The making of the Kargil disaster Excerpts from Nasim Zehra's book, 'From Kargil To The Coup: Events

[Aasimkhan]

This is the basic belief of all major religions, everyone believes in a heaven which is better than this world... but that doesn’t mean that you actively strive to destroy this world for the want to go to heaven.

You are a crazy.

There are many who dont believe in it. And if i take your statement as correct then atleast they dont practice it which means they dont believe in it.

You should actually talk to the perpetrators of the APS attack.

The Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) claimed responsibility for the attack, describing it as revenge for Operation Zarb-e-Azb, the Pakistani military's offensive in North Waziristan that started in summer 2014.

TTP spokesman Muhammad Omar Khorasani said that "we targeted the school because the Army targets our families. We want them to feel our pain.", "Our six fighters successfully entered the Army school and we are giving them instructions from outside," said Khorasani by phone. Khorasani also said "Our suicide bombers have entered the school, they have instructions not to harm the children, but to target the Army personnel. It's a revenge attack for the Army offensive in North Waziristan." Later though the Taliban claimed contrary by putting out a statement saying, "More than 50 sons of important army officers were killed after being identified."[25][26] The attacks were mainly coordinated by TTP leaders operating in Afghanistan.[27] According to the Pakistani Federal Investigation Agency or FIA's early investigations, the group was led by the terrorist, Hussain Mubarak Patel who planned the attacks, accompanied by three Arabs and two Afghans who spoke Pashto and were from Eastern Afghanistan.[28] Moustafa Seyan Sediqyar was later killed in a drone strike in Afghanistan on 9 July 2016.[29]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Peshawar_school_massacre

Hussain Mubarak Patel is an Indian serving officer by the name of Kalbhoshan Yadev and a RAW agent. These terrorists had Indian made equipment and life support stuff. Indian consulates in Afghanistan are involved in training of these terrorists. You think people of Pakistan are fool enough to beleive this BS of Khurasani you have quoted above ?

 

[Hamza913]

Haqqani is your former Ambassador - your beloved. If someone from your country criticizes you, doesn't put him in the Indian camp. Although Indians also say the same stuff - anyone who questions aspects of the Govt is told "Go to Pakistan" - it is juvenile.

You have not provided a single proof to back your claim except bombastic rhetoric. Show me some neutral account.

Haqqani not only opposes Pakistan, but even encouraged the US to not sell arms to Pakistan, and has done plenty of other things that put him in the camp of pro Hindustani cucks. You can research him further if you like.

Neutral accounts go against your claims too, anyway, I don't particularly trust them since they weren't actually there (with a few exceptions of course).

 

[Jackdaws]

Haqqani not only opposes Pakistan, but even encouraged the US to not sell arms to Pakistan, and has done plenty of other things that put him in the camp of pro Hindustani cucks. You can research him further if you like.

Neutral accounts go against your claims too, anyway, I don't particularly trust them since they weren't actually there (with a few exceptions of course).

I've seen some interviews of his and know he belongs to some think tank. At the end of the day, he is a Pakistani. Whatever camp he belongs to is your internal business. His pro or anti Indian views don't change the fact that he was a representative of Pakistan. Mani Shankar Aiyar and Arundhati Roy are Indians though some Indians happily routinely call them Pakistanis and what not. Which is rubbish. Even poor Sushma Swaraj is not spared by right wing Indian trolls these days and they call her Visa Mata and what not.

Of course they go against Indian claims as well because 1965 was pretty much a military stale mate with both sides claiming victory with exaggerated claims - that's why neutral accounts are probably more reliable. Also Pak was firmly in the Western camp then as part of SEATO and CENTO - so highly unlikely that there would be bias in Western accounts against Pak.

 

[Hamza913]

Of course they go against Indian claims as well because 1965 was pretty much a military stale mate with both sides claiming victory with exaggerated claims - that's why neutral accounts are probably more reliable. Also Pak was firmly in the Western camp then as part of SEATO and CENTO - so highly unlikely that there would be bias in Western accounts against Pak.

There may not have been bias against Pakistan, but incorrect reporting is pretty likely if they never went there.

Also, even as per your logic, Hindustan has no proof of its claims either. Chachro isn't that far from the international border. You also need to understand the difference between square km and just km as a raw distance of how far away a place is. Square km is the area of the land, km itself is just a measure of distance. In every single war we've fought, neither side has managed to penetrate deep into the others territory (unless you count the older Muslim-Hindu wars that occurred).

You hate Hindus, but that is what your ancestors were. And mine too.

Some of your ancestors would likely be migrants who came to the region during the Islamic conquests, and the ones that were converts would have still assisted them in their conquests (unless you come from a family of purely recent converts, which is pretty unlikely).

 

[Jackdaws]

There may not have been bias against Pakistan, but incorrect reporting is pretty likely if they never went there.

Also, even as per your logic, Hindustan has no proof of its claims either. Chachro isn't that far from the international border. You also need to understand the difference between square km and just km as a raw distance of how far away a place is. Square km is the area of the land, km itself is just a measure of distance. In every single war we've fought, neither side has managed to penetrate deep into the others territory (unless you count the older Muslim-Hindu wars that occurred).



Some of your ancestors would likely be migrants who came to the region during the Islamic conquests, and the ones that were converts would have still assisted them in their conquests (unless you come from a family of purely recent converts, which is pretty unlikely).

From what I've read, out of the towns captured in 1971 by India, only Nagarparkar was close to the IB. Chachro, Islamkot, Virvaha(spelling??) are supposed to be way inside Pak borders. But I read this a while back, so I could be wrong. I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.

 

[Hamza913]

From what I've read, out of the towns captured in 1971 by India, only Nagarparkar was close to the IB. Chachro, Islamkot, Virvaha(spelling??) are supposed to be way inside Pak borders. But I read this a while back, so I could be wrong. I am happy to be corrected if I am wrong.

You're wrong, they're all close to the border. Neither Hindustan or Pakistan has ever managed to penetrate deep into each others territory, we've only both managed to capture large areas of land via war, but most of it was of little strategic importance (other than the peaks Pakistan captured during the Kargil war and Azad Kashmir/Gilgit Baltistan as a whole) so it was all returned via negotiations (apart from the Siachen and Chamb sector, they're the only areas captured through warfare that lack much strategic importance but still remain occupied by Hindustan and Pakistan respectively).

 

[my2cents]

There are many who dont believe in it. And if i take your statement as correct then atleast they dont practice it which means they dont believe in it.


Hussain Mubarak Patel is an Indian serving officer by the name of Kalbhoshan Yadev and a RAW agent. These terrorists had Indian made equipment and life support stuff. Indian consulates in Afghanistan are involved in training of these terrorists. You think people of Pakistan are fool enough to beleive this BS of Khurasani you have quoted above ?

It is Wikipedia. Anybody can edit it. You can change it now to reflect your point of view.

 

[Aasimkhan]

I've seen some interviews of his and know he belongs to some think tank. At the end of the day, he is a Pakistani. Whatever camp he belongs to is your internal business. His pro or anti Indian views don't change the fact that he was a representative of Pakistan. Mani Shankar Aiyar and Arundhati Roy are Indians though some Indians happily routinely call them Pakistanis and what not. Which is rubbish. Even poor Sushma Swaraj is not spared by right wing Indian trolls these days and they call her Visa Mata and what not.

Of course they go against Indian claims as well because 1965 was pretty much a military stale mate with both sides claiming victory with exaggerated claims - that's why neutral accounts are probably more reliable. Also Pak was firmly in the Western camp then as part of SEATO and CENTO - so highly unlikely that there would be bias in Western accounts against Pak.

If the rubbish you are giving is taken as correct then you Jawahar lal Nehru had promised a plebiscite in Kashmir, why dont you Indians accept his contention ? You indians will accept anything which goes in your favour but will not accept if it goes against your favour even if it is morally correct.

It is Wikipedia. Anybody can edit it. You can change it now to reflect your point of view.

HAHA then who was that woman who was brought by your ambassador to meet him claming she is her wife?

 

[lit_soldier]

How the Army was fighting without approval from PM!

 

[Aasimkhan]

How the Army was fighting without approval from PM!

It was a hot border already, local commanders do not need to get approval from the top sometimes if they can come across an "opportunity crossing", This is precisely what musharraf did.

 

[Jackdaws]

If the rubbish you are giving is taken as correct then you Jawahar lal Nehru had promised a plebiscite in Kashmir, why dont you Indians accept his contention ? You indians will accept anything which goes in your favour but will not accept if it goes against your favour even if it is morally correct.


HAHA then who was that woman who was brought by your ambassador to meet him claming she is her wife?

A plebiscite was promised under UN auspices under the terms of Pakistani withdrawal and the maintenance of an Indian force in Kashmir. Why do you Pakistanis conveniently forget that?

My guess is that the so-called tribal "liberators" engaged in so much loot, rape and pillage that for there was 0 chance of them winning any plebiscite. Let me know what you think is the reason.

 

[Dalai Lama]

Stupid move especially in light of Lahore bus diplomacy of Vajpayee. It had been almost 30 years since 1971 and a newer generation didn't have the same animosity toward Pakistan. Kargil changed that.

Unfortunately, you've hit the nail on the head. Kargil ignited the animosity amongst Millennials in India and the 2008 Mumbai attacks compounded it. An unnecessary turn of events led by a power-hungry general with the Pakistani civil leadership remaining complacent and complaint. The rest is history.

 

[lit_soldier]

It was a hot border already, local commanders do not need to get approval from the top sometimes if they can come across an "opportunity crossing", This is precisely what musharraf did.

Ok. Got it.

 

[Aasimkhan]

A plebiscite was promised under UN auspices under the terms of Pakistani withdrawal and the maintenance of an Indian force in Kashmir. Why do you Pakistanis conveniently forget that?

My guess is that the so-called tribal "liberators" engaged in so much loot, rape and pillage that for there was 0 chance of them winning any plebiscite. Let me know what you think is the reason.

We do not need your guesses. Conduct the plebicite as promised and we will trust the results. Keep your guesses to yourself.

 

[Jackdaws]

We do not need your guesses. Conduct the plebicite as promised and we will trust the results. Keep your guesses to yourself.

Of course we will. Do fulfill all the criteria agreed upon to conduct the plebiscite and let me know. I will personally go and conduct it.