How a 4-Hour Battle Between Russian Mercenaries and U.S. Commandos Unfolded in Syria

[A.P. Richelieu]

1. "Islamist" is a totally incorrect word to refer to terrorists/reactionaries who happen to be Muslim. This is because Islam is an older Socialist system and anyone deviating from it majorly is really going away from Islam.

2. I don't blame Pakistan for all terrorist organizations operating in India because it is in India that one of the two Sunni extremist ideologies started from. I am talking of the Deobandi cult/ideology whose world headquarters is in Deoband town in Northern India. But the main bunch of people propagating Deobandi ideology are the Tableeghi Jamaat missionaries who operate from Africa to South-east Asia, Russia to Central Asia, China to Europe to North America.

3. But I didn't understand your post because we are not talking of Pakistan in this thread and I certainly didn't blame Pakistan in my first post.

You do not get to tell us what we shall call people that commit crimes in the name of Islam.

 

[jamahir]

You do not get to tell us what we shall call people that commit crimes in the name of Islam.

So you will continue using "Islamist" to refer to criminal things knowing fully well that you are wrong??

That's hypocritical.

I don't call "Christian" to refer to the crimes committed by NATO around the world.

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

So you will continue using "Islamist" to refer to criminal things knowing fully well that you are wrong??

That's hypocritical.

I don't call "Christian" to refer to the crimes committed by NATO around the world.

NATO are not saying that they are out to promote Christianity.
Islamists claim that they promote Islam.
They use the Quran to justify their actions.
There is no central authority in Islam that decided what is Islam or not.
For each group of Muslims, there is a dozen other groups of Muslims calling them non-Muslims.

We consider ”Islamist” to be a good description of the phenomena.
We do not consider it wrong, and we are not going to change.
It is not enough to be a Muslim committing a crime, to be branded an Islamist.
You have to motivate the Crime using Islam to be an Islamist.

You are free to invent a term for crimes motivated by the teaching of Jesus - if You can find any.

 

[Pindi Boy]

Are you an idiot or are you just an illiterate, at least read the source, you are giving.

The battle did happen.

Pakistan launched an offensive against Jaisalmer with a brigade backed by a tank regiment of 45 tanks and 1000 other vehicles and artillery, on longewala post. held by a company of hundred or so Indian soldiers backed by 4 hunters.

When the battle was over, Pakistan had lost 37 of it 45 tanks, over 500 vehicles and over 200 soldiers killed. Indian losses were just 2 soldiers.


The above article is just army and airforce for jostling, for who should get the credit for defeating Pakistan at Longewala?

too mich brainwashing has made you behave like a clown


Two days after Hindustan Times published the shocking revelation by Maj. Gen. Atma Singh (retd) that the Army faked the famous battle, an air ace who controlled the strikes that finished off the Pakistani armour has said the Army has hoodwinked the nation with false tales of valour.


Advertisement
Some other veterans of the 1971 war have also raised questions about this “golden moment” in India’s military history, romanticised by the 1997 Sunny Deol superhit, Border.

Air Marshal MS Bawa (retd), who was commanding the Jaisalmer base from where the IAF Hunter fighters operated in the battle, told Hindustan Times, “The services were the only organisation with some credibility. The Army has torn that apart by faking the entire operation.”



Atma Singh, who won the Vir Chakra for gallantry at Laungewala, had said no ground battle was fought, and the Army had merely rehearsed the operation on a sand model to cover up for its senior commanders’ incompetence.



Bawa, then a wing commander, told Hindustan Times: “If the Army wants to stem this rot, it has to act against officers responsible for this propaganda. Or else, you will have a series of ketchup colonels and fake encounters.”




let me guess you are also the one who believes invisible surgical strikes happened even after many Indian politicians denied them and not even a single proof was presented

 

[rambro]

40 rambros lol

 

[jamahir]

NATO are not saying that they are out to promote Christianity.
Islamists claim that they promote Islam.
They use the Quran to justify their actions.
There is no central authority in Islam that decided what is Islam or not.
For each group of Muslims, there is a dozen other groups of Muslims calling them non-Muslims.

Mostly when NATO attacks Muslim-majority countries ( eg. Libya ) that country will be a Socialist one, and the Socialists there claim their version of interpretation of Islam to be the rightful one. But NATO will support another faction within that country or from outside whose ideology will be reactionary based on general common sense. This faction's example can be al-Qaeda or FSA or NTC. Why does NATO support such reactionary factions ?? In this very thread we are talking about the American military being in support of FSA. Why ??

There is the other point of NATO seeing itself as the modern version of the Crusaders of the Middle Ages.

And yes, Islam does not have an established central authority agreed by all factions, but I believe in Muammar Gaddafi to be the "Imam of all Muslims", a leader of Sunni as well as Shia or other sects. His is not the position of a central priest ( there is no priest in Islam ) but more a guide.

 

[Osiris]

too mich brainwashing has made you behave like a clown


Two days after Hindustan Times published the shocking revelation by Maj. Gen. Atma Singh (retd) that the Army faked the famous battle, an air ace who controlled the strikes that finished off the Pakistani armour has said the Army has hoodwinked the nation with false tales of valour.


Advertisement
Some other veterans of the 1971 war have also raised questions about this “golden moment” in India’s military history, romanticised by the 1997 Sunny Deol superhit, Border.

Air Marshal MS Bawa (retd), who was commanding the Jaisalmer base from where the IAF Hunter fighters operated in the battle, told Hindustan Times, “The services were the only organisation with some credibility. The Army has torn that apart by faking the entire operation.”



Atma Singh, who won the Vir Chakra for gallantry at Laungewala, had said no ground battle was fought, and the Army had merely rehearsed the operation on a sand model to cover up for its senior commanders’ incompetence.



Bawa, then a wing commander, told Hindustan Times: “If the Army wants to stem this rot, it has to act against officers responsible for this propaganda. Or else, you will have a series of ketchup colonels and fake encounters.”




let me guess you are also the one who believes invisible surgical strikes happened even after many Indian politicians denied them and not even a single proof was presented

Cherry picking are we, the same article also mentions, Pakistan lost 37 tanks(not surprised, you did not include that part)? So Did your tanks self combust?

 

[Pindi Boy]

Cherry picking are we, the same article also mentions, Pakistan lost 37 tanks(not surprised, you did not include that part)? So Did your tanks self combust?

Indian army faked entire battle
Atma Singh, who won the Vir Chakra for gallantry at Laungewala, had said no ground battle was fought, and the Army had merely rehearsed the operation on a sand model to cover up for its senior commanders’ incompetence.

well i dont blame you
india is worlds most ignorant nation you lot will buy anything which has sensationalism and a bit of masala

 

[Osiris]

Indian army faked entire battle
Atma Singh, who won the Vir Chakra for gallantry at Laungewala, had said no ground battle was fought, and the Army had merely rehearsed the operation on a sand model to cover up for its senior commanders’ incompetence.

well i dont blame you
india is worlds most ignorant nation you lot will buy anything which has sensationalism and a bit of masala

How did you loose, 37 tanks, 200 men and 500 vehicles, and why were you forced to retreat?

 

[Pindi Boy]

How did you loose, 37 tanks, 200 men and 500 vehicles, and why were you forced to retreat?

IAF most likely
the vehicles were stuck in desert and they couldnt move

 

[Osiris]

IAF most likely
the vehicles were stuck in desert and they couldnt move

So just 4 aircraft from IAF defeated an entire infantry brigade and tank regiment ?

 

[Pindi Boy]

So just 4 aircraft from IAF defeated an entire infantry brigade and tank regiment ?

its possible when vehicles are stucked in sand and there is no cover

So just 4 aircraft from IAF defeated an entire infantry brigade and tank regiment ?

the number you said are extremely fake
unless we were fighting immortal avengers

 

[A.P. Richelieu]

Mostly when NATO attacks Muslim-majority countries ( eg. Libya ) that country will be a Socialist one, and the Socialists there claim their version of interpretation of Islam to be the rightful one. But NATO will support another faction within that country or from outside whose ideology will be reactionary based on general common sense. This faction's example can be al-Qaeda or FSA or NTC. Why does NATO support such reactionary factions ?? In this very thread we are talking about the American military being in support of FSA. Why ??

There is the other point of NATO seeing itself as the modern version of the Crusaders of the Middle Ages.

And yes, Islam does not have an established central authority agreed by all factions, but I believe in Muammar Gaddafi to be the "Imam of all Muslims", a leader of Sunni as well as Shia or other sects. His is not the position of a central priest ( there is no priest in Islam ) but more a guide.

People in the West view themselves as champions of human rights, not Christianity.
Leaders may have a more cynical view.
To go on a crusade is a proverb, which nowadays rarely have anything to do with religion.
You can go on a crusade to stop littering in the street.

We do not like dictators like Gaddaffi, Saddam Hussein, Slobodan Milosevich and Assad.
The only one of these four that may have any legal base for governing was Milosovich.
The rest got into power through military coups, and ended up as dictators guilty of rape, plunder and mass murder. For both Gaddaffi and Milosevich it was pressure from the public which forced the leader to act. For Milosovich, the key factor was Madeline Albright who was persecuted as Young, and now she decided - not on her watch. European leaders were really not doing much until she forced her will.
The Syrian situation is much more complex. When the Arab spring started to spread, the illegal government of Assad responded with mass murder. The security services of Syria were built up by ex-nazis escaping from Nazi Germany at the end of WW2. Their Gestapo methods kept the Syrians down for 60 years. When they finally had enough they had no organisation.
Already in the beginning of the Arab Spring in Syria, the US came to the conclusion that it should keep out of Syria, because there were no obvious partner.
An obvious partner would be a group fighting for a free and democratic Syria.
1-2 years later FSA seemed to emerge as an umbrella organisation for the democratic opposition, mainly lead by ex Syrian Army officers having enough of the repression of Syrians by the regime.
They were SLAUGHTERED by the superior weapons of the Syrian Army.
Finally the US sent a minor shipment of TOWs.
They also started a training program which in the end produced maybe 2 dozen fighter. I.E. A total failure.
Meanwhile Islamists from all over the world convened in Syria to establish an Islamic State.
They were primarily supported by the Gulf States and KSA.
Arabs were and are the primary movers and shakers in Syria, not the West.

What complicates issues in Syria is there are about a thousand different rebel groups in Syria.
They form, and they disappear, and people move between groups.
If a rebel organisation has a certain agenda, and their people are trained, the people may switch to another organisation the day after.

I call BS on the statement that the West has ever supported Al-Qaeda knowingly.
The West now focuses on fighting ISIS in Syria, with Kurds as the major ally.
If Assad or the Russians interfere, then they get a reminder.

 

[Osiris]

its possible when vehicles are stucked in sand and there is no cover


the number you said are extremely fake
unless we were fighting immortal avengers

So tell me, what are the real numbers, and offcourse back it with a source.

 

[Vassnti]

A constructive example of what happens on a modern battlefield when infantry attack a prepared enemy that has access to S@load of air support.

Cant but feel sorry for the poor guys that were ordered in to that
AC-130 Gunship Mission - YouTube