does not justify the second - Indian intervention was wrong, and you know it, but you cannot admit it because it requires you admit India was wrong reject years of propaganda fed to you.

Of course, I do accept that India's intervention in East Pakistan was wrong. Goes against the tenets on which India apparently claims a moral high ground. My friend, propaganda/rhetoric is only for the illiterate masses, not for people like you and me.

It was disputed and there was nothing agreed between the two nations on issuing or not issuing Visa's - you cannot argue 'sovereignty' over Visa's for trekking. You could have issued your own visa's. You could have raised the issue diplomatically, instead you chose to violate the Simla Accord and covertly invade Siachen. Unprovoked Indian aggression.

If I am not mistaken, there was no clear demarcation of the line in Siachen-Saltoro region in the Shimla accord - (from the NJ9842 location the boundary would proceed "thence north to the glaciers." UN officials presumed there would be no dispute between India and Pakistan over such a cold and barren region)
Interpretation in both our countries differed and when India realized that the line Pakistan claimed was contrary to India's interpretation, result was Op. Meghdoot.
Perceptions, my friend, perceptions. So you see, it wasn't exactly a "violation" of the Shimla Agreement!

What pre-emptive strikes occurred in Siachen? And the 'pre-emptive strike' in East Pakistan had occurred with Indian support for terrorism and separatism in EP. If you do not see that as 'aggression', then why should a similar attempt by the PA to stoke an insurrection in dispute Kashmir be considered 'aggression'? By that standard you started the 1965 war, not Pakistan, since the overt military strikes were initiated by India, not Pakistan.

I never said anything about pre-emptive strikes in Siachen by Pakistan.
As for your claim about terrorist activities in east Pakistan, credible SOURCES for Indian involvement! Got any evidence?
Rest of your argument, does not hold water, I dont agree. You start conflicts, we end them. Has happened before, will do again in the future if need arises.

You are not only 'writing history', you are inventing it as you go along.
About India not being the initial aggressor in any conflict with Pakistan - East Pakistan, Siachen, Junagadh, Hyderabad - you have plenty of examples debunking that point.

While you are at it, why dont you also claim Gujrat, Mumbai, Chennai, Orissa, UP, Lucknow etc?

kashmir is not Pakistan's down fall, and we do not have to let go of it. Why should we cave into injustice?

Oh, dont cave in to injustice, stop making ludicrous claims and set your own house in order, first! Exercise absolute control over your lands first, exercise civilian control over all your establishments, reign in your citizens - those so called non-state actors or rogue elements, strengthen your government and then lets talk. Take care of the injustices prevalent in your own society. Clean up that load of BS in your own house before looking for dust in other people's houses.

You claim there was a 'country that was split' in 1947? What country was that, and what ideology does that represent if not the ideology of an "Akhand Bharat"? You yourself claimed that Indians were 'livid' over this 'split' - why were they 'livid' if not over 'Akhand Bharat'?

Oh boy. Doesnt that tell you anything? People who lived in those lands fought for independence as one against the British. When the lands were split, people were angry. Why do you take everything out of context, my friend?

Thanks, but neither is Indira Gandhi alive, nor are the circumstances of East Pakistan in existence in today's Pakistan.
Don't be absurd by bandying about ridiculous threats against a nation.

Seriously, think hard, my friend. You dont want to accept the reality.

Does not matter how its is viewed - the fact is that the attempts by India and Afghanistan to further break Pakistan have failed, despite your claims of India's 'clout and muscle'. Again, leave the inane threats for the third grade playground.

But first, why would we want to break up Pakistan? Nope, its more headache and against India's interest. If its in our interest, then you will get all the chance to complain.

And we will claim what is ours.

About time. Good luck and best wishes for the ongoing operations.

All in the threads here (which I'll dredge up if you truly have selective amnesia) - and the IAF Chief was himself quoted a few months ago admitting that India was considering strikes into Pakistan after the Mumbai attacks.

Of course he said that, but then does the IAF chief have authority to order strikes? NOPE. Its the democratically elected civilian GoI who has the authority, albeit only after authorized by the President of India.
Now, did anyone of those claim that we will attack Pakistan? If anything they said, "surgical strikes" on known terrorist establishments. Isn't there a difference between terrorist training camps and the state of Pakistan? Are you equating the two?

The fires in our nation can be put out without trusting you, and in fact are being put out without trusting you. Trust for India will come when apologies for past wrongs are given, and the glorification of hate mongers such as Indira Gandhi and her actions is stopped.

Good for you then. Btw, again, why should India apologize for your incompetence? Demand that from your own incompetent politicians, but mostly those Army generals who took over power illegally and pushed Pakistan further into chaos.

Whoo...that was one long post.

 

[irfan1173]

AoA

No point blaming India for what happened in East Pakistan.We were squarely responsible for the breakup. As far as India interfering in our internal affairs, we were doing the same supporting groups in Indian north east all through the 60's.

 

[InExile]

Seriously, threads like these would be funny if not tragic.

Posters from both sides talk at each other, instead of to each other.

I dont think that Indians have to apologize for 1971.

Pakistan can hardly claim the high moral ground considering what they did to the Bangladeshis.

 

[InExile]

AoA

No point blaming India for what happened in East Pakistan.We were squarely responsible for the breakup. As far as India interfering in our internal affairs, we were doing the same supporting groups in Indian north east all through the 60's.

Very good post; if only more of us both Indians and Pakistanis would focus on our own mistakes rather than trying to prove how bad the other side is.

I freely admit that my country has done a lot of things wrong, especially in Kashmir, where unfortunately we cant deny we have blood on our hands.

 

[IceCold]

Seriously, threads like these would be funny if not tragic.

Posters from both sides talk at each other, instead of to each other.

I dont think that Indians have to apologize for 1971.

Pakistan can hardly claim the high moral ground considering what they did to the Bangladeshis.

Pakistan isnt claming any moral high grounds but so should India and articles such as above should be thrown to garbage.
And what we did to BD according to you is still none of India's business as BD wasnt a disputed territory. India spread terrorism, fueled insurgency, spew hatred and then declared war resulting in the break up of Pakistan and now India is concerned why is Pakistan focusing on India? yeah right So quit this self righteousness. Its pathetic Indians claiming moral high grounds here.

 

[toxic_pus]

Nothing is set in stone -had India not exacerbated the situation with her support for the separatists/terrorists in East Pakistan, perhaps the need for a military crackdown would not have been felt, there would not have been open violent civil war, and nowhere close to the refugees we saw - and so you cannot remove the Indian factor and still claim the result was inevitable.

The seed of separation was sowed by non other than the Quaid-a-Azam, Mr Jinnah. Blinded by his ‘2 nation’ joke of a theory, he forgot to take stock of Bengalis and their fierce cultural nationalism. Mr Jinnah’s speech at Dhaka University, where he expressed his desire to impose Urdu as the only national language, directly resulted in the Bhasha Andolon (language movement) in 1952. That was the first time, the Bengalis of East Pakistan realized, that Pakistan was all about the western ‘moth-eaten country’ (Mr Jinnah’s words, not mine), and for the first time experienced how brutal the ‘martial race’ could be to suppress a legitimate peaceful civil movement. No, India had no hand in it.

That was 1st strike.

The movement eventually fizzled out, although the sentiments were very much alive. Then in 1965, a tin pot dictator, Ayub Khan decided that he had balls the size of Jupiter and imposed an unnecessary war on India. The entire Pak juggernaut was concentrated in the West, and East was left, practically, unguarded. Had it not been for India’s concern over a possible Chinese intervention, which forced her to concentrate a large chunk of her troops in the North and North-East, or had she decided to risk the Chinese intervention and attack East Pakistan, IA would have practically walked right into Dhaka. Bengalis of East Pakistan, who had always considered themselves to be no less patriotic than their western counterparts, were finally convinced that Pakistan in reality belonged to the West, and East was just a ‘also-there’, to be milked when needed and thrown away when not. This led to the second wave of Bengali nationalism, which in turn led to the rise of Sk Mujibar Rahaman. And again, India had no hand in it.

That was 2nd strike.

All this culminated into Mujib's electoral win in 1970, by a large majority. But another tin pot dictator, Yahya Khan and his trusted sidekick, apparently in opposition and a clown of a politician, Bhutto, who would rather eat ‘grass’, simply dismissed Mujib’s victory, almost by a wave of hand. That was the 3rd & final strike and once again, India had no hand in it. This dismissal led to massive civil disobedience movement, to which the ‘martial race’ reacted in the only way known to it – brutal suppression, through Operation Searchlight. That and only that, led to massive migration to India.

It didn’t need India to ‘instigate’ or ‘exacerbate’ any situation by supporting the freedom fighters. By repeatedly refusing to recognize the Bengali sentiments and using force, literal and political, as means to address their legitimate concerns, Pakistanis were shooting their feet quite diligently, and successfully driving the freedom fighters to seek for help from India.

Yes, Indian intelligence agencies, may have been active in East Pakistan, much before the ‘refugee’ problems, but the refugee problem was certainly not of India’s making. It was beyond the capacity of a fledgling intelligence agency, RAW, the prime accused, founded only around 1968, to pull something as grandeur and complex as splitting a country into two, within 3 years of its existence – a feat which not many intelligence agencies could achieve, if at all any agency has indeed achieved so.

It would have required RAW, or any intelligence agency, to be able to influence Pakistani state policy, to the extent of convincing the powers that be in Pakistan to carry out nonsensical and stripped off logic, suicidal policies, in order to achieve what RAW and other Indian intelligence agencies are ‘accused’ to have achieved. Even if one assumes that Bengalis in the east were all boneheads, who didn’t know right from wrong and needed Indian intelligence agencies to stoke their cultural nationalism, it still was in Pakistan’s hand to decide on how to diffuse the whole situation. 7th March, 1971 was the date, when Mujibur officially called for independence and on 25th March, a mere 18 days after that declaration, Pakistan launched the most brutal crack down, that is only second to Hitler’s antiques and perhaps pales even Pol Pot’s. ‘Genocide’ was the term used by Mr Archer Blood, the American diplomat in East Pakistan, to describe that military action. That, Pakistani leadership chose the most violent option available, was not something for which Indian intelligence agencies could be held responsible. The refugee problem was the direct result of Pakistani policies. India, or any of her intelligence agency, had absolutely nothing to do with it.

Diluting and then quietly sweeping Pakistan’s own failures and mistakes, under hysterical jingoism, and then setting up the strawman of RAW, and by extension India, can only mean that Pakistan and Pakistanis don’t want to learn from their mistakes. There is plethora of Bangladeshi writers who have written extensively on the liberation war of 1971. That, along with declassified US documents, just fly into the face of the contention that India was somehow responsible for the rise of Bengali nationalism and hence, for the brutal crack down by Pakistanis, the resultant refugee problem and finally, the direct military intervention by India. The sooner Pakistanis realize that it was Pakistan which served Bangladesh to Bangladeshis, on a platter, the sooner s/he will be at peace with him/herself.

The claim that India should ‘apologize to Pakistan’ for 1971, is perhaps the joke of the century and doesn’t deserve any further comment.