What's new

Role of Big Powers in Indo-Pak War of 1971

@barbarosa :


Bullsh!t.

The only involvement USSR had, was in preventing USA from interfering. The Soviets placed nuclear subs in the Indian ocean, when the Americans tried to send a carrier.

I know it hurts your ego to know that the vegan kafirs split you into two. That's the reason you keep trying to come up with fictitious theories about how that happened. India split you. Not USSR, not Bengalis by themselves. Making up fiction may soothe your ego, but the truth is the truth.



So powerful that in the next war, your army didnt even dare to put on their uniform. LOL.

And no, you didn't breakup the USSR. They imploded from within, their constituent nations broke free from the shackles of communism. They tore down the Berlin wall, they revolted.

The Afghan war put a strain on them, yes. Of which Pakistan was a peripheral player - US and Afghans played the major part. And that war itself was only a marginal factor in the breakup of the USSR.

Again, making up narratives to feel proud of yourself, eh? Yea yea, you couldn't even fight India, but fought and defeated a superpower. Gullibility, the hallmark of Pakistanis.

LOL your version is nothing near the truth ...

That's why when the Berlin wall was going down, the German General send the piece of that wall to general Abdul Rehman with the the note .. TO THE PERSON WHO GAVE THE FIRST BLOW

PAKISTAN was the major player against USSR ... you can't see the truth ..

BTW that is why INDIA .. SUPA POWER cant attack Pakistan after 26/11 lol ...
I know its hurting you but you cant escape it ...
 
.
LOL your version is nothing near the truth ...

That's why when the Berlin wall was going down, the German General send the piece of that wall to general Abdul Rehman with the the note .. TO THE PERSON WHO GAVE THE FIRST BLOW

PAKISTAN was the major player against USSR ... you can't see the truth ..

BTW that is why INDIA .. SUPA POWER cant attack Pakistan after 26/11 lol ...
I know its hurting you but you cant escape it ...

All right, you can be proud that your country attacked and killed 166 unarmed civilians on 26/11. I'm sure it was one of the greatest victories for your nation. India celebrated cutting Pakistan into two, Pakistan celebrates a terror attack. Yes, sounds right, given each country's tradition.

Do you realize how patheticc you sound? That in response to me pointing out we cut your coutry into two, you gloat about 26/11? Do you really think each accomplishment is the same? Oh well, what can I say? For Pakistanis, I suppose terrorist attacks are a matter of pride and gloating, just as for us, cutting the enemy into two in a resounding military victory is a matter of pride. That's a difference in mentality between you and us.

OK, I'll admit:

1) India cut Pakistan into two, and Pakistanis have to swallow that.
2) Pakistan "bravely" shot civilians in railway stations and hotels, and India has to accept that.
 
.
download-314.jpg



New Delhi: Today, we are observing the anniversary of the conclusion of the “War of the Century” in 1971, which saw the surrender of 93,000 Pakistani troops to the Indian Army and the Mukti Bahini in Dacca, and the emergence of a new nation, Bangladesh. India could achieve this in spite of the support that Pakistan had of the United States of America. Recent documents that have come to light indicate that U.S. President Richard Nixon was on the phone with Secretary of State Henry Kissinger trying to find out how to save Pakistan even though it attacked Indian airfields, which Nixon felt “was a reckless act that prompted India to declare war.”


Kissinger in his reply said “If they lose half their country without fighting, they will be destroyed. They may also be destroyed this way, but they will go down fighting”. The U.S. then decided to continue its support Pakistan. Earlier, following Pakistan’s crackdown on the Eastern Wing, Prime Minister Indira Gandhi went on a tour of West European countries, Britain and the United States of America to make them aware of the scale of the crackdown by the Pakistan Army on its eastern wing and its impact on India, as millions of refugees poured in.


When Indira Gandhi could not prevent Western countries, particularly the USA from supporting Pakistan, she sent External Affairs Minister Swaran Singh to Moscow to conclude the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace Friendship and Cooperation with the Soviet Union. The treaty was signed on August 9, 1971.When the war broke out on December 3, Nixon was upset and contacted Kissinger and recalled that even though he had “warned the b…ch” (referring to Prime Minister Indira Gandhi) against taking action against Pakistan. He said Pakistan had given an accuse to India to declare war on Pakistan by bombing Indian air fields . He wanted to help Pakistan and asked Kissinger to approach France, China and some West Asian states to send fighter aircraft to help Pakistan.


The Chinese did not react to the message. India attacked Pakistan Army concentrations in East Pakistan and troops converged from West Bengal, Meghalaya and Tripura. India also air dropped paratroopers from the Para Brigade on Tangail, who proceeded towards Dacca. During the first week of the War, Indian Air Force attacked East Pakistan air bases and the Navy blocked access to the Pakistani ships by taking control of the Dacca and Chittagong ports.The United States still did not give up its efforts to support Pakistan. On December 10, the Indian Intelligence intercepted an American message that the US Seventh Fleet, which was based in the Gulf of Tonkin, led by the nuclear-powered USS Enterprise, which had on board 70 fighters and bombers to proceed towards the war zone. Nixon persuaded the British Navy to join in the U.S. effort.


India’s eastern fleet, which was commanded by Vice Admiral N.Krishnan, asked the Government of India to give him the orders to defend, and the Indian Air Force got itself ready to counter any attack by U.S. aircraft from the USS Enterprise.What prevented them the U.S. threat from materialising was the dispach of a number of nuclear armed flotillas from Vladivastok on December 13 in an effort that the Americans and British from getting closer to Ïndian military objects” They also encircled the U.S. Fleet. The records, recently unclassified, disclosed the conversation between the British Fleet Commander and the U.S. Seventh Fleet Commander : “Sir, we are too late. There are Russian atomic submarines here and a big collection of battleships”. The US Fleet could not come close to Karachi, Chittagong or Dhaka.


The Chief of the Naval Staff, Admiral S.M. Nanda and the Chief of the Air Force, Air Marshal P.C. Lal were in close touch with the developing situation. India also used psywar techniques to expedite the conclusion of the war. The Chief of Army Staff, General S.H.F.J. Manekshaw, in a broadcast directed against Pakistani soldiers, told them that if they surrendered to the Indian Army, their security will be guaranteed, and they would be evacuated from East Pakistan, looked after in India and sent home safely. He also assured them that they will be guarded against attack by hostile elements in East Pakistan. India also air dropped pamphlets conveying this along with surrender documents at Pakistani military bases and troop concentration.The impact was immediate.


On December 14, on hearing that soldiers from the Indian Para Brigade, dropped at Tangail, were nearing Dacca Lt.-Gen A A K Niazi in his interaction with Major General J.F.R. Jacob, Chief of Staff of the Eastern Command-who had flown into into Dacca — said he was willing to surrender. He also conveyed this message to the American Consul General in Dacca , who conveyed it to Washington.On December 16 the surrender took place in the Dacca Race Course. Lt Gen A A K Niazi surrendered to Lt. Gen J.S. Aurora, GOC-in-c of the Eastern Command of the Indian Army. The news of the surrender was announced by Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in Parliament. We saw Army Chief General Sam Manekshaw, carried by crowds when he arrived at the South Block. During the war, I had the privilege to work as the Public Relations Officer of the Indian Army, and involve myself in all communication efforts before and during the war . I too felt a little taller that day.

Role of Big Powers in Indo-Pak War of 1971 | Latest News & Gossip on Popular Trends at India.com

Thanks for posting this thead.
I was having a silly argument with one delusional pakistani member on here who said they received no help whatsoever from U.S/U.K. Lool. Even though everybody knows its a BIG LIE. He was saying this just to boast his ego though, I understand. Lool
Cant even remember his name, whether it was desertfox or something. Lol
I'm glad our navy was late in reaching Indian shores where the Soviets had already encircled the area, if not our force would have invaded India for no good reason just to help Pakistan.

China did the smartest thing - not get involved. It would pretty much do the same thing today.
Well, the Chinese have always been a passive power and will never intervene in a war that doesn't concern them. Be it for Pakistan or in Syria today(where their ' ally' Russia wished they could help.lol). They will rather watch tings from the sidelines. Lol. GOOD STRATEGY THOUGH.:)
 
.
First of all it is @mike2000 is back 's fault errrrr the British's fault, they should have created Bangladesh or East Pakistan as it at was known during those time and made a clear partition line which one belongs to who (would have saved us all the ruckus now. look at Kashmir). But we can forgive 'em since they did left in a hurry. :toast_sign:

The separation of East Pakistan from West Pakistan is the choice of the Bangladeshi's not Pakistan's and certainly not India. They wanted Independence clear and simple. The US supported Pakistan, but East Pakistan's (Bangladesh) separation from West Pakistan is inevitable. As one Pakistani member stated they are 1000 miles away from each other and all that racial differences etc. The only thing they have in common is religion. That being said, since "RELIGION" is their only common ground, I have a question...

DOES THAT MEAN THAT ALLIANCES BETWEEN COUNTRIES BASED ON RELIGION ALONE WONT WORK IRREGARDLESS WHAT RELIGION IT MAY BE? I mean isn't that what everybody if not majority is preaching here? Posts such as "THEY ARE OUR BROTHERS BLAH BLAH BLAH WE SHOULD UNITE" is kinda common here in PDF.

Look at China and Pakistan, their alliance is based on friendship and mutual understanding. Look how far they have gone.

Friends, my post is not intended to insult anyone or anybody.
 
Last edited:
.
1) India cut Pakistan into two, and Pakistanis have to swallow that.
2) Pakistan "bravely" shot civilians in railway stations and hotels, and India has to accept that.
Sorry Sir if it sarcasm OK otherwise totally wrong and against the stance of Pakistan.
 
.
1971 was one the most difficult times for India, list of nations against India was far greater than list of nations supporting India. Despite such a situation we managed a strategic victory of huge magnitude.

Nations against in India in 1971 :
1. USA
2. European nations
3. Middle East nations excepts Syria and Egypt.
4.Indonesia
5. South Africa
6. China

Nations supporting India
1. Soviet Union
2. Egypt
3. Syria

Difficult times for India ????? lol , What else do you want , u had the Mukhti bahaini , support of the bengalis , Russian equipment , while the Pakistan Army was surrounded by its own people and then the Indian army attacked :what::coffee::coffee:,
Still we fought very bravely , even your Generals and Field Marshal accept that ...:pakistan:

1971 was one the most difficult times for India, list of nations against India was far greater than list of nations supporting India. Despite such a situation we managed a strategic victory of huge magnitude.

Nations against in India in 1971 :
1. USA
2. European nations
3. Middle East nations excepts Syria and Egypt.
4.Indonesia
5. South Africa
6. China

Nations supporting India
1. Soviet Union
2. Egypt
3. Syria


And the countries you have listed above in the "Nations Against India in 1971" They all were also against Pakistan at the time of the war , They even placed embargoes on Pakistan :hitwall: :crazy:
Only China I suppose and some Gulf states gave Pakistan some support ......

Pakistan Army
Get your facts right , Single enemy ???? Bengalis + Russia + India this doesnt seem to me as a single enemy ,
and Pakistan didnt attack India in 1971 , India has a problem of interfering in others matter , u attacked us , u were even training the rebel group , dont try to become so innocent ,
Last point , when did Pakistan have superior weapons ? then india
 
.
I'm glad our navy was late in reaching Indian shores where the Soviets had already encircled the area, if not our force would have invaded India for no good reason just to help Pakistan.

Just for the record when was the last time ' your forces' attacked another nation to help someone else - all this outside the ambit of a UN resolution ?
 
.
India was not able to complete this without the help of USSR ...

That is the reason when USSR , started Afghan operation, we with the help of USA , taken our revenge ...

INDIA = 1 reason : only broke Pakistan with the help of USSR
Pakistan = 10 reason : Broke USSR the actual factor of 71 fall .. We eliminated the main factor .. and Pakistan came back as more powerful nation

deal with this...
No your Wrong.. After soviet fall Pakistan emerged as nation for OBL and other Al-quieda leaders.
 
.
Sorry Sir if it sarcasm OK otherwise totally wrong and against the stance of Pakistan.

Well, tell that to your countryman @Leviza. He was boasting about 26/11.

I told him that is was India (not USSR) that cut up Pakistan. In response, he boasted about 26/11, and laughed that India could not do anything to Pakistan, even though you did 26/11.

So clearly, just as Indians are proud of the decisive military victory of '71, he is proud of the 26/11 terror attack.

And he is not the only one to boast about it on PDF. Plenty of other Pakistanis have.

The separation of East Pakistan from West Pakistan is the choice of the Bangladeshi's not Pakistan's and certainly not India. They wanted Independence clear and simple.

Choice of Bengalis in Pakistan at the time. But achieved with India's military might, along with their own resistance and revolt.

DOES THAT MEAN THAT ALLIANCES BETWEEN COUNTRIES BASED ON RELIGION ALONE WONT WORK IRREGARDLESS WHAT RELIGION IT MAY BE? I mean isn't that what everybody if not majority is preaching here? Posts such as "THEY ARE OUR BROTHERS BLAH BLAH BLAH WE SHOULD UNITE" is kinda common here in PDF.

Well, we knew it back then in 1947. When Jinnah and others were espousing the "Two nation theory", and bragging that Islam would hold Pakistan together despite all other differences, we knew it was wishful thinking.

Islam cannot hold any people together, only a sense of nationhood can. They thought that nationhood will arise from religion (hence muslims being one nation in the Two nation theory). Barely 25 years later, that pipe dream of Pakistan's founders lay shattered.

In short, Islam or other religions cannot unite people. Nationalism could, sense of common identity could. It was their mistake to delude themselves about Two nation theory and Islam being a binding force.
 
.
Well, we knew it back then in 1947. When Jinnah and others were espousing the "Two nation theory", and bragging that Islam would hold Pakistan together despite all other differences, we knew it was wishful thinking.

Islam cannot hold any people together, only a sense of nationhood can. They thought that nationhood will arise from religion (hence muslims being one nation in the Two nation theory). Barely 25 years later, that pipe dream of Pakistan's founders lay shattered.

In short, Islam or other religions cannot unite people. Nationalism could, sense of common identity could. It was their mistake to delude themselves about Two nation theory and Islam being a binding force.

You said it all buddy... Now if only others here or for that matter the whole world think like you, the world will be a much better place. Thanks buddy!
 
.
Difficult times for India ????? lol , What else do you want , u had the Mukhti bahaini , support of the bengalis , Russian equipment , while the Pakistan Army was surrounded by its own people and then the Indian army attacked :what::coffee::coffee:,
Still we fought very bravely , even your Generals and Field Marshal accept that ...:pakistan:

We didn't "have" mukti bahini, we created it. Raised it, trained it, equipped it, commanded it. We didn't simply purchase it from the market.

We had Russian equipment, yes. You had American equipment that was just as good, sometimes better.

We had support of Bengalis, true. That's what happens when we make friends, instead of persecuting and massacring people. That too, is our skill, not an accident. Or rather, that happened because of your country's tendency to persecute people.
 
.
Well, tell that to your countryman @Leviza. He was boasting about 26/11.

I told him that is was India (not USSR) that cut up Pakistan. In response, he boasted about 26/11, and laughed that India could not do anything to Pakistan, even though you did 26/11.

So clearly, just as Indians are proud of the decisive military victory of '71, he is proud of the 26/11 terror attack.

And he is not the only one to boast about it on PDF. Plenty of other Pakistanis have.



Choice of Bengalis in Pakistan at the time. But achieved with India's military might, along with their own resistance and revolt.



Well, we knew it back then in 1947. When Jinnah and others were espousing the "Two nation theory", and bragging that Islam would hold Pakistan together despite all other differences, we knew it was wishful thinking.

Islam cannot hold any people together, only a sense of nationhood can. They thought that nationhood will arise from religion (hence muslims being one nation in the Two nation theory). Barely 25 years later, that pipe dream of Pakistan's founders lay shattered.

In short, Islam or other religions cannot unite people. Nationalism could, sense of common identity could. It was their mistake to delude themselves about Two nation theory and Islam being a binding force.

What is your AGE kid?
 
.
All right, you can be proud that your country attacked and killed 166 unarmed civilians on 26/11. I'm sure it was one of the greatest victories for your nation. India celebrated cutting Pakistan into two, Pakistan celebrates a terror attack. Yes, sounds right, given each country's tradition.

Do you realize how patheticc you sound? That in response to me pointing out we cut your coutry into two, you gloat about 26/11? Do you really think each accomplishment is the same? Oh well, what can I say? For Pakistanis, I suppose terrorist attacks are a matter of pride and gloating, just as for us, cutting the enemy into two in a resounding military victory is a matter of pride. That's a difference in mentality between you and us.

OK, I'll admit:

1) India cut Pakistan into two, and Pakistanis have to swallow that.
2) Pakistan "bravely" shot civilians in railway stations and hotels, and India has to accept that.
are you drunk or MAD or May be indians are like this ..

When did i said 26/11 was done by Pakistan ??? I said After 26/11 India was not able to attack Pakistan ...
But you being typical indian .. can't understand simple English ...

Who ever did 26/11 , india tried multiple times to attach Pakistan but failed to do so ...
 
.
Way too much is made about the 1971 war. Did'nt matter if it happened in 1971, 1981, 1991 or 2001. bangladesh was always set to be separated from Pakistan. bangladesh is a nation that is 1000s of miles away from us. Pakistanis have nothing in common with bangladeshis. Pakistanis differ completely to bengalis in terms of physical looks, genetics, race, heritage and culture. bengalis are as alien to Pakistanis as are indians and Africans. In fact, reality is that Pakistanis have far more in common with Iranians, Arabs and Turks than we do with bengalis. They are geographically and racially more closer to us than bengalis. In fact creating a nation of Pakistan, Iran and Turkey and expecting it to stay united permanently is more realistic than forming a nation between Pakistan and bangladesh. The biggest mistake of partition in 1947 is that bangladesh was not created then. The creation of bangladesh was a mere inevitability due to the massive and unbridgeable differences between Pakistanis and bengalis and due to the fact they are 1000s of miles away from us.

You are quite ignorant about how your country came into existence.
 
.
are you drunk or MAD or May be indians are like this ..

When did i said 26/11 was done by Pakistan ??? I said After 26/11 India was not able to attack Pakistan ...
But you being typical indian .. can't understand simple English ...

Who ever did 26/11 , india tried multiple times to attach Pakistan but failed to do so ...

If you think India ought to have attacked Pakistan, isn't that an implicit admission that 26/1 was Pakistan's doing? You didn't say India couldn't attack China, you didn't say India couldn't attack Sri Lanka. You said that after 26/11 India couldn't attack Pakistan. Obviously that's an admission of Pakistan doing 26/11.

Logic ain't your forte, huh? It's not my lack of English that's at play here - it is your lack of logical reasoning. Put simply, your lack of brains.

What is your AGE kid?

Maybe 10, maybe 100. But smart enough to write a post to which you have no response other than a snide one liner. If you are incapable of mustering a response despite your presumably advanced age, don't highlight it for all to know.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom