Bharti journalist Bit** slapped by the US State department

[Windjammer]

Ny times confirmed that Indian created entire mobilization to coerce Pakistan to reduce militant infiltration into Kashmir and it worked perfect3:

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2002/01/20/world/kashmir-threat-eases-but-us-still-sees-dangers.html


Also just because your Army did not reveal casualties doesn't mean that its casualties were not high.]

Stephen Cohen confirmed this, NY Times published that, didn't some simple Sunil disclosed Pakistani casualties as well.
As for the rest....read and weep...

But India wanted to avoid war. It gambled that its coercive diplomacy and the risk of a nuclear war would compel the United States and Britain to force Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan's president, to withdraw support for the terrorists by ending infiltration into Indian Kashmir and dismantling terrorist camps near the frontier. The tactic worked, up to a point. Infiltration decreased, but India says it increased again at the end of June. It says Pakistan has not tried to close down the camps and end support for terrorists who are already inside Indian Kashmir. India is also sceptical about Pakistan's denial of responsibility for last weekend's killings.

Why India did not bark
http://www.economist.com/node/1239157

 

[Gregor Clegane]

Hundreds of deaths on Pakistan side are your assumptions and have no proof whatsoever. For now we know that India lost 800 soldiers fore nothing and then backed off after getting nothing.

Massive and a clear success for Pakistan.

That's like saying North Korea has no corruption just because they do not give data.

Massive and a clear success for India as infiltration reduced by 90% without even a war.

Stephen Cohen confirmed this, NY Times published that, didn't some simple Sunil disclosed Pakistani casualties as well.
As for the rest....read and weep...


Why India did not bark
http://www.economist.com/node/1239157

It worked perfectly from 2000/year to just 100-120 a year.

 

[Areesh]

Your nukes saved you. That was huge miscalculation from the Indian government of the day. India government of that day did not know how to deal with Pak nukes.

You should have known that Pakistan is a nuclear power. It was no hidden truth either. Anyways it was a success for us.

 

[RIP Pak LAW]

Somrething like this ?
http://zeenews.india.com/news/india...ty-council-president-watch-video_1936864.html

Happens all the time....when you ask a question out of context.

So you actually agree that the Indian journalist was totally asking an irrelevant question ?

 

[Areesh]

That's like saying North Korea has no corruption just because they do not give data.

Massive and a clear success for India as infiltration reduced by 90% without even a war.

Well you can assume things on your own. But the fact is that infiltration is on even today as per your own claims while you lost 800 soldiers for nothing.

You had to back off after losing hundreds and spending billions while getting nothing in return. I am sure less number of Indian soldiers would have died fighting infiltration as compared to your losses in this grand failure of Operation Parakram.

 

[ito]

You should have known that Pakistan is a nuclear power. It was no hidden truth either. Anyways it was a success for us.

Indian government of that day wanted to coerce Pakistan by showing its military strength, hence that troop posture. It was indeed a huge miscalculation. However, I think India got valuable lessons from that. And has started thinking of ways in dealing with Pak nukes

 

[Windjammer]

That's like saying North Korea has no corruption just because they do not give data.

Massive and a clear success for India as infiltration reduced by 90% without even a war.


It worked perfectly from 2000/year to just 100-120 a year.

Lets just put your mind to rest and say there were 10000 Pakistani casualties but at the same time, India is saying that after initially it decreased , the infiltration increased again....so much so you war lords had to fool you with a surgical circus.

 

[AnnoyingOrange]

So you actually agree that the Indian journalist was totally asking an irrelevant question ?

Yes.. the bugger wanted to score a brownie point.. got his *** kicked... happens all over the world... these media cartoons need to learn things like decorum and discipline.. right now they behave as if they are on a high...

 

[ito]

So you actually agree that the Indian journalist was totally asking an irrelevant question ?

No question on Baluchistan is irreverent to an Indian journo even if it is dumb. Baluchistan = TRPs for Indian news channels.

 

[Gregor Clegane]

Well you can assume things on your own. But the fact is that infiltration is on even today as per your own claims while you lost 800 soldiers for nothing.

You had to back off after losing hundreds and spending billions while getting nothing in return. I am sure less number of Indian soldiers would have died fighting infiltration as compared to your losses in this grand failure of Operation Parakram.

Forcing Pakistan to Reduce infiltration by 90% is worth $10 billion.

Lets just put your mind to rest and say there were 10000 Pakistani casualties but at the same time, India is saying that after initially it decreased , the infiltration increased again....so much so you war lords had to fool you with a surgical circus.

Infiltration increased only for a short period in summer, reduction in infiltration can be seen in reduction in casualties between 2001-04

http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/data_sheets/casualtiesmilitency.htm

 

[Areesh]

Forcing Pakistan to Reduce infiltration by 90% is worth $10 billion.

And infiltration is on as per your daily whining. Then Pakistan banned a lot of jihadi and religious including those who have nothing to do with Kashmir or India like Lashkar e Jhangvi or Spiah e Sahaba during that period.

So your claim that Pakistan stopped infiltration due to a failed operation like Parakram is ridiculous and unrealistic.

Indian government of that day wanted to coerce Pakistan by showing its military strength, hence that troop posture. It was indeed a huge miscalculation. However, I think India got valuable lessons from that. And has started thinking of ways in dealing with Pak nukes

Good. At least you are admitting you failed.

There is an obvious old fool here who thinks parakram was a success.

 

[Windjammer]

Forcing Pakistan to Reduce infiltration by 90% is worth $10 billion.


Infiltration increased only for a short period in summer, reduction in infiltration can be seen in reduction in casualties between 2001-04

http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/data_sheets/casualtiesmilitency.htm

Well if that's the only argument you have left then time to spend another $10 Billion and suffer several hundred casualties by own mines.....after all it may be worth it.

In 2016, infiltration from Pak into India rose by over 300%

http://www.defencenews.in/article/I...ak-into-India-rose-by-over-300-percent-189618

 

[Gregor Clegane]

And infiltration is on as per your daily whining. Then Pakistan banned a lot of jihadi and religious including those who have nothing to do with Kashmir or India like Lashkar e Jhangvi or Spiah e Sahaba during that period.

So your claim that Pakistan stopped infiltration due to a failed operation like Parakram is ridiculous and unrealistic.



Good. At least you are admitting you failed.

There is an obvious old fool here who thinks parakram was a success.

90% reduced infiltration is as good as victory.

Well if that's the only argument you have left then time to spend another $10 Billion and suffer several hundred casualties by own mines.....after all it may be worth it.

In 2016, infiltration from Pak into India rose by over 300%

http://www.defencenews.in/article/I...ak-into-India-rose-by-over-300-percent-189618

116 militants infiltrated

In 2002 700 infiltrated in first 5 months and they were not even peak months(june-sept)

to official figures, 696 militants infiltrated into Kashmir between January and end-May 2001. Of them, 466 were foreigners and the rest were local militants. After the "clampdown" announced by Musharraf in January and reiterated in May, 611 militants crossed the border. Military and security agencies estimate that around 3,000 armed men from various tanzeems (militant groups) are massed across Kashmir today with their lines of communication active and their logistics secure.

http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1913/19130250.htm

 

[Areesh]

90% reduced infiltration is as good as victory.

Yeah whatever. Even Indians know what you are saying is BS.

Enough for us.

 

[Gregor Clegane]

Yeah whatever. Even Indians know what you are saying is BS.

Enough for us.

Running away from thread now, you are.