Indian Army is mobilizing tanks and troops along the internationl boundary with Pakistan-OSINT

[MastanKhan]

Dear Mastan Uncle,

So now you know that the enemy is amassing on your border with stated doctrine of cold start and 2.5 front whilst building up pressure internally through businessmen who have shared investments.

What or how much mass would you allow for the sake of war posturing/gaming before going Nasr?

just a curious question from a Troll

Hi,

That is a very serious question---it is the end of the world question---. How do you want me to answer that---?

The problem over here is that the pak military has bragged one too many times of using the nucs---. What they have tried is to hide behind the Nasr---.

The thing is that they have not utilized / procured other resources that could have compensated for a lack of Nasr usage---.

The JH7A's---J11's---

 

[CrazyZ]

And as if indian conventional power is still that of 1947...
Oil refinery in Jamnagar is a private company and there are many companies which are much bigger than oil refinery, so even if we suffer damage to it we will be down by few percent in growth, but what will happen to you...give a thought...

We will end up destroying a whole bunch of Indian jets and tanks. There many other Indian oil refineries close to Pakistani border. We will hit as many as possible as hard as possible as well as other economically sensitive targets . After a few days, the big guys will intervene and both sides will stand down. If we're savvy about the targets... we can cause a decrease in India's GDP.

 

[ZedZeeshan]

Hi,

That is a very serious question---it is the end of the world question---. How do you want me to answer that---?

The problem over here is that the pak military has bragged one too many times of using the nucs---. What they have tried is to hide behind the Nasr---.

The thing is that they have not utilized / procured other resources that could have compensated for a lack of Nasr usage---.

The JH7A's---J11's---

I agree...!!!

 

[El Sidd]

Hi,

That is a very serious question---it is the end of the world question---. How do you want me to answer that---?

The problem over here is that the pak military has bragged one too many times of using the nucs---. What they have tried is to hide behind the Nasr---.

The thing is that they have not utilized / procured other resources that could have compensated for a lack of Nasr usage---.

The JH7A's---J11's---

Not interested in an arms race imposed or already settled.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hon Sir

Can you please expand on the following point.

I am a bit at a loss here. Did you expect Pakistani State not to respond after IAF crossed the border and made a bombing run inside Pakistan? From what i see, Pakistan had no choice but to respond. I think our PM made it clear that Pakistan would have no choice but to respond if India exercises the surgical strike option. But i will wait for your feedback.

Dear Sir, that is because you have taken a cross-section at the wrong point. The spectacular miscalculation was to continue the provocations without a careful assessment of the nature of the beast you were now facing.

You have correctly pointed out: you had no choice but to respond. The miscalculation was to imagine that the response to provocation would be the same old same old.

Also, as you, and I and everybody else and his aunt knows, your PM has no say in the matter; the nature and extent of the response by Pakistan was decided by others, very professionally, but very distinctively.

Sir, with all due respect, that has to be the most delusional post i have ever read. It has been perfectly rebutted by @Signalian and @IceCold

Not delusional; emotional. What he is saying is what very many naive Indians feel; you discount it at your own peril. The perfect rebuttal in the face of an enraged mass is a perfectly logical and perfectly mistaken response. It is not we that you are dealing with; it is with much rawer sentiment, an upsurge of feeling that severely limits the the space for a government.

Incidentally, this, apart from the nature and the driving power behind the Pakistani response, is another case where Pakistani opinion has simply not understood what they are dealing with. It was shown to be wrong in 1965; again in 1971; yet again in 1999; this seems to be a pattern. The way for Pakistan to deal with India is not through provocation or through a campaign of a thousand cuts, and finally enfuriating the masses; it is through isolating and speaking to the pro-peace and pro-cooperation segment of the Indian population, the portion that is for Pakistan in spite of a laboured and unhappy relationship, and one that remains hopeful in the face of all odds.

I am very sure that this is not understood and will never be understood; in Pakistan, it is that segment of the population, that is pro-peace and pro-cooperation in India, that is the bellicose segment, and that is intent on making trouble, confident and secure that they have a technical or morale-driven fix for any foreseeable outcome. In Pakistan, they are not swept away by a surge of popular feeling, they are the prime movers of popular feeling. It is very difficult for the two to understand each other.

It is only those who are decaffeinated, in technical terms, the declasse, who might understand; those who should be of this category have, on both sides, been swept away by patriotism and nationalist sentiment, or have started lip-syncing to avoid personal peril. Not for nothing is Julien Benda still relevant.

 

[HydNizam]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1112708039205883906

 

[Joe Shearer]

The restraint hasn't been removed on indian side only. It has been removed for Pakistan as well. Pakistan was always within range of indian air craft but now with longer range missiles bulk of indian air space will be target, it's a sword which cuts both ways

Perhaps you felt that my post demanded a brave and fleering defiance and a display of stout-heartedness. That is totally unnecessary. I am speaking at a rational and clinical level that does not take into account the delusions of those who believe in divine intervention.

There is unfortunately no possibility of your understanding what is being said, or of taking it into account in any rational kind of way. Save yourself the trouble, please.

U keep looking at this table to make a fool of yourself, I will look at the results of 27 feb 2019. PAF just proved this chart wrong


Don't run to your dad USA about drones. Talk about your flying coffins, as for USA we r gonna sort them out and Israel also your other father


Moody came to power thumping a 56 inch chest and is now running around with a 56 inch hole in his rear made by God knows sd10 or amraam

AM!

For

1. Barbarities? A legal nation state requires adherence to the laws. Anyone in violation of the same, is to be dealt with as such. Nobody stops those who feel stifled from leaving for Pakistan. As the complaint is of lack of jobs, resources etc, they can move out.

And as for referendum, again my suggestion, why does Pakistan not conduct it in the so called Azad Jammu & Kashmir, thereby exhibiting a 'sample' population's wishes? I am sure you can appreciate that was Pakistan to do this, this would amount to a major step in applying pressure on India from International Community, which may argue that the population in AJK may perhaps be the representative sample? You have UNMOGIP, expand to include more UN personnel. What stops you?

2. That is one way of looking at, the other, more sinister side is that we revert to ceasefire agreement of 1948. And there, Pakistan recognized an International border opposite the districts of Kathua, Sambha & Jammu. So, the LC is now a CFL, and that means, it was a temporary cessation of hostilities till recovery of lost territories is achieved. India, from willing to consider a division of territories as per actual control, has moved towards reintegration of territories.

The war is not about military confrontation, but imposing costs on Pakistan, costs that shall be felt at the core support group for terror. Meanwhile, to paraphrase @Nilgiri we continue to add more than a small fraction of Pakistan's GDP daily to our economy.

Rest, as @Joe Shearer has said. No difference of opinion with him.

Regards & best wishes to you and yours.

Have you seen this?

https://www.hindustantimes.com/indi...elf-defence/story-DUnxjGoQK9sasQWfj1VPmL.html

One is unfortunately inured to this pattern of gradual alteration of stance until a full 180 degree turn is achieved.

Amazing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1112708039205883906

In keeping with the date and the spirit of the day, I suppose.

 

[MastanKhan]

Dear Sir, that is because you have taken a cross-section at the wrong point. The spectacular miscalculation was to continue the provocations without a careful assessment of the nature of the beast you were now facing.

You have correctly pointed out: you had no choice but to respond. The miscalculation was to imagine that the response to provocation would be the same old same old.

Also, as you, and I and everybody else and his aunt knows, your PM has no say in the matter; the nature and extent of the response by Pakistan was decided by others, very professionally, but very distinctively.



Not delusional; emotional. What he is saying is what very many naive Indians feel; you discount it at your own peril. The perfect rebuttal in the face of an enraged mass is a perfectly logical and perfectly mistaken response. It is not we that you are dealing with; it is with much rawer sentiment, an upsurge of feeling that severely limits the the space for a government.

Incidentally, this, apart from the nature and the driving power behind the Pakistani response, is another case where Pakistani opinion has simply not understood what they are dealing with. It was shown to be wrong in 1965; again in 1971; yet again in 1999; this seems to be a pattern. The way for Pakistan to deal with India is not through provocation or through a campaign of a thousand cuts, and finally enfuriating the masses; it is through isolating and speaking to the pro-peace and pro-cooperation segment of the Indian population, the portion that is for Pakistan in spite of a laboured and unhappy relationship, and one that remains hopeful in the face of all odds.

I am very sure that this is not understood and will never be understood; in Pakistan, it is that segment of the population, that is pro-peace and pro-cooperation in India, that is the bellicose segment, and that is intent on making trouble, confident and secure that they have a technical or morale-driven fix for any foreseeable outcome. In Pakistan, they are not swept away by a surge of popular feeling, they are the prime movers of popular feeling. It is very difficult for the two to understand each other.

It is only those who are decaffeinated, in technical terms, the declasse, who might understand; those who should be of this category have, on both sides, been swept away by patriotism and nationalist sentiment, or have started lip-syncing to avoid personal peril. Not for nothing is Julien Benda still relevant.

Hi,

Tactically---even in the US---the President has no clue about the response---other than the military telling the president about different intensities of response and the President pick the one he wants to---.

You assumption of who the real boss is incorrect---.

When you sit in fron of the generals in your chair with legs crossed and use a pointy finger to give them directives and the generals are sitting with both their feet planted on the ground and looking at IK---then there is only on BOSS in the room---and that is IK---.

IK has too much intellectual and character strength to just be ruled over by the generals---.

I can tell you this---from an insider---all generals stand inline and ask " Sir how high do I need to jump "---.

 

[monitor]

Hi,

That is a very serious question---it is the end of the world question---. How do you want me to answer that---?

The problem over here is that the pak military has bragged one too many times of using the nucs---. What they have tried is to hide behind the Nasr---.

The thing is that they have not utilized / procured other resources that could have compensated for a lack of Nasr usage---.

The JH7A's---J11's---

This current development of Indian action against Kashmir fighters inside Pakistani control Azad Kashmir have shattered the idea that due to presence of nuclear weapons to both country nobody would escalate the situation due to fear of nuclear strike .
now its clear that India will conduct this kind of surgical strike in spite of having Nasr or other nuclear weapons as nay use of nuclear weapons will brings equal reaction from other sides .
Now its imperative Pakistan developed conventional deterrence too to counter any escalation . 27th February might be a proud moment for PAF and Pakistan but not a example for future aggression by India .

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hi,

Tactically---even in the US---the President has no clue about the response---other than the military telling the president about different intensities of response and the President pick the one he wants to---.

You assumption of who the real boss is incorrect---.

When you sit in fron of the generals in your chair with legs crossed and use a pointy finger to give them directives and the generals are sitting with both their feet planted on the ground and looking at IK---then there is only on BOSS in the room---and that is IK---.

IK has too much intellectual and character strength to just be ruled over by the generals---.

I can tell you this---from an insider---all generals stand inline and ask " Sir how high do I need to jump "---.

I have too much respect for your iconoclasm and radical approach to question you. Let's just say that while respecting your view, I retain mine.

 

[Awan68]

Hi,

Tactically---even in the US---the President has no clue about the response---other than the military telling the president about different intensities of response and the President pick the one he wants to---.

You assumption of who the real boss is incorrect---.

When you sit in fron of the generals in your chair with legs crossed and use a pointy finger to give them directives and the generals are sitting with both their feet planted on the ground and looking at IK---then there is only on BOSS in the room---and that is IK---.

IK has too much intellectual and character strength to just be ruled over by the generals---.

I can tell you this---from an insider---all generals stand inline and ask " Sir how high do I need to jump "---.

You must be a fool to think that the generals are the ones who actually control the state of Pakistan. Generals are just a front, a boogeyman to blame, the real guys are the ones who must not be named.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Dear Sir, that is because you have taken a cross-section at the wrong point. The spectacular miscalculation was to continue the provocations without a careful assessment of the nature of the beast you were now facing.

You have correctly pointed out: you had no choice but to respond. The miscalculation was to imagine that the response to provocation would be the same old same old.

Also, as you, and I and everybody else and his aunt knows, your PM has no say in the matter; the nature and extent of the response by Pakistan was decided by others, very professionally, but very distinctively.

Sir,

I fail to see where the provocations were from the Pakistani side. Let's follow the chain of events:

- IAF strikes targets within Pakistan
- PAF strikes targets inside India. In the process, chasing IAF interceptors cross into Pakistan and are shot down

Where is the provocation or escalation from the Pakistani side? PAF rightly so responded, and struck targets within inside India to showcase that it retains the ability to respond. IA's military installations were painted, but at no point were they targeted.

You maybe right in the past about previous PM's, but this PM is a very different beast. He is on top of what is happening, and he is the one that has been driving the policy. He might not know the tactical details of PAF's response, but he is well aware and is in the driving seat in terms of setting up policies.

Not delusional; emotional. What he is saying is what very many naive Indians feel; you discount it at your own peril. The perfect rebuttal in the face of an enraged mass is a perfectly logical and perfectly mistaken response. It is not we that you are dealing with; it is with much rawer sentiment, an upsurge of feeling that severely limits the the space for a government.

Incidentally, this, apart from the nature and the driving power behind the Pakistani response, is another case where Pakistani opinion has simply not understood what they are dealing with. It was shown to be wrong in 1965; again in 1971; yet again in 1999; this seems to be a pattern. The way for Pakistan to deal with India is not through provocation or through a campaign of a thousand cuts, and finally enfuriating the masses; it is through isolating and speaking to the pro-peace and pro-cooperation segment of the Indian population, the portion that is for Pakistan in spite of a laboured and unhappy relationship, and one that remains hopeful in the face of all odds.

I am very sure that this is not understood and will never be understood; in Pakistan, it is that segment of the population, that is pro-peace and pro-cooperation in India, that is the bellicose segment, and that is intent on making trouble, confident and secure that they have a technical or morale-driven fix for any foreseeable outcome. In Pakistan, they are not swept away by a surge of popular feeling, they are the prime movers of popular feeling. It is very difficult for the two to understand each other.

It is only those who are decaffeinated, in technical terms, the declasse, who might understand; those who should be of this category have, on both sides, been swept away by patriotism and nationalist sentiment, or have started lip-syncing to avoid personal peril. Not for nothing is Julien Benda still relevant.

If there is one side that was pushing for peace, and begging for talks, that was Pakistan and not India. I mean, one only need to see how belligerent and warmongering the Indian media was. How can one forget Indian anchors putting on military camouflages and pretending to be Generals. The only war mongering that was coming was from the Indian side, while the Pakistani side was consistently pushing for peace talks and dialogue. Look at the response from Pakistan, especially Pakistani media. Throughout the incident, the consistent theme from every segment of the Pakistani society was to avoid war and engage in peace talks because we Pakistanis have seen war, and we have 80K Pakistanis buried under the ground as a testament to that.

The last thing Pakistan wants is a war with India, because we have seen war, and we have seen what it does.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It is not we that you are dealing with; it is with much rawer sentiment, an upsurge of feeling that severely limits the the space for a government.

I'd like to point out that the 'upsurge of feeling' has been cultivated by the megalomaniac, with the Indian media essentially acting as a Modi surrogate in scapegoating, demonizing and dehumanizing Pakistan.

Pakistan cannot bend in the face of such wanton 'blackmail' based on dishonesty and deliberate hate-mongering. The onus is on (rational and reasonable) Indians to rectify their ship and douse the fires their fellow Indian Bakhts have lit. Looking to Pakistan to just roll over and be drubbed to satiate the monster of Indian public opinion that Modi and the Media have themselves crated and inflamed is just not going to work.

 

[MastanKhan]

I have too much respect for your iconoclasm and radical approach to question you. Let's just say that while respecting your view, I retain mine.

Hi,

I understand where you are coming from---but if you needed to know the truth---it is as I stated---.

 

[IceCold]

Also, as you, and I and everybody else and his aunt knows, your PM has no say in the matter; the nature and extent of the response by Pakistan was decided by others, very professionally, but very distinctively.

This is a very popular notion in India and has always been and it does not matter to us anymore who you think the power in Pakistan lies? However the one thing in all of this which should be pondered upon is the confidence with which Pakistan armed forces responded. This confidence was never there during the tenure of previous governments of Zardari and Nawaz and this is where India miscalculated thinking Khan to be the same.