Musharraf answers to the threat of Surgical strikes by India

[HAIDER]

Brave enough

 

[attitude]

bhai shab ye to ab histroy ho gaye

do u think he can play any role in future iin pak

 

[SSGPA1]

bhai shab ye to ab histroy ho gaye

do u think he can play any role in future iin pak

1. He will play a major role in future.

2. Regardless of who is in control of Pakistan, there will be a very strong retaliation to any bloody strike by India.

 

[Gazzi]

1. He will play a major role in future.

2. Regardless of who is in control of Pakistan, there will be a very strong retaliation to any bloody strike by India.

Exactly, I had this debate in another thread, where the Indians actually believe that by giving an air attack the name of "surgical strike" then it is not a War or declaration of War according to their definitions hence Pakistan will not respond as such.

God.......they are so confused....Pakistani generals have made VERY clear that they will treat this as a War and deal with it as such.......not its or buts....no "limited war" crap.....straight out war.......

Some kind of atmosphere and understanding the Indians wish to create whereby forcing or convincing Pakistan that a "limited war" or "surgical strike" should not be treated as a full scale war, as if Pakistan will really fgo along with that.......Gosh, they'l be in for a surprise

 

[blain2]

Surgical strikes are a non-starter as far as Pakistan is concerned.

There will be a significant retaliation, and one that would be proportionally greater than the initial surgical strike to ensure that in the future such options are not exercised. Pakistan will most definitely up the ante.

 

[Always Neutral]

Surgical strikes are a non-starter as far as Pakistan is concerned.

There will be a significant retaliation, and one that would be proportionally greater than the initial surgical strike to ensure that in the future such options are not exercised. Pakistan will most definitely up the ante.

Hey Blain,

Do the drone strikes come under surgical strikes ? Ask Gen M that.

Regards

 

[Awesome]

India may decide who starts the hostilities but Pakistan will decide the level they are escalated to.

 

[Awesome]

Hey Blain,

Do the drone strikes come under surgical strikes ? Ask Gen M that.

Regards

Yes, but then that's at the behest of Pakistanis against a common enemy in collaboration with an ally. India IS the enemy.

 

[RobbieS]

Yes, but then that's at the behest of Pakistanis against a common enemy in collaboration with an ally. India IS the enemy.

Hmmm...so the ally in this case would be the US? What happened to sovereignty? And to the CIA-Mossad-RAW nexus?

 

[Solomon2]

Q: What does it mean to you, surgical strikes? Where do you think we'll strike?

A: Wherever you strike there will be a strike back. If I'm soldier I wouldn't be worth my salt if I don't strike you back. And no soldier in Pakistan, it annoys the soldiers and the officers of Pakistan, how dare they talk of surgical strikes! What -

Q: So you're saying in the event of there is a surgical strike there will be war?

A: Obviously. We are a sovereign country. How can you come and attack us?

Q: Even if it is a surgical strike where you, say, hit terrorist camps -

A: No sir, absolutely. You cannot do that. You must not do that. Absolutely.

Q: You're saying Pakistan will retaliate and there will be war?

A: I'm not in charge of Pakistan. I'm not running the government. It will be a government decision, not only my decision. But I'm a soldier and this is my feeling.

****

The YouTube video is dated 5/31/09. I would guess this interview took place much earlier than that.

 

[Solomon2]

the Indians actually believe that by giving an air attack the name of "surgical strike" then it is not a War or declaration of War according to their definitions -

You didn't listen to the General. He was specific: surgical strikes cannot be justified since Pakistan is a sovereign country, and the Army would feel obligated to respond. Contrariwise, where Pakistan is not sovereign, surgical strikes can't be ruled out - as in places where the P.A. can not or does not enforce government control, i.e. places where the TTP, et al rule.

If Mushy wanted to rule out Indian surgical strikes entirely, don't you think he could have been more sweeping in denouncing them?

 

[Awesome]

Hmmm...so the ally in this case would be the US? What happened to sovereignty? And to the CIA-Mossad-RAW nexus?

Don't ask lame questions and waste our time here.

 

[Awesome]

You didn't listen to the General. He was specific: surgical strikes cannot be justified since Pakistan is a sovereign country, and the Army would feel obligated to respond. Contrariwise, where Pakistan is not sovereign, surgical strikes can't be ruled out - as in places where the P.A. can not or does not enforce government control, i.e. places where the TTP, et al rule.

If Mushy wanted to rule out Indian surgical strikes entirely, don't you think he could have been more sweeping in denouncing them?

Try it and find out. We Pakistanis have been daring Indians to just try it out. There has been no backing out of a fight from our end. The Indians cowered away from a fight after amassing 1 million troops in 2002.

Retaliation would be massive.

 

[Awesome]

An Indian surgical strike would be responded by a Butcher strike from Pakistan.

 

[RobbieS]

Don't ask lame questions and waste our time here.

Of course they would be lame to you.

But the point remains that your ally is able to do anything in your territory and Pak doesn't have the balls to stop em. And this same ally is then abused by quite a few members on this very forum and a lot of intellectuals in Pak about colluding with RAW in arming TTP? Don't you find all this strange? Why the double standards?