deckingraj
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2009
- Messages
- 5,192
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Gazzi...please don't loose patience...See you are taking so much pain in writing all this....I am also trying my best to share my opinion....
See there you missed the entire point... Atleast understand my point before hitting the wall....DId i say that crippling economy was not a deterrant for India??? In fact i said it was a deterrant for India not because Pakistan will destroy our stock Exchange by her missiles but because the sheer scare of region going into flames will take investors away.... What in fact i am saying is that our economy being crippeled or not is a deterrant for India and that is one of the reason we have not choosen surgical strikes or limited role in Kargil...Here we are talking about a scenario where India has already attacked Pakistan...In other words we have already crossed the deterrant...Do you agree with this much or not???
Now lets look at Pakistan response...One would be lunatic to say that Pakistan will not respond...However what should be the nature of that retaliation??? If lets say they choose to attack Mumbai Stock Exchange(to cripple the economy) then don't you think india will also return the favor??? You simply can't compare attacks on some terrorists camps with attacks on Financial capital equivalent of crippling the whole country....Such an attack would mean calling for a full-fledge war and i am sure we both agree that would mean end of both the countries....So Pakistan response would be after taking into considerations of possible India's retaliation....Do you agree here???
So now let me ask again do you still think Pakistan would simply attack our financial capital or they would like to retaliate in a manner that can limit the theater but still is strong enough to tell Indians that Pak sovereignity cannot be challenged????
Again you are not listening to me but accusing me of same....I have said repeatedly it is not India who will decide what would be Pakistan's reply...It will be decided only by Pakistan...Of course there will be external pressure but final decision lies with pakistan...Yes you are right all options are open...What you are not considering is that though you would like to hit where it hurts yet what about India's response??? Won't we hit back where it will hurt you??? So that is the deterrant for you apart from other's....Our strikes by no mean is as significant as attack on the survivability of nation...thus they are not as grave as attack on economic capital....Your attack on economic capital means there is no way a full-fledge war can be avoided....which is nothing but suicidal...Get this distinction and then respond....
Let me give you a hint : You will choose to hit some low strategic areas just to give the message and keep the theater small....
The answer is a BIG NO.... All your doctorines are defensive...Let me drill more...When you say offensive what exactly you mean?? Do you mean that you will hit areas with missiles and then put strong defenses to stop IA from coming in Pakistan??? If this is your definition of offense(which is wrong though) then i agree with you...Otherwise
Not sure what you did not get...Ask me and i will more than willing to explain...
That's why i say keep emotions away...Am i using anything like hitting wall...who the hell....come down from high horses blah blah...???? Hitting pakistan is not declared war because her existense is not compromised.. please note that i am not saying that compromising one's sovereignity is a joke...It is grave but response of any army is based on the threat perception from the enemy....If that wouldn't be the case then any border skirmish on IB between BSF and Rangers can escalate into full-fledge war.... Your own army coming into indian territory fighting for atleast a month in Kargil did not bring us to a full-fledge war but any surgical strikes in P-O-K means nothing but a declaration of war...How come??? Remember all options are open for everyone(India-Pak)...however nukes will keep both of them away from going into an all out offensive even if they have the ability or not...
See that's your problem...You have some dillusions about india and indians...as if we are someone from space.... I am talking to you on facts ...why don't you choose to reply back in same manner rather than these comments??? I asked you a very simple question...do you know the difference between Pakistan and Bangladesh currency??? Is that any indicator to you???
Kewl... If you say so then i am all fine... Typical response from members complemented with this below quote from you made me think otherwise...
Both are preparing for such as the geography of 1971 is not the same. Now it will mainly a border to border war, East on West. Not Pakistan fighting on two sides of India, surrounded on all 4 sides by India in East Pakistan
Anyways we seems to be in agreement here...so lets leave it.....
None...Hell i am a software engineer with a quest to learn about defense and offense...I am just talking to you on plane logic beacuse all i know is that its the political establishment that decide what and how big should be the army response.... our generals wanted to cross IB instead of fighting on difficult terrain as Kargil is...but political establishment choose otherwise....I might be wrong but with all due respect if you know/have participated in wars then i guess we should stop discussing...I lack the same acumen that you are blessed with....
Not sure Sir.... As per your logic(common belief not specific to you) even kargil is a victory for Pakistan.... So i don't agree it happens only in India...Anyways these are all off topics...I am just sharing my POV and there is every chance that i am wrong...though same apply's to you....
Speaking to you is like
Well if damaging or crippling economy was not a deterrent for Pakistan then why did Vajpayee not go to war or limited war in 2001. As this is a definite thing Pakistan would exploit, why. Well quite simply because if we really are going into a war, limited or not, may as well do whatever damage that can be done to India militarily and economically. Who is to decide that such an attack on the Indian economical sector will bring about a full fledged war leading to nukes.
See there you missed the entire point... Atleast understand my point before hitting the wall....DId i say that crippling economy was not a deterrant for India??? In fact i said it was a deterrant for India not because Pakistan will destroy our stock Exchange by her missiles but because the sheer scare of region going into flames will take investors away.... What in fact i am saying is that our economy being crippeled or not is a deterrant for India and that is one of the reason we have not choosen surgical strikes or limited role in Kargil...Here we are talking about a scenario where India has already attacked Pakistan...In other words we have already crossed the deterrant...Do you agree with this much or not???
Now lets look at Pakistan response...One would be lunatic to say that Pakistan will not respond...However what should be the nature of that retaliation??? If lets say they choose to attack Mumbai Stock Exchange(to cripple the economy) then don't you think india will also return the favor??? You simply can't compare attacks on some terrorists camps with attacks on Financial capital equivalent of crippling the whole country....Such an attack would mean calling for a full-fledge war and i am sure we both agree that would mean end of both the countries....So Pakistan response would be after taking into considerations of possible India's retaliation....Do you agree here???
So now let me ask again do you still think Pakistan would simply attack our financial capital or they would like to retaliate in a manner that can limit the theater but still is strong enough to tell Indians that Pak sovereignity cannot be challenged????
Again, you just simply do not understand someone elses post, its again like
With regards to attacking Indian economy, please see above first paragraph, and also based on the 2001 scenario, it appears that many investors will be leaving willingly before any Pakistani attempt anyway, why would Pakistan not do something to hit India where it hurts, you need to come out of this fantasy dream. seriously, all options are on the table, to you hitting so called terror camps, or freedom fighter camps is acceptable but for Pakistan to hit Indian targets as well as other targets, is a no no becuase Indian forum members think so, well ok
Again you are not listening to me but accusing me of same....I have said repeatedly it is not India who will decide what would be Pakistan's reply...It will be decided only by Pakistan...Of course there will be external pressure but final decision lies with pakistan...Yes you are right all options are open...What you are not considering is that though you would like to hit where it hurts yet what about India's response??? Won't we hit back where it will hurt you??? So that is the deterrant for you apart from other's....Our strikes by no mean is as significant as attack on the survivability of nation...thus they are not as grave as attack on economic capital....Your attack on economic capital means there is no way a full-fledge war can be avoided....which is nothing but suicidal...Get this distinction and then respond....
Let me give you a hint : You will choose to hit some low strategic areas just to give the message and keep the theater small....
You have said Pakistan would not like to increase the theatre of war. You seem to assume Pakistan will sit in a defensive mode......sorry, 40 years have past since the last war, you dont know how Pakistan is going to react, but my point is, and please read this again ans=d again to comprehend......Pakistan has the means for offensive attacks, as proven by the missile names given (those names were given to hopefully get you to understand) and Kargil is an example and is the General Majids comment I mentioned earlier that Pakistan has the ability and stomach to do so.
The answer is a BIG NO.... All your doctorines are defensive...Let me drill more...When you say offensive what exactly you mean?? Do you mean that you will hit areas with missiles and then put strong defenses to stop IA from coming in Pakistan??? If this is your definition of offense(which is wrong though) then i agree with you...Otherwise
??????????????????????????????????????
Not sure what you did not get...Ask me and i will more than willing to explain...
for their own good..........When a strike is launched, that is it, it is an attack and it is a declared war. Pakistan is not going to sit for a tit for tat and wait for India to hit a target in Pakistan and respond with hitting a target in India....I mean, who the hell do you think you Indians are.....we will target what we like in war, not India.
That's why i say keep emotions away...Am i using anything like hitting wall...who the hell....come down from high horses blah blah...???? Hitting pakistan is not declared war because her existense is not compromised.. please note that i am not saying that compromising one's sovereignity is a joke...It is grave but response of any army is based on the threat perception from the enemy....If that wouldn't be the case then any border skirmish on IB between BSF and Rangers can escalate into full-fledge war.... Your own army coming into indian territory fighting for atleast a month in Kargil did not bring us to a full-fledge war but any surgical strikes in P-O-K means nothing but a declaration of war...How come??? Remember all options are open for everyone(India-Pak)...however nukes will keep both of them away from going into an all out offensive even if they have the ability or not...
Yes I believe Bangladesh was a liability, my view, talk about educating oneself, I have been educated, just my education from my Pakistan's point of view and yours, well your is Indian so quite obviously it MUST be correct...as India is the only one that can be.
See that's your problem...You have some dillusions about india and indians...as if we are someone from space.... I am talking to you on facts ...why don't you choose to reply back in same manner rather than these comments??? I asked you a very simple question...do you know the difference between Pakistan and Bangladesh currency??? Is that any indicator to you???
Both are preparing for such as the geography of 1971 is not the same. Now it will mainly a border to border war, East on West. Not Pakistan fighting on two sides of India, surrounded on all 4 sides by India in East Pakistan......
Kewl... If you say so then i am all fine... Typical response from members complemented with this below quote from you made me think otherwise...
Both are preparing for such as the geography of 1971 is not the same. Now it will mainly a border to border war, East on West. Not Pakistan fighting on two sides of India, surrounded on all 4 sides by India in East Pakistan
Anyways we seems to be in agreement here...so lets leave it.....
Well we differ in that............Israeli/Arab war shows otherwise. Launchinf an offensive can open up many options and keep the enemy on their toes.......how many battles have you taken part in deckingraj...other then the armchair expert one
None...Hell i am a software engineer with a quest to learn about defense and offense...I am just talking to you on plane logic beacuse all i know is that its the political establishment that decide what and how big should be the army response.... our generals wanted to cross IB instead of fighting on difficult terrain as Kargil is...but political establishment choose otherwise....I might be wrong but with all due respect if you know/have participated in wars then i guess we should stop discussing...I lack the same acumen that you are blessed with....
You seems to be informed person...Though for some reason your information goes for a toss when it comes to India...Our general said that we can defend India in case a war is thrusted upon us from Pak and China....One thing i know that even during 1971 we had reserves for China(in case they choose the misadventure) and you yourself has said that its been 40 years....So...Well according to your Generak he can fight both Pakistan and China........You again are living in a superioty complex, I am getting tired of using this word just as much as I am getting tired of hearing the word terrorist. India thinks its has a better force, and in some ways like technology it does, however, all depends heavily also on ground forces and I believe our ground troops are second to none. My view, you have your...........
Logic, well Indian logic is not logic altogether, its sheer lunacy. Reminds me Sri Sri Ravi Shankars view like kutarka
Kutarka means wrong logic or illogical, where the intention is not right. Logic is applied here with the sole purpose of finding fault. One knows deep inside that it is not right, but still, logically you prove that it is right. This is called Kutarka.
For example: The door is half open means the door is half closed. Therefore, the door is fully open means the door is fully closed!......This can only happen in India
Not sure Sir.... As per your logic(common belief not specific to you) even kargil is a victory for Pakistan.... So i don't agree it happens only in India...Anyways these are all off topics...I am just sharing my POV and there is every chance that i am wrong...though same apply's to you....
Last edited: