Mukti Bahini must be given due credit for liberating Bangladesh: Gen Jacob

[EzioAltaïr]

The combat were seen AFTER india declared war on pakistan. Furthermore, these engagements are not blockades by any means. These engagement were military combats, not blockades

The blockade occurred until 2nd december. After that it was full on war.

A blockade means blocking all trade to any particular harbour or a country as whole. This is exactly what India did, it sealed the entire Indian Ocean, the blockade was intact all the while in those 14 days of war.

That's why they sank merchant ships too.

@ LaBong
Lemme ask you one simple question, Who defeated Alexander at the Banks of River Indus ..it was King Porus from present day Jehlum city in Punjab, Who joined the armies of Ghaznavi to attack Central India, it were the Gakhar tribes of North Punjab (mountainous region) and present day army chief Kayani is a from them, which people joined army of Muhammad Bin Qasim in droves, even before they were muslims, to attack Rajputs of Rajistan (present state of India), it were the Jatts of Punjab.

Hopefully i don't have to explain anything about the other martial race "the Pushtuns" probably u know about them.

....... Porus..... did not really defeat Alexander, you know that right? Alexander was never defeated.

After his death, the Mauryans did defeat his best general Selucus (who used the same tactics as his predecessor), but no, no one ever beat Alexander.

 

[Avisheik]

Of course, they were being flown before 1971, no? When India denied, only then they went to SL, no? Or were they always using SL. My knowledge here is limited, please correct me if I'm wrong. All I know is that India held it against SL when they allowed refuelling. So it was a logically new thing.

I think most of the supplies for the army came by ships before 1971. We didnt really have much of an army in East pakistan, flying them would be costly. But to be honest i dont really know.

 

[shiv]

Of course, they were being flown before 1971, no? When India denied, only then they went to SL, no? Or were they always using SL. My knowledge here is limited, please correct me if I'm wrong. All I know is that India held it against SL when they allowed refuelling. So it was a logically new thing.

SL granted refuelling rights to all civilian planes and to all non combat surface vessels of PN !! It was the latter which enraged Indira

 

[EzioAltaïr]

It was impossible for Pakistan to win that war in East Pakistan.

1) The army was cut off from the mainland.

2) Local population was hostile, and was resisting in the form of Mukti Bahni.

3) The PAF was outnumbered by 8 squadrons to 1 by IAF on the Eastern Front.

4) And Finally Indian Army attacked, it had resupplies, was attached to its mainland, etc.

Its just like imagine if some how India is defeated in Afghanistan by Afghans with the help of Pak Army and then we start claiming see we defeated Indian Army in Afghanistan.Since Afghanistan isn't attached geographically to India. Dude stop this non sense, yes Bengalis deserve to celebrate, they had given alot of sacrifices, but Indian members here are over excited...You win a war truly if u defeat a country in its mainland, not an area where local poppulation is resisting against them...eg Allies captured France from Germany in 1944, the french were resisting but still by 1944, no one said we defeated Germany..they way u indians claim.

Bengalis did contribute to the war more than they are given credit for, but do you really believe without Indian help, the PA would have been defeated in 14 days?

The Mukti played a vital role. It gave us the intel and info on the geography of Bangladesh, which allowed us to fight better, and themselves kept most of the PA stuck at Dhaka, allowing India to face lesser resistance.

Without Mukti, India would have had to fight a long and hard war, but without India, the Mukti would have had to fight long and hard.

 

[shiv]

I think most of the supplies for the army came by ships before 1971. We didnt really have much of an army in East pakistan, flying them would be costly. But to be honest i dont really know.

Don't kid yourselves... PA was present in sufficient numbers in BD before '71 war actually started. They had moved in to before the elections and then again a sizeable chunk was shipped to quell the mass protests.

 

[EzioAltaïr]

Of course, they were being flown before 1971, no? When India denied, only then they went to SL, no? Or were they always using SL. My knowledge here is limited, please correct me if I'm wrong. All I know is that India held it against SL when they allowed refuelling. So it was a logically new thing.

They did have overland flights over India until February 1, 1971 (Indian Airlines hijacking). But only civilian flights were allowed. They could probably transport supplies as that still isn't hostile in nature, but not ammo and fighters.

 

[third eye]

I think most of the supplies for the army came by ships before 1971. We didnt really have much of an army in East pakistan, flying them would be costly. But to be honest i dont really know.

If you don't know, is it necessary to spout Gyan ?

A man learns more by listening than talking.

 

[shiv]

razakars here must be burning

 

[Kinetic]

God job Indians working for us. There I patted U guys on the head for today. Be happy now. We recognize your existence.

Never seen anyone so happy to get independence donated by others. Coward.

 

[MadDog]

I agree that MB alone were not in a position to defeat Pak Army, a professional force was required and that gap was filled by Indian Army, but again it was not Pakistani mainland which was around 2000 km away, as i said, it was literally a foreign terrain for Pak Military since local population considered them as occupiers, thus in my opinion both IA and MB contributed to the surrender of Pak Army.

 

[kalu_miah]

If everyone else has the right to propagate against an independent Bangladesh, then I have not forfeited my right to call them the real sons of razakaar bitches. Do you have any problem with that? Do not come and teach me all those niceties here in the PDF. I already know some of the razakaars. They are so prevalent in this forum. Why do you ask me personal questions? Do you have that right? Stop bull shitting and stop pretending to be an all knowing teacher.

People have their right to express their views.

A large majority of then East Pakistani people did not even think about independence before the night of 25th March, but the operation searchlight crackdown that started on that night changed most people's mind. A small percentage remained loyal towards Pakistan after that. Lets call them population A and some of them then collaborated with Pakistan Army (population B, a subset of A) and a small percentage of that population actually committed war crimes (population C, a subset of B).

But C have to be at least 16-18 or higher to commit any crimes in 1971, that would put their minimum age today at 57-59. I think there is only one or two Bangladeshi posters here from that age group, and you probably know who they are. They may have even fought against Pakistan Army, I am not sure.

So many posters who you are referring to could not have committed crimes, but its possible that some are probably related to A or B and I am not sure if there is any related to C.

I asked you a personal question, because you seem very emotional about this issue. If you do not want to share that information, fine, sorry for asking, my apologies.

I had no intention of sounding like an all knowing teacher, sorry if I sound like that.

 

[LaBong]

@ LaBong
Lemme ask you one simple question, Who defeated Alexander at the Banks of River Indus ..it was King Porus from present day Jehlum city in Punjab, Who joined the armies of Ghaznavi to attack Central India, it were the Gakhar tribes of North Punjab (mountainous region) and present day army chief Kayani is a from them, which people joined army of Muhammad Bin Qasim in droves, even before they were muslims, to attack Rajputs of Rajistan (present state of India), it were the Jatts of Punjab.

Hopefully i don't have to explain anything about the other martial race "the Pushtuns" probably u know about them.

Porus was probably a Khatriya king and spoke Sanskrit as was the tradition of that time. Anyway Porus was a small time King and most of the Punjab was ruled by king of Taxila and Ambhi who surrendered to Alexander without fighting.

Jats fighting for MBQ? What the hell have you been smoking, MBQ infact said pretty nasty things about Jats. Arabs never been able to do inroad into North India and been defeated by Rajput confideciary.

Gakhhar claim their ancestry to Rajputs and they are not majority of Punjab anyway. Look some of them fighting for various invasive force as soldier of fortune really doesn't speak tall of them. The fact remains almost all invasion to India from North West rarely met any resistance in Pakistani Punjab. Invaders who got past Peshawar could then only be stopped at Karnal or Panipat because they went through Punjab undisturbed, nor did the Punjabi Muslims ever rebelled against ruling power be them Mughal, Afghan or Sikhs.

Except Sher Shah, Afghans never been able to make a notable empire in South Asia. Gazni, Ghori etc are actually Turk, not Pashtun. Also Afghans never been conquered is a myth. They have been ruled by Indians, Persians, Greek, Kushans, Arabs, Sikhs, Turks, Mongols, Huns to name a few.

 

[eastwatch]

1) Mukti Bahini would have probably won with our indirect support, but it would be a long, drawn-out battle, lasting a really long time (not exclusive to Bangladesh, it applies to any civilian revolution).

2) India's direct involvement shortened the war to 14 days, and saved a lot of lives.

1) We were ready to take more punishings by PA, but IA intervention was not acceptable to us. It was imposed by GoI on a morally weak and characterless AL high command who were prevelant only in Calcutta and who never ventured to a single battle field or guerrilla attack.

2) The war was only 14 days for IA. But, it was 9 month long for us. We all suffered and fought against the PA.

 

[eastwatch]

Indians never had a victory in their life.

If Bangladeshi didn't betray us, they would have got spanked again.

We did not betray you. Rather west Pakistan betrayed us by imposing a war of attrition on us, a people whose guns were taken away by the British long time ago.

 

[EzioAltaïr]

1) We were ready to take more punishings by PA, but IA intervention was not acceptable to us. It was imposed by GoI on a morally weak and characterless AL high command who were prevelant only in Calcutta and who never ventured to a single battle field or guerrilla attack.

What? GoI has no say in this? We were the ones that had to feed those 10 million refugees that fled to India to escape persecution. So we have every right to help the ones that need it, if it shortens the war, and reduces the number of refugees.

2) The war was only 14 days for IA. But, it was 9 month long for us. We all suffered and fought against the PA.

And without IA, it would have lasted for another 9 months. They had close to a 100,000 troops there. And without our help, they could freely ship more.