India Invaded Pakistan In 1971: Know The Facts, And The Enemy

[Che Guevara]

India never invaded pakistan in 1971,Pakistan launches a series of preemptive air strikes on 11 Indian airfields on dec 3rd,Which most people agree as an act of war.

u and ur delusions

Yes, although Indian army has decided to attack pakistan on 5th dec but pakistan attack India on 3rd dec.LOL good for India,since India is attacked we can go on war and had blame pakistan to start the war...LOL

 

[Maira La]

Another 1971 thread. All '71 threads should be merged into this one thread in the sticky section.

 

[Che Guevara]

BIG LOL Rupee News

---------- Post added at 10:47 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:44 AM ----------

bharati state is the enemy, no doubt - '71 confirmed this.

LOL, you still doubt after 4 wars between us that India and pakistan are enemy.Yes hell yes we are enemy.

 

[Don Jaguar]

Why indians are so scared of rupee news?

 

[Che Guevara]

Why indians are so scared of rupee news?

LOL we should declare today as LOLday,we are not scared of rupee news, we are laughing at it.

 

[LaBong]

Imagine there is no country, its easy if you try

 

[harshad]

pakistanis have still not come to terms with the loss,move on

 

[Kalyugi Mirza]

What about those refugees from Indian occupied Kashmir who fled Pakistan because of cruelty and oppression of Indian army?

Why you guys deny the genocide in your own country. Why you did not liberate Kashmiri as per UN resolution before liberating others... double standard/hypocrisy of India..keep blind eyes to oppression/insurgencies movement within India and even use military force to oppress them while helping the separatist movements in countries like sri lanka, pakistan, china.

Problem is that your country started sending terrorist in Kashmir to destroy the good environment of Kashmir ..To control the terror there was lot of things are going on...Pls Atleast start accepting your mistakes...

 

[LaBong]

What about those refugees from Indian occupied Kashmir who fled Pakistan because of cruelty and oppression of Indian army?

Why you guys deny the genocide in your own country. Why you did not liberate Kashmiri as per UN resolution before liberating others... double standard/hypocrisy of India..keep blind eyes to oppression/insurgencies movement within India and even use military force to oppress them while helping the separatist movements in countries like sri lanka, pakistan, china.

Last time I checked the only people living in camps in "Azad" Kashmir, are those who were displaced because of the 2005 earthquake.

As for the UN resolution, you don't know squat.

 

[kingkobra]

Why indians are so scared of rupee news?

lol...rupee news articles where not enough for making us laugh? why are you making us laugh with your comments

 

[shuntmaster]

THE SURRENDER
Over in 30 minutes
By Lt Gen. (retd) J.F.R. Jacob
Story Dated: Friday, November 25, 2011 16:39 hrs IST
How General Niazi crumbled and the Pakistan army surrendered

Moment of glory: Jacob (extreme right) looks on as Niazi signs the surrender agreement on December 16

On December 13, a resolution introduced by the Americans at the UN was vetoed by the Soviets. The US fleet was on the Strait of Malacca. There was consternation in Delhi. Matters were made worse when Field Marshal Sam Manekshaw sent us an order to go back and capture all towns we had bypassed. It was an impossible task. We were outside Dacca and there was no mention of Dacca! The order was copied to the core commanders. I told them to ignore it. When someone accused me of disobeying orders, I said, “Yes.”
On December 16, Manekshaw telephoned me and said, “Jake, go and get a surrender.” I said, “I have sent you a draft. Should I negotiate on that?” He said, “You know what to do. Just go.” I told him that I had been talking to General Amir Abdullah Khan Niazi, commander of the Pakistani forces in Bangladesh, for three days on the wireless, and that he had invited me over for lunch....
At Dacca, I was met by UN representatives, who said they were coming with me to take over the government. I said, no, thank you. Niazi had sent an army car and a brigadier. The Mukti Bahini had not observed the ceasefire. Five hundred yards down the road, a string of Mukti Bahini fighters fired at me. I jumped out with my hands up, and they stopped firing. They had recognised me. They knew I was coming—it was on the radio. I asked them to let us go. I told them that their own government will take over the next day.
When I met Niazi and read out the Instrument of Surrender, he said, “Who said I am surrendering? You have only come here for a ceasefire.” He accused me of blackmail and our talks turned hostile. “Who said this is joint command?” Niazi asked. “We don't recognise the Mukti Bahini. We don't accept [surrender].”
I did not know what to do. I called Niazi aside and told him I cannot give him a better deal. I said we would treat the surrendering troops like gentlemen. I knew my position was weak. They had 26,400 troops in Dacca. We had 3,000 some 30 miles out.
I told Niazi that if he did not surrender, I would not be able to protect their families and ethnic minorities. And that I would order resumption of hostilities and the bombing of Dacca. I said, “I give you 30 minutes. If you don't surrender within that time, I will order resumption of hostilities and bombing of Dhaka cantonment.” Then I walked out.
I thought, “My God, what have I done? Suppose he says no. I have nothing in my hand. The ceasefire expires in the evening. We will all be captured. Niazi can fight for at least two weeks more.”
I went back after 30 minutes. The paper was lying on the table. I said, “General, do you accept that paper?” He didn't answer. I asked him three times. Then I picked it up and said, “I take it that you have accepted.”
There was no answer. I told him that he will surrender in public at the Ramna Race Course in Dacca. He said, “I won't.” I said, “You will. I have already given instructions and you will provide a guard of honour.” He said, “I have no one to command.” I said, “Your ADC [aide-de-camp] is there. He will command.”
Then I went for lunch. All the silver was out. But I didn't eat anything. I felt dejected, and I did not want to eat with them. There was no vehicle for me to go back. I had to travel in Niazi's car to the airport.
I quote from the report of the Hamidur Rahman commission, formed by Pakistan to look into the 1971 war: “Gen. Niazi, when you had 26,400 troops in Dacca...you could have fought on for two more weeks.... Why then, did you accept a shameful, unconditional public surrender?” Niazi said he was blackmailed.
It is rubbish. I did not blackmail him. Getting that surrender was a matter of touch and go. I, to this day, don't understand why he crumbled.
As told to Mandira Nayar

 

[third eye]

This is where I stopped reading this tripe..my comments are in red in brackets..

1971: Why the surrender?

1971-1975: A Bangladeshi perspective | Rupee News Why the surrender? Rupee News

Some Indians crow about the victory in 1971. That ephemeral victory has been the downfall of Bharati democracy too ( Where ? Last when I checked elections have been held regularly pre & post 1971). 1971 created a Nuclear South Asia, possibly a Nuclear Iran( India is responsible for itself & its own security,Iran went Nuclear for its own reasons like Pak did, it should & does not matter to India. Pokhran 1 took place thanks to the 7th Fleet entering the Bay Of Bengal. India is not responsible for what others do to themselves). It hardened Chinese positions, and created difficulties for the USSR a decade later. Zia Ul Haq sent a telegram reminding the Moscow of Pakistan’s revenge.

Within Bharat itself, the brutal emergency consolidated the stranglehold of the Nehru dynasty–which brought untold misery on South Asia. (Another uneducated rant. Congress has lost elections on more occasions than one..Stranglehold ?)Nehru’s attempt to impose Bharat on 560 states manifests itself into the desire of 50 new states to lean away from Delhi in varying degrees of independence from the Central Authority( Which 50 states ? India does not even have 50 states). Assam and kashmir want nothing to do with “India”. Maharashtra wants to the Hindu Republic. Gujarat wants to impost Ram Rajha. The restless Tamils have blackmailed Dlehi into disproportional representation in the Center–hence Talangana and other such movements( Telangana is only a political tool for Politicians & Babus to make more money..more CMs, State Secretaries, DG Police). Bharat has aggravated the Chinese, the Bengalis, the Pakistanis, the Lankans, the Nepalese, the Bhutanese, the Sikkimese and the Maldivians.

 

[ziaulislam]

out numbered by 1 to 10 with ZERO local support and over a million local fighters is not the only reason.
real reason for 60 thousand troops (and 30 000 civillian workers) to lay down was no lack of reason to fight..i mean what were they fighting for in the end when local support ended..?

i just wished there would have been a peaceful settlement even if bangladesh would have been formed (1940 resolution was in favour of states it was until 46 that a single state was decided) but instead mujeeb and bhutto wanted to play hero..ironically both fates were so interconnected that they and their families got similar ending





you cant fight any war without supply and air force, practically that didnt existed..

 

[Splurgenxs]

A better coverage on some 1971 introspection

only for those who understand Hindi, sorry.

 

[NiceFarmer]