Real Role of USA, UK, EU, Israel, Russia, China in 1971 Bengal-PAK-India War
- Thread starter shazlion
- Start date
It´s easy to say why India hates Muslims.
Muslims eat a Cow , the Cow is for an Indian Holy.
I don´t know why they believe that Cow that , i want to not provocate here anybodies Religion or something like that, but in this Terms India must hate the World.
Muslims eat a Cow , the Cow is for an Indian Holy.
I don´t know why they believe that Cow that , i want to not provocate here anybodies Religion or something like that, but in this Terms India must hate the World.
indianBong
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,125
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
Stephen Cohen
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2014
- Messages
- 8,456
- Reaction score
- -37
- Country
- Location
shazlion
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 309
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Like You Motha Fukkers are Indian Monkey Angels and India did not Plan and Break up Pakistan
Stephen Cohen
BANNED
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2014
- Messages
- 8,456
- Reaction score
- -37
- Country
- Location
shazlion
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 309
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
US forces had orders to target Indian Army in 1971
The Help which Never come and they were just Lies, Propaganda to fool the Whole Islamic World by USA, India and Jewish Lobby in USA
US forces had orders to target Indian Army in 1971 - The Times of India
Israel helped India in 1971 war, reveals book
1971 Bangla Desh War – Why was China quiet? | Quick Take - As It Happens
Talwar e Pakistan
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2014
- Messages
- 6,525
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
Russia, India, Israel Planned almost One Decade before
1971 War to How to destroy and Divide East & West PAKISTAN (Fall of Dacca - East Pakistan Now Bangladesh)
Russia and India were the Main Planners and Actors and Israel give Military, Diplomatic, Spy, Espionage Support to India against Pakistan
Israeli Lobby and Senators in USA working Day & Night against Pakistan and Fall of East Pakistan Dacca
USA, UK, EU Play along with their Plans and they knew their Plans against Pakistan before the Plans and Espionage come into Play & Action in East Pakistan now Bangladesh
1971 War: How Russia sank Nixon’s gunboat diplomacy
December 20, 2011 Rakesh Krishnan Simha, specially for RIR
Exactly 40 years ago, India won a famous victory over Pakistan due to its brilliant soldiers, an unwavering political leadership, and strong diplomatic support from Moscow. Less well known is Russia’s power play that prevented a joint British-American attack on India
Read further here:
1971 War: How Russia sank Nixon’s gunboat diplomacy | Russia & India Report
Israel helped India in 1971 war against Muslim Pakistan & Bengladesh, reveals book
Israel helped India in 1971 war, reveals book
US and China Connection, A Little Known Fact
(All Excerpts and Sources from 929 page long Volume XI of the Foreign Relations of the United States)
US sympathized with Pakistan, because of various reasons. Among them two reasons were that: firstly, Pakistan belonged to American led military Pact, CENTO and SEATO; secondly, US believed any victory of India will be considered as the expansion of Soviet influence in the parts gained by India with the victory, as it was believed to be a pro Soviet nation, even though they were non aligned.
In a telegram sent to US Secretary of State Will Roger, on March 28, 1971, the staff of the US consulate in Dhaka complained, ‘Our government has failed to denounce the suppression of democracy. Our government has failed to denounce atrocities. Our government has failed to take forceful measures to protect its citizens while at the same time bending over backwards to placate the West Pakistan dominated government… We, as professional public servants express our dissent with current policy and fervently hope that our true and lasting interests here can be defined and our policies redirected in order to salvage our nation’s position as a moral leader of the free world.’
This brought China in the picture. US needed help from China and the messenger was Pakistan. US approached China very secretly on this issue, who was more than welcoming as it believed that their relations with US could improve from this onward.
During the second week of July, 1971, Kissinger arrived in Beijing, where he heard the words by then Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai: “In our opinion, if India continues on its present course in disregard of world opinion, it will continue to go on recklessly. We, however, support the stand of Pakistan. This is known to the world. If they [the Indians] are bent on provoking such a situation, then we cannot sit idly by.’ On this, Kissinger responded that China should know that the US also backs Pakistan on this issue.
Indira Gandhi, the Indian prime minister in those times decided to tour most of the Western capitals to prove Indian stand and gain support and sympathy for the Bengalis of East Pakistan. On November 4th and 5th she met Nixon in Washington. Nixon straight forwardly told her that a new war in the subcontinent was out of the question.
The next day, Nixon and Kissinger assessed the situation. Kissinger told Nixon: ‘The Indians are bastards anyway. They are plotting a war.’
The pressure increased in East Pakistan, which attracted Indian attention. Indians were preparing for war and were concentrated on the Eastern front. To divert the pressure, on December 3, in the dark of night, even before India could attack East Pakistan, Pakistan opened western front and air raided six Indian Airfields in Kashmir and Punjab.
The CIA reported to the US President that Indian Prime Minister believes that the Chinese will never intervene militarily in North India, and thus, any action from China would be a surprise for India and Indian military might collapse in tensed situation caused by fighting in three different fronts (East, North and West).
Hearing this, on December 9, Nixon decided to send the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise into the Bay of Bengal to threaten India. The plan was to Surround India from all four sides and force them to retreat and leave East Pakistan.
On December 10, Nixon instructed Kissinger to ask the Chinese to move some troops toward the Indian frontier. ‘Threaten to move forces or move them, Henry, that’s what they must do now.’ China feared any action on India might attract Soviet aggression. At this, US assured China that any action taken by Soviet Union will be countered by US to protect China.
Pakistani army had somehow maintained their position and resisted Indian advancement. They believed China is preparing to open the Northern front which will slow down or completely stop the Indian advancement. In fact, the myth of Chinese activity was also communicated to Pakistan’s army to boost their moral, to keep their will to fight and hope alive. Lieutenant General A A K Niazi, the Pakistani army commander in Dhaka, was informed: “NEFA front has been activated by Chinese, although the Indians, for obvious reasons, have not announced it.” But Beijing never did.
In Washington, Nixon analysed the situation thus: ‘If the Russians get away with facing down the Chinese and the Indians get away with licking the Pakistanis…we may be looking down the gun barrel.’ Nixon was not sure about China. Did they really intend to start a military action against India?
China in the box
Despite Kissinger’s goading and desperate Pakistani calls for help, the Chinese did nothing. US diplomatic documents reveal that Indira Gandhi knew the Soviets had factored in the possibility of Chinese intervention. According to a cable referring to an Indian cabinet meeting held on December 10, “If the Chinese were to become directly involved in the conflict, Indira Gandhi said, the Chinese know that the Soviet Union would act in the Sinkiang region. Soviet air support may be made available to India at that time.”
Interestingly, while the cable is declassified, the source and extensive details of the Indian Prime Minister’s briefing remain classified. “He is a reliable source” is all that the document says. There was very clearly a cabinet level mole the Americans were getting their information from
On December 10, even as Nixon and Kissinger were frothing at the mouth, Indian intelligence intercepted an American message, indicating that the US Seventh Fleet was steaming into the war zone. The Seventh Fleet, which was then stationed in the Gulf of Tonkin, was led by the 75,000 ton nuclear powered aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise. The world’s largest warship, it carried more than 70 fighters and bombers. The Seventh Fleet also included the guided missile cruiser USS King, guided missile destroyers USS Decatur, Parsons and Tartar Sam, and a large amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli.
Standing between the Indian cities and the American ships was the Indian Navy’s Eastern Fleet led by the 20,000-ton aircraft carrier, Vikrant, with barely 20 light fighter aircraft. When asked if India’s Eastern Fleet would take on the Seventh Fleet, the Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Vice Admiral N. Krishnan, said: “Just give us the orders.” The Indian Air Force, having wiped out the Pakistani Air Force within the first week of the war, was reported to be on alert for any possible intervention by aircraft from the Enterprise.
Meanwhile, Soviet intelligence reported that a British naval group led by the aircraft carrier Eagle had moved closer to India’s territorial waters. This was perhaps one of the most ironic events in modern history where the Western world’s two leading democracies were threatening the world’s largest democracy in order to protect the perpetrators of the largest genocide since the Holocaust in Nazi Germany. However, India did not panic. It quietly sent Moscow a request to activate a secret provision of the Indo-Soviet security treaty, under which Russia was bound to defend India in case of any external aggression.
The British and the Americans had planned a coordinated pincer to intimidate India: while the British ships in the Arabian Sea would target India’s western coast, the Americans would make a dash into the Bay of Bengal in the east where 100,000 Pakistani troops were caught between the advancing Indian troops and the sea.
To counter this two-pronged British-American threat, Russia dispatched a nuclear-armed flotilla from Vladivostok on December 13 under the overall command of Admiral Vladimir Kruglyakov, the Commander of the 10th Operative Battle Group (Pacific Fleet). Though the Russian fleet comprised a good number of nuclear-armed ships and atomic submarines, their missiles were of limited range (less than 300 km). Hence to effectively counter the British and American fleets the Russian commanders had to undertake the risk of encircling them to bring them within their target. This they did with military precision.
In an interview to a Russian TV programme after his retirement, Admiral Kruglyakov, who commanded the Pacific Fleet from 1970 to 1975, recalled that Moscow ordered the Russian ships to prevent the Americans and British from getting closer to “Indian military objects”. The genial Kruglyakov added: “The Chief Commander’s order was that our submarines should surface when the Americans appear. It was done to demonstrate to them that we had nuclear submarines in the Indian Ocean. So when our subs surfaced, they recognised us. In the way of the American Navy stood the Soviet cruisers, destroyers and atomic submarines equipped with anti-ship missiles. We encircled them and trained our missiles at the Enterprise. We blocked them and did not allow them to close in on Karachi, Chittagong or Dhaka."
At this point, the Russians intercepted a communication from the commander of the British carrier battle group, Admiral Dimon Gordon, to the Seventh Fleet commander: “Sir, we are too late. There are the Russian atomic submarines here, and a big collection of battleships.” The British ships fled towards Madagascar while the larger US task force stopped before entering the Bay of Bengal.
The Russian manoeuvres clearly helped prevent a direct clash between India and the US-UK combine. Newly declassified documents reveal that the Indian Prime Minister went ahead with her plan to liberate Bangladesh despite inputs that the Americans had kept three battalions of Marines on standby to deter India, and that the American aircraft carrier USS Enterprise had orders to target the Indian Army, which had broken through the Pakistani Army’s defences and was thundering down the highway to the gates of Lahore, West Pakistan’s second largest city.
According to a six-page note prepared by India's foreign ministry, "The bomber force aboard the Enterprise had the US President's authority to undertake bombing of the Indian Army's communications, if necessary
Why was China militarily neutral in Indo-Pak Wars-1965, 1971? Tibet Card used by Indian Foreign Policy?
Signing of Surrender Document on 16 December 1971 Surrender received by Lieutenant General Jagjit Singh Arora (General Officer Commanding (GOC), Eastern Command) from Pakistani General A.A.K. Niazi. (Photo courtesy - indopakmilitaryhistory.blogspot.com). Click for larger image
1971 Bangla Desh War – Why was China quiet? | Quick Take - As It Happens
War on two fronts
One of the major reasons why India could take on Pakistan on two fronts – in Bangla Desh and on the Western Front, was because, there was NO Chinese action to support Pakistan. China has been positioned as an all-weather friend of Pakistan? So, in the hour of need, China did not lift its little finger to help Pakistan against India?
Indo-Soviet alliance
The answer for 1971 seems to be the dreaded Soviets.
The Chinese dreaded the Soviets. China’s aggressive posturing against Soviet Russia on the border island of Zhenbao-Damanskii had alienated the Russians. Soviet Russia backed off afterChina was made to pay a price. It was some US show of support to China, that made the Soviets stop from complete bull-dozing of China. This aspect of international politics is rarely analyzed or factored into analysis. But this does not explain 1965-Chinese neutral posturing.
This extract below from The Guardian gives a perspective on the USSR-China-USA relationship.
The Tribune announcing Niazi's appeal for surrender. Niazi's surrender with 1,00,000 soldiers, was the largest surrender received by any general in 20th century. (Picture courtesy - bangladesh-tour.blogspot.com). Click for larger image.
de facto alliance was personally decided by Nixon in August 1969 just as the Soviet Union was preparing to launch a pre-emptive nuclear attack on China. Nixon had decided the Soviets were the more dangerous party and that it was against American interests for China to be “smashed” in a Chinese-Soviet war. “It was a revolutionary moment in US foreign policy,” Kissinger explains. “An American president declared we had a strategic interest in the survival of a major communist country.”
In October 1969, Mao Zedong was so convinced war was nigh, he ordered all Chinese leaders to disperse around the country, except for the indispensable Zhou Enlai. Kissinger says that it was only Moscow’s uncertainty about America’s response that led the Soviets to postpone the project. Soon after, Kissinger, as Nixon’s national security adviser, engaged in the secret negotiations that led to the American president’s meeting with Mao in 1972, an event that astonished America’s enemies and its friends. (via On China by Henry Kissinger – review | Books | The Guardian).
US forces had orders to target Indian Army in 1971
The Help which Never come and they were just Lies, Propaganda to fool the Whole Islamic World by USA, India and Jewish Lobby in USA
US forces had orders to target Indian Army in 1971 - The Times of India
Israel helped India in 1971 war, reveals book
1971 Bangla Desh War – Why was China quiet? | Quick Take - As It Happens
I'm just glad we seperated from Bangladesh.
shazlion
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 309
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Yes, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh be united as one Greater India but now it Partition done by Evil British Anglo-Saxxon NWO and also by Right Wing Hindus in Congress Party who do not allow Muhammad Ali Jinnah to be first President of United India
and openly said that Let Pakistan come with India then they will treat Muslims as Minority
India either accept Pakistan and Bangladesh or if insist on taking out Pakistan Pieces by Pieces then Pakistan will take out India as well as Now Thanks to Allah Pakistan have Power to take and Break India, If you want to unite all lands then call the United India as Greater Pakistan --- New and Bless Name of United India
Indus Pakistan
BANNED
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 20,487
- Reaction score
- 182
- Country
- Location
Russia, India, Israel Planned almost One Decade before
1971 War to How to destroy and Divide East & West PAKISTAN (Fall of Dacca - East Pakistan Now Bangladesh)
Russia and India were the Main Planners and Actors and Israel give Military, Diplomatic, Spy, Espionage Support to India against Pakistan
Israeli Lobby and Senators in USA working Day & Night against Pakistan and Fall of East Pakistan Dacca
USA, UK, EU Play along with their Plans and they knew their Plans against Pakistan before the Plans and Espionage come into Play & Action in East Pakistan now Bangladesh
1971 War: How Russia sank Nixon’s gunboat diplomacy
December 20, 2011 Rakesh Krishnan Simha, specially for RIR
Exactly 40 years ago, India won a famous victory over Pakistan due to its brilliant soldiers, an unwavering political leadership, and strong diplomatic support from Moscow. Less well known is Russia’s power play that prevented a joint British-American attack on India
Read further here:
1971 War: How Russia sank Nixon’s gunboat diplomacy | Russia & India Report
Israel helped India in 1971 war against Muslim Pakistan & Bengladesh, reveals book
Israel helped India in 1971 war, reveals book
US and China Connection, A Little Known Fact
(All Excerpts and Sources from 929 page long Volume XI of the Foreign Relations of the United States)
US sympathized with Pakistan, because of various reasons. Among them two reasons were that: firstly, Pakistan belonged to American led military Pact, CENTO and SEATO; secondly, US believed any victory of India will be considered as the expansion of Soviet influence in the parts gained by India with the victory, as it was believed to be a pro Soviet nation, even though they were non aligned.
In a telegram sent to US Secretary of State Will Roger, on March 28, 1971, the staff of the US consulate in Dhaka complained, ‘Our government has failed to denounce the suppression of democracy. Our government has failed to denounce atrocities. Our government has failed to take forceful measures to protect its citizens while at the same time bending over backwards to placate the West Pakistan dominated government… We, as professional public servants express our dissent with current policy and fervently hope that our true and lasting interests here can be defined and our policies redirected in order to salvage our nation’s position as a moral leader of the free world.’
This brought China in the picture. US needed help from China and the messenger was Pakistan. US approached China very secretly on this issue, who was more than welcoming as it believed that their relations with US could improve from this onward.
During the second week of July, 1971, Kissinger arrived in Beijing, where he heard the words by then Chinese Prime Minister Zhou Enlai: “In our opinion, if India continues on its present course in disregard of world opinion, it will continue to go on recklessly. We, however, support the stand of Pakistan. This is known to the world. If they [the Indians] are bent on provoking such a situation, then we cannot sit idly by.’ On this, Kissinger responded that China should know that the US also backs Pakistan on this issue.
Indira Gandhi, the Indian prime minister in those times decided to tour most of the Western capitals to prove Indian stand and gain support and sympathy for the Bengalis of East Pakistan. On November 4th and 5th she met Nixon in Washington. Nixon straight forwardly told her that a new war in the subcontinent was out of the question.
The next day, Nixon and Kissinger assessed the situation. Kissinger told Nixon: ‘The Indians are bastards anyway. They are plotting a war.’
The pressure increased in East Pakistan, which attracted Indian attention. Indians were preparing for war and were concentrated on the Eastern front. To divert the pressure, on December 3, in the dark of night, even before India could attack East Pakistan, Pakistan opened western front and air raided six Indian Airfields in Kashmir and Punjab.
The CIA reported to the US President that Indian Prime Minister believes that the Chinese will never intervene militarily in North India, and thus, any action from China would be a surprise for India and Indian military might collapse in tensed situation caused by fighting in three different fronts (East, North and West).
Hearing this, on December 9, Nixon decided to send the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise into the Bay of Bengal to threaten India. The plan was to Surround India from all four sides and force them to retreat and leave East Pakistan.
On December 10, Nixon instructed Kissinger to ask the Chinese to move some troops toward the Indian frontier. ‘Threaten to move forces or move them, Henry, that’s what they must do now.’ China feared any action on India might attract Soviet aggression. At this, US assured China that any action taken by Soviet Union will be countered by US to protect China.
Pakistani army had somehow maintained their position and resisted Indian advancement. They believed China is preparing to open the Northern front which will slow down or completely stop the Indian advancement. In fact, the myth of Chinese activity was also communicated to Pakistan’s army to boost their moral, to keep their will to fight and hope alive. Lieutenant General A A K Niazi, the Pakistani army commander in Dhaka, was informed: “NEFA front has been activated by Chinese, although the Indians, for obvious reasons, have not announced it.” But Beijing never did.
In Washington, Nixon analysed the situation thus: ‘If the Russians get away with facing down the Chinese and the Indians get away with licking the Pakistanis…we may be looking down the gun barrel.’ Nixon was not sure about China. Did they really intend to start a military action against India?
China in the box
Despite Kissinger’s goading and desperate Pakistani calls for help, the Chinese did nothing. US diplomatic documents reveal that Indira Gandhi knew the Soviets had factored in the possibility of Chinese intervention. According to a cable referring to an Indian cabinet meeting held on December 10, “If the Chinese were to become directly involved in the conflict, Indira Gandhi said, the Chinese know that the Soviet Union would act in the Sinkiang region. Soviet air support may be made available to India at that time.”
Interestingly, while the cable is declassified, the source and extensive details of the Indian Prime Minister’s briefing remain classified. “He is a reliable source” is all that the document says. There was very clearly a cabinet level mole the Americans were getting their information from
On December 10, even as Nixon and Kissinger were frothing at the mouth, Indian intelligence intercepted an American message, indicating that the US Seventh Fleet was steaming into the war zone. The Seventh Fleet, which was then stationed in the Gulf of Tonkin, was led by the 75,000 ton nuclear powered aircraft carrier, the USS Enterprise. The world’s largest warship, it carried more than 70 fighters and bombers. The Seventh Fleet also included the guided missile cruiser USS King, guided missile destroyers USS Decatur, Parsons and Tartar Sam, and a large amphibious assault ship USS Tripoli.
Standing between the Indian cities and the American ships was the Indian Navy’s Eastern Fleet led by the 20,000-ton aircraft carrier, Vikrant, with barely 20 light fighter aircraft. When asked if India’s Eastern Fleet would take on the Seventh Fleet, the Flag Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Vice Admiral N. Krishnan, said: “Just give us the orders.” The Indian Air Force, having wiped out the Pakistani Air Force within the first week of the war, was reported to be on alert for any possible intervention by aircraft from the Enterprise.
Meanwhile, Soviet intelligence reported that a British naval group led by the aircraft carrier Eagle had moved closer to India’s territorial waters. This was perhaps one of the most ironic events in modern history where the Western world’s two leading democracies were threatening the world’s largest democracy in order to protect the perpetrators of the largest genocide since the Holocaust in Nazi Germany. However, India did not panic. It quietly sent Moscow a request to activate a secret provision of the Indo-Soviet security treaty, under which Russia was bound to defend India in case of any external aggression.
The British and the Americans had planned a coordinated pincer to intimidate India: while the British ships in the Arabian Sea would target India’s western coast, the Americans would make a dash into the Bay of Bengal in the east where 100,000 Pakistani troops were caught between the advancing Indian troops and the sea.
To counter this two-pronged British-American threat, Russia dispatched a nuclear-armed flotilla from Vladivostok on December 13 under the overall command of Admiral Vladimir Kruglyakov, the Commander of the 10th Operative Battle Group (Pacific Fleet). Though the Russian fleet comprised a good number of nuclear-armed ships and atomic submarines, their missiles were of limited range (less than 300 km). Hence to effectively counter the British and American fleets the Russian commanders had to undertake the risk of encircling them to bring them within their target. This they did with military precision.
In an interview to a Russian TV programme after his retirement, Admiral Kruglyakov, who commanded the Pacific Fleet from 1970 to 1975, recalled that Moscow ordered the Russian ships to prevent the Americans and British from getting closer to “Indian military objects”. The genial Kruglyakov added: “The Chief Commander’s order was that our submarines should surface when the Americans appear. It was done to demonstrate to them that we had nuclear submarines in the Indian Ocean. So when our subs surfaced, they recognised us. In the way of the American Navy stood the Soviet cruisers, destroyers and atomic submarines equipped with anti-ship missiles. We encircled them and trained our missiles at the Enterprise. We blocked them and did not allow them to close in on Karachi, Chittagong or Dhaka."
At this point, the Russians intercepted a communication from the commander of the British carrier battle group, Admiral Dimon Gordon, to the Seventh Fleet commander: “Sir, we are too late. There are the Russian atomic submarines here, and a big collection of battleships.” The British ships fled towards Madagascar while the larger US task force stopped before entering the Bay of Bengal.
The Russian manoeuvres clearly helped prevent a direct clash between India and the US-UK combine. Newly declassified documents reveal that the Indian Prime Minister went ahead with her plan to liberate Bangladesh despite inputs that the Americans had kept three battalions of Marines on standby to deter India, and that the American aircraft carrier USS Enterprise had orders to target the Indian Army, which had broken through the Pakistani Army’s defences and was thundering down the highway to the gates of Lahore, West Pakistan’s second largest city.
According to a six-page note prepared by India's foreign ministry, "The bomber force aboard the Enterprise had the US President's authority to undertake bombing of the Indian Army's communications, if necessary
Why was China militarily neutral in Indo-Pak Wars-1965, 1971? Tibet Card used by Indian Foreign Policy?
Signing of Surrender Document on 16 December 1971 Surrender received by Lieutenant General Jagjit Singh Arora (General Officer Commanding (GOC), Eastern Command) from Pakistani General A.A.K. Niazi. (Photo courtesy - indopakmilitaryhistory.blogspot.com). Click for larger image
1971 Bangla Desh War – Why was China quiet? | Quick Take - As It Happens
War on two fronts
One of the major reasons why India could take on Pakistan on two fronts – in Bangla Desh and on the Western Front, was because, there was NO Chinese action to support Pakistan. China has been positioned as an all-weather friend of Pakistan? So, in the hour of need, China did not lift its little finger to help Pakistan against India?
Indo-Soviet alliance
The answer for 1971 seems to be the dreaded Soviets.
The Chinese dreaded the Soviets. China’s aggressive posturing against Soviet Russia on the border island of Zhenbao-Damanskii had alienated the Russians. Soviet Russia backed off afterChina was made to pay a price. It was some US show of support to China, that made the Soviets stop from complete bull-dozing of China. This aspect of international politics is rarely analyzed or factored into analysis. But this does not explain 1965-Chinese neutral posturing.
This extract below from The Guardian gives a perspective on the USSR-China-USA relationship.
The Tribune announcing Niazi's appeal for surrender. Niazi's surrender with 1,00,000 soldiers, was the largest surrender received by any general in 20th century. (Picture courtesy - bangladesh-tour.blogspot.com). Click for larger image.
de facto alliance was personally decided by Nixon in August 1969 just as the Soviet Union was preparing to launch a pre-emptive nuclear attack on China. Nixon had decided the Soviets were the more dangerous party and that it was against American interests for China to be “smashed” in a Chinese-Soviet war. “It was a revolutionary moment in US foreign policy,” Kissinger explains. “An American president declared we had a strategic interest in the survival of a major communist country.”
In October 1969, Mao Zedong was so convinced war was nigh, he ordered all Chinese leaders to disperse around the country, except for the indispensable Zhou Enlai. Kissinger says that it was only Moscow’s uncertainty about America’s response that led the Soviets to postpone the project. Soon after, Kissinger, as Nixon’s national security adviser, engaged in the secret negotiations that led to the American president’s meeting with Mao in 1972, an event that astonished America’s enemies and its friends. (via On China by Henry Kissinger – review | Books | The Guardian).
US forces had orders to target Indian Army in 1971
The Help which Never come and they were just Lies, Propaganda to fool the Whole Islamic World by USA, India and Jewish Lobby in USA
US forces had orders to target Indian Army in 1971 - The Times of India
Israel helped India in 1971 war, reveals book
1971 Bangla Desh War – Why was China quiet? | Quick Take - As It Happens
When I read posts like these from my own countrymen, my beloved Pakistan I want to cry for it's future. You my fellow citizen have managed to get the opposite side of the stick. What your saying is as bizzare as somebody trying to put on his trousers upside down - The wrong way.
There is no way way, even if Pakistan had a been a superpower that we could have won. We had maximum of two bloody divisions and even than my understanding is one was haphazardly raised, most of heavy equipment was left in Pakistan.
and Shazlion you need to get a grip on your language. I also feel very strongly about Indian's but language like that just exposes your own lack of intellect.
shazlion
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2013
- Messages
- 309
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Pakistan Cyber Force: NO mass rapes in 1971 took place at the hands of Pakistan Army: Sarmila Bose
1971 Mass rape allegations massive propoganda: Sarmila Bose
1971 Mass rape allegations massive propaganda by Bangladesh: Sarmila Bose
New impartial evidence debunks 1971 rape allegations against Pakistan Army
A study of the 1971 conflict by an Indian academic, Prof Sarmila Bose, says the Pakistan army personnel did not rape Bengali women as has been widely alleged by Indian and Bangladeshi writers. While Prof Boses study focuses on certain specific cases, the finding is very interesting, based as it is on extensive interviews with eyewitnesses. The study also determines the pattern of conflict as three-layered: West Pakistan versus East Pakistan, East Pakistanis (pro-Independence) versus East Pakistanis (pro-Union) and the fateful war between India and Pakistan.
As Prof Bose has noted, no prior study of the conflict has been done. What we have are narratives that strengthen one point of view by rubbishing contending viewpoints. The Bangladeshi meta-narrative, for instance, focuses on the rape issue and uses that not only to demonise the Pakistan army but also exploit it as a symbol of why it was important to break away from (West) Pakistan. Indeed, the sheer number of Bangladeshi women raped is placed in the millions, a fact to which the Hamoodur Rehman Commission Report also referred and declared as absurd. Even so, over the years the charge of rape has stuck to the Pakistan army and weighed it down in moral terms. Prof Bose, a Bengali herself and belonging to the family of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, has done a remarkable job of investigating the charge and paving the way for independent scholars to probe the issue further.
Prof Bose, who unveiled her study at a US State Department conference convened to mark the release of declassified US government documents from that period, also spoke about the violence generated by all sides. The civil war of 1971 was fought between those who believed they were fighting for a united Pakistan and those who believed their chance for justice and progress lay in an independent Bangladesh. Both were legitimate political positions. All parties in this conflict embraced violence as a means to the end, all committed acts of brutality outside accepted norms of warfare, and all had their share of humanity. These attributes make the 1971 conflict particularly suitable for efforts towards reconciliation, rather than recrimination, says Prof Bose.
It goes to Prof Boses credit that while studying the conflict she retained her professionalism and integrity, two essential traits normally absent in studies done of that period by all sides. Under the circumstances, if she wants to explore the issue further the Pakistan army should not hesitate to give her access to raw material in its archives so that she can expand her work. Indeed, heres the Pakistan armys chance to wash this stigma off it once and for all. We are reasonably sure that elements within Bangladesh and even India will criticise Boses study because it goes against the grain of Bangladeshi nationalism. But this will not take away from its impartialness and significance.
1971 Mass rape allegations massive propoganda: Sarmila Bose
1971 Mass rape allegations massive propaganda by Bangladesh: Sarmila Bose
New impartial evidence debunks 1971 rape allegations against Pakistan Army
A study of the 1971 conflict by an Indian academic, Prof Sarmila Bose, says the Pakistan army personnel did not rape Bengali women as has been widely alleged by Indian and Bangladeshi writers. While Prof Boses study focuses on certain specific cases, the finding is very interesting, based as it is on extensive interviews with eyewitnesses. The study also determines the pattern of conflict as three-layered: West Pakistan versus East Pakistan, East Pakistanis (pro-Independence) versus East Pakistanis (pro-Union) and the fateful war between India and Pakistan.
As Prof Bose has noted, no prior study of the conflict has been done. What we have are narratives that strengthen one point of view by rubbishing contending viewpoints. The Bangladeshi meta-narrative, for instance, focuses on the rape issue and uses that not only to demonise the Pakistan army but also exploit it as a symbol of why it was important to break away from (West) Pakistan. Indeed, the sheer number of Bangladeshi women raped is placed in the millions, a fact to which the Hamoodur Rehman Commission Report also referred and declared as absurd. Even so, over the years the charge of rape has stuck to the Pakistan army and weighed it down in moral terms. Prof Bose, a Bengali herself and belonging to the family of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose, has done a remarkable job of investigating the charge and paving the way for independent scholars to probe the issue further.
Prof Bose, who unveiled her study at a US State Department conference convened to mark the release of declassified US government documents from that period, also spoke about the violence generated by all sides. The civil war of 1971 was fought between those who believed they were fighting for a united Pakistan and those who believed their chance for justice and progress lay in an independent Bangladesh. Both were legitimate political positions. All parties in this conflict embraced violence as a means to the end, all committed acts of brutality outside accepted norms of warfare, and all had their share of humanity. These attributes make the 1971 conflict particularly suitable for efforts towards reconciliation, rather than recrimination, says Prof Bose.
It goes to Prof Boses credit that while studying the conflict she retained her professionalism and integrity, two essential traits normally absent in studies done of that period by all sides. Under the circumstances, if she wants to explore the issue further the Pakistan army should not hesitate to give her access to raw material in its archives so that she can expand her work. Indeed, heres the Pakistan armys chance to wash this stigma off it once and for all. We are reasonably sure that elements within Bangladesh and even India will criticise Boses study because it goes against the grain of Bangladeshi nationalism. But this will not take away from its impartialness and significance.
Indus Pakistan
BANNED
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 20,487
- Reaction score
- 182
- Country
- Location
I was war gaming the 1971 conflict. The nearest examples I came to is if UK was asked to secure Ukraine. In that scenario all of Ukraine launches a insurgency against 50,000 British soldiers, That is just about two divisions with HQ.
That many men would struggle to control in insurgency. NATO had 125,000 men in Afghanistan but failed. Bangladesh in 1971 had twice more people than Afghanistan. Anyway in the secnario I played with Ukraine what if on top of the Ukrainian insurgents the Russians also attack? The British force of 50,000 would not last longer than 48 hours.
Given that our men in 1971 performed like heros. Stop blaming others. We fought with American M48 Patton Tanks, with American M313 APCs, American artillery, American Sabre jets, American C-130 transport aircraft, American made radars, american made communication kits, American trained officers and you think they conspired against us ?
You need to go back and learn the art of cogent, reasoned, deductive logic all over again my friend.
That many men would struggle to control in insurgency. NATO had 125,000 men in Afghanistan but failed. Bangladesh in 1971 had twice more people than Afghanistan. Anyway in the secnario I played with Ukraine what if on top of the Ukrainian insurgents the Russians also attack? The British force of 50,000 would not last longer than 48 hours.
Given that our men in 1971 performed like heros. Stop blaming others. We fought with American M48 Patton Tanks, with American M313 APCs, American artillery, American Sabre jets, American C-130 transport aircraft, American made radars, american made communication kits, American trained officers and you think they conspired against us ?
You need to go back and learn the art of cogent, reasoned, deductive logic all over again my friend.
ashok mourya
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 19, 2014
- Messages
- 1,957
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
Pakistan faced defeat and surrendered because betray of its own soldiers, friends like China, USA, UK and Arabworld.
Indus Pakistan
BANNED
- Joined
- May 7, 2012
- Messages
- 20,487
- Reaction score
- 182
- Country
- Location
It was written in the DNA in 1947 that this would happen. No where in the world has there been a country so divided, so differant into two portions. It was a non starter. I don't even understand how it became part of Pakistan. Allama Iqbal was first to articulate for Pakistan and his idea was very simple.
Allahabad Address - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"India is a continent of human groups belonging to different races, speaking different languages, and professing different religions [...] Personally, I would like to see the Punjab, North-West Frontier Province, Sindh and Baluchistan amalgamated into a single State. Self-government within the British Empire, or without the British Empire, the formation of a consolidated North-West Indian Muslim State appears to me to be the final destiny of the Muslims, at least of North-West India.
He was asking for this:-
Do you see Punjab, Afghania [NWFP] Kashmir , Sindh, Balochistan to make P, A, K, S and Tan. In addition back in 1930s Ch. Rehmat Ali who made the NAME Pakistan said this:-
Choudhry Rahmat Ali - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"At this solemn hour in the history of India, when British and Indian statesmen are laying the foundations of a Federal Constitution for that land, we address this appeal to you, in the name of our common heritage, on behalf of our thirty million Muslim brethren who live in PAKSTAN – by which we mean the five Northern units of India, Viz: Punjab, North-West Frontier Province (Afghan Province), Kashmir, Sind and Baluchistan."
Do you notice Bengal was not even in the original blueprint. Look at this map drawn by him it shows a separate Muslim country in the east called Bangaistan. Well it is there today called Bangladesh. A historical abberation has been corrected by historical circumtance.
For get about the Bengali In fact have a party they went. Instead concentrate on what we have. Even there today forget about Americans and Isreali. Do you think they are clever than us. Do you think they are stronger than us? Do you think we are weaker than them. Why don't you try to brerak them up and see how far you will get. If a family is weak you don't blame the world. you blame the family.
Today Pashtun are killing Sindhi, sindhi are killing Mohajir, Mohajir are killing Pashtun, Baloch are killing Punjabi, Shia are killing Sunni, wahabi are killiing shia, Rajputs hate the jats, one clan is at war with another, one group is bombing school children.
Whose fault is that? Ours and ours alone>
syedali73
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2008
- Messages
- 6,066
- Reaction score
- 60
- Country
- Location
This reminds me of a fine dialogue by Deeno Kaka (Mahmood Ali) in PTV's 1981 classic drama 'Afshan'.
مسلمان کی دسمنی میں تو سب جاتیں ایک ہو جاویں ہیں۔
Now you are entitled to your opinion what to believe and what not.
Similar threads
- Article
