What's new

Indian army 'backed out' of Pakistan attack

Yes indeed, the internet warriors can only resort to chest thumping and past conspiracies but those who have to fight and take the bullet remain under no illusions and take all their shortcomings into account. The 12 month long stand off was a soul destroyer for the Indian army. I am sure they would have remembered that in 2008.

Months ago your comrades were on fire just because we were leading the score, you still want war with us?
 
Last edited:
.
The fact is Indians never stop gloating about 1971, any debate or argument and the Indians run back over 40 years to salvage some pride. Wasn't 1971 when India introduced terrorism in the shape of Mukti, Israel can take pride in beating it's larger neighbours, what's India's pride when they had a 10 :1 ratio in air force, some 50.000 Pakistani troops fighting much larger Indian army and mukti guerrillas simultaneously, these Pakistani soldiers away from home, without any supplies, reinforcements or aircover were in a no win situation, on the contrary when the odds were still very much in India's favour but since the Pak forces were on home ground and in better position, be it 2002 or 2008, Indians had to think twice. Get the point. !!


As per the article you quoted, IAF and IN was ready to strike but the Army was reluctant.

The navy and air force, however, had given the government the go-ahead about their preparedness to carry out an attack and repulse any retaliation from Pakistan.
 
.
. . . .
After the so called 27/11 Mumbai attack blamed on Pakistani Nationals, why was New Delhi reluctant to attack Pakistan is best described from an Indian prospective.

First of all, you got the date wrong, rest is not worth reading, even if it makes sense. IT says how detailed you are.
 
.
First of all, you got the date wrong, rest is not worth reading, even if it makes sense. IT says how detailed you are.
Then again we are not exactly discussing the Mumbai incident here are we,.... what to say talking out of context.
 
.
Hay......INDIA.................dont boooop.....WITH US.........:devil:

h5D842B70.gif
 
.
Then again we are not exactly discussing the Mumbai incident here are we,.... what to say talking out of context.

When presenting something to an international audience, please take due diligence, considering you entered the elite class a long time ago. An event with catastrophic outcomes would be presented as the day its remembered by history. By ignoring this piece you are not paying respect to the dead and not condemning its results furthermore.

We will come back to topic when you get the basics right.
 
.
When presenting something to an international audience, please take due diligence, considering you entered the elite class a long time ago. An event with catastrophic outcomes would be presented as the day its remembered by history. By ignoring this piece you are not paying respect to the dead and not condemning its results furthermore.

We will come back to topic when you get the basics right.
Albeit, the Indians tried to portray it as their 9/11, the world seldom remembers it any more than Mumbai attacks or even the attack on Taj hotel, Ask any of your so called international audience to give you a date from the top of their head, forget whether it was 26th or 27th, i doubt they can even remember the month.
Now if you have something to contribute to the subject, fine otherwise please don't derail the thread any further.
 
.
Good ! Carry on ...Your Indians counterpart are watching you....(shabash)
do something extraordinary with facts&figures........

My Indian counterpart?? Who that could be???? Pls elaborate!!!!!
 
.
Albeit, the Indians tried to portray it as their 9/11, the world seldom remembers it any more than Mumbai attacks or even the attack on Taj hotel, Ask any of your so called international audience to give you a date from the top of their head, forget whether it was 26th or 27th, i doubt they can even remember the month.
Now if you have something to contribute to the subject, fine otherwise please don't derail the thread any further.

I would directly quote from what the general had to say to Charlie Wilson when he asked about the degree of Pakistani involvement in A'stan against Russia.

"We always feel that despite being a superior force in terms of training, equipment (emphasis added) and superior war doctrine, We have never been able to out match our absolutely overwhelming enemy, we would love to return that favor and avenge ourselves if we cant do that directly."

This was not too long ago and replay to my topic from your angle.

Second, our bureaucracy, is most effective in getting its job done, sometimes even if it has to black mail the govt (needed for politicians on a timely basis).

So its for the consumption of the govt that see we have a depleted force, do something about it. To fight Pakistan, India is always over prepared. Dont live in a dream land.

And for you 26/11 doesnt matter, and its good for India that it should never matter to only "Pakistan", that way we will always win the moral battle and awe-fully won.
 
.
Good that they did not start a war..... We have never in the past......

The reason of success of 71 was the preparedness of armed forces and the clarity they had in their objective..... which would have been missing in this case.....
this got to go to the funny thread.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom