What is common between 1971, 9/11, and 11/26?

[KRAIT]

@acid rain What is common is that Pak made wrong decisions before or after these dates.

 

[Zabaniyah]

Manekshaw never mentions this in reference to Indira's insrugency planning against E. Pakistan.

Why would you bring it in?

Who should I trust?

my dear Loki bro?

or

Manekshaw?

decisions decisions decisions !

I'd suggest everyone to read about the history of the Naga rebellion:
War and Nationalism in South Asia: The Indian State and the Nagas - Marcus Franke - Google Books

This is from a fairly balanced source.

There was an important rational as to why India intervened during the 71' War on the Eastern Front. I don't see how General Maneckshaw comes into the picture. He was a soldier, not a politician.

====================================================

Confession by conspirators

In 2010, and on the anniversary of the withdrawal on 22 February 2011, surviving conspirator and Deputy Speaker of the Parliament Shawkat Ali confessed to the parliament at a point of order that the charges read out to them were accurate, stating that they formed a Shangram Parishad under Sheikh Mujib for the secession of East Pakistan.
====================================================

Yes, that is true.

Q. Why exactly is this referred to as the Agartala Conspiracy Case?



The name “Agartala Conspiracy Case”, is a misnomer. The actual name of the case filed against us was State vs Sheikh Mujibur Rahman and Others. A total of 35 accused, including Sheikh Mujib.



The name of Agartala became associated with the case due to a small incident. A two member delegation from our group went to Agartala, India, to meet Indian authorities to discuss with them our plans and ask them if they could aid us.



The accusation against us was 100 paragraphs long one, out of which only one paragraph was devoted to this tiny event. Until recently it was believed this case was a ploy to get rid of Sheikh Mujib, when in reality it was a case filed on very concrete and true accusations. We did conspire for secession of East Pakistan! The accusations were 100 percent true.

- See more at: In Conversation with Col (retd) Shawkat Ali « Dhaka Courier

 

[FaujHistorian]

There was an important rational as to why India intervened during the 71' War on the Eastern Front. I don't see how General Maneckshaw comes into the picture. He was a soldier, not a politician.

Agreed that he wasn't a politician, but General Maneckshaw was top general who had the front row seat in the planning of Indian insurgency and eventual attack.

And the guy was deadly honest.

Now please tell me one politician who fits that criteria when it comes to understanding the events unfolding during 1970s


Naga rebellion was not going to succeed in the long run. If India could crush Sikh rebellion in Punjab few years later, Nagas had no chances at all.

So we should look at NAGA issue in its conext and not attach too much value.


Dismemberment of E. Pakistan was on the card pretty much from 1948.

If the intellectuals from East and West wings had some brains, they would have picked up the book from Jinnah Suhrawady discussions in the late 40s.

My understanding from Jinnah Suhrawady discussions is that East and West wings would have eventually become fully autonomous units at some point.

Heck Mujib and Bhutto (had they been educated properly about their own miltiary history) could easily had come to the same conclusion where I Jinnah and Suhrawardy were few decades earlier.

So what Jinnah and Suhrawardy were discussion.

Same thing.

That E. Bengal should exist as an autonomous unity.

However Brits were totally against the idea of Balkanization. So the viceroy Wavell (and later Mountbatten) went with two state solution instead of 3 states.


However in late 60s and early 70s, Brits were long gone, and the politicians Bhutto and Mujib should have come to the similar understanding.

So let me do a bit of could have should have thingy as a historian (which is not supposed to be done but let try anyways).

INsteand of actively planning an armed insurrection in 1968,

and 6 point agenda, an educated Mujib and informed Bhutto should have setup a 10 years long sunset period to end in 1978.

During this transitionary period, Mujib should have concentrated in E. Bengal

And Bhutto to do the same in W. Pak.

Once the 10 years were over, the two wings would have become autonomous.

Who would care of a figurehead old man is sitting in Islamabad or Dhaka.

Who would have cared.

But we would have avoided wars and rebellions, death and destruction of fellow brothers and sisters.

Would have could have

would have could have

would have could have, as historian would say while filled with great sorrow.


peace

Q. What is common b/w 1971 , 9-11 and 26-11

Ans. @FaujHistorian knows absolutely nothing about either one of them

@FaujHistorian please dont compare terrorist attacks like 9-11 and 26-11 with wars like '71 it is hurtful and rude to the people who lost their lives in the war and were captured as pow's

60,000 insurgents pushed into E. Pakistan by India.

I only wish those were copies / clones of Mother Teresa. and not some bloody terrorists blowing homes, and bridges and offices.

I only wish.

 

[akshay gehlot]

Agreed that he wasn't a politician, but General Maneckshaw was top general who had the front row seat in the planning of Indian insurgency and eventual attack.

And the guy was deadly honest.

Now please tell me one politician who fits that criteria when it comes to understanding the events unfolding during 1970s


Naga rebellion was not going to succeed in the long run. If India could crush Sikh rebellion in Punjab few years later, Nagas had no chances at all.

So we should look at NAGA issue in its conext and not attach too much value.


Dismemberment of E. Pakistan was on the card pretty much from 1948.

If the intellectuals from East and West wings had some brains, they would have picked up the book from Jinnah Suhrawady discussions in the late 40s.

My understanding from Jinnah Suhrawady discussions is that East and West wings would have eventually become fully autonomous units at some point.

Heck Mujib and Bhutto (had they been educated properly about their own miltiary history) could easily had come to the same conclusion where I Jinnah and Suhrawardy were few decades earlier.

So what Jinnah and Suhrawardy were discussion.

Same thing.

That E. Bengal should exist as an autonomous unity.

However Brits were totally against the idea of Balkanization. So the viceroy Wavell (and later Mountbatten) went with two state solution instead of 3 states.


However in late 60s and early 70s, Brits were long gone, and the politicians Bhutto and Mujib should have come to the similar understanding.

So let me do a bit of could have should have thingy as a historian (which is not supposed to be done but let try anyways).

INsteand of actively planning an armed insurrection in 1968,

and 6 point agenda, an educated Mujib and informed Bhutto should have setup a 10 years long sunset period to end in 1978.

During this transitionary period, Mujib should have concentrated in E. Bengal

And Bhutto to do the same in W. Pak.

Once the 10 years were over, the two wings would have become autonomous.

Who would care of a figurehead old man is sitting in Islamabad or Dhaka.

Who would have cared.

But we would have avoided wars and rebellions, death and destruction of fellow brothers and sisters.

Would have could have

would have could have

would have could have, as historian would say while filled with great sorrow.


peace




60,000 insurgents pushed into E. Pakistan by India.

I only wish those were copies / clones of Mother Teresa. and not some bloody terrorists blowing homes, and bridges and offices.

I only wish.

and what about. the heinous crimes your officers were doing there. all the rapes and. murders all the hate of hindus the lack of feedom and what about denying then a fair chance to form goverment . what about the crimes of gen. tikka khan .

insurgents fighting cruel rulers and generals was also the way india and pakistan got independent.
okay so shut the f*** up . you would know better if you lived in e. pakistan and your family was tortuded by army generals

 

[rubyjackass]

Can't believe that this thread came from FaujiHistorian.

 

[FaujHistorian]

and what about. the heinous crimes your officers were doing there..s

Read up my dear Akshay readup

First insurgents went in then Pak army responded.

you are totally switching the timeline around.

This may be OK in 5th grade history class

but not during adult discussion.


Just remember that.

Thank you.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

60,000 insurgents pushed into E. Pakistan by India.



I only wish.

@FaujHistorian; where did you get this figure of 60,000 from? Can you atleast give some FACTS to substantiate your statements. Your figure is wrong.
Secondly; India did not have to push anyone into BanglaDesh. Those insurgents were already in Bangla Desh. Have'nt you been reading the exchange of messages that we had with @Joe Shearer??
I explained to you how that phenomenal growth of the Mukti Bahini took place after all the Pakistani Army excesses in East Bengal.

I only wish............that you would have at least have some respect for FACTS.

 

[FaujHistorian]

@FaujHistorian; where did you get this figure of 60,000 from? Can you atleast give some FACTS to substantiate your statements. Your figure is wrong.
Secondly; India did not have to push anyone into BanglaDesh. Those insurgents were already in Bangla Desh. Have'nt you been reading the exchange of messages that we had with @Joe Shearer??
I explained to you how that phenomenal growth of the Mukti Bahini took place after all the Pakistani Army excesses in East Bengal.

I only wish............that you would have at least have some respect for FACTS.

Please keep private discussions as private.

The numbers come from several interviews from Gen. Manekshaw.

unfortunately Indian news sites took them down soon after they were posted.

But if you are in USA, there are documentaries about Pak India fiasco. Few of those contain the live interviews.

Will try to dig it up time permitting.


I respect you

but let's make sure we leave the offical propaganda out of our discussion.

If Pakistan claims that everything in Kashmir insurgency is local

Will you buy that?

Just wondering.

 

[BeyondHeretic]

they're all arbitrary numbers

 

[FaujHistorian]

they're all arbitrary numbers

Not that arbitrary.

Militaries especially the ones from pak and india keep detailed record for men and material.

Heck they count the empties after practice at the firing range and put everything in a log.

So the numbers are never arbitrary when it comes military supported projects.

They may be secret but never arbitrary.


Thank you.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Please keep private discussions as private.

The numbers come from several interviews from Gen. Manekshaw.

unfortunately Indian news sites took them down soon after they were posted.

But if you are in USA, there are documentaries about Pak India fiasco. Few of those contain the live interviews.

Will try to dig it up time permitting.


I respect you

but let's make sure we leave the offical propaganda out of our discussion.

If Pakistan claims that everything in Kashmir insurgency is local

Will you buy that?

Just wondering.

Hey Fauji; there is nothing PRIVATE about FACTS. I do not subscribe to the "theory of Selective Honesty or Integrity".

And I say again that the figure of 60,000 Mukti Bahini is way off the mark.
Just as I say (as I said earlier) that India did not need to push anybody. They were just fired up already and they were inside East Bengal. While they were a motley bunch, they were extremely highly motivated (as I explained in our conversations). The Men and Boys who made up the Mukti Bahini had looted the Local Armories and were led in their battles by the Personnel of the EBR, EPR and local Police who were being massacred by the Pakistani Army and who consequently mutinied and escaped into the East Bengal country-side. These Men were the nucleus of the Mukti Bahini who then attracted young students by the droves after the massacre of students in the Dormitory Halls of Dhaka University that was carried out by the Pakistani Army. Read up about how the Bengali Men of the PA in Chittagong mutinied, routed their superiors and compatriots from West Pakistan till the Sabres of the PAF were sent to strafe them. That group of Men became one of the Strongest and most Well-trained Forces of the Liberationists.
I can tell you even more; but your scant respect of Historical Facts dissuades me from doing so. If you wish to discuss anything with any semblance of seriousness, then it will be better to eschew "intellectual dishonesty".

Btw, @FaujHistorian; I still await your response (with FACTS) to my post to you on that other thread where you presented some "fable" about Nehru and Azad.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Hey Fauji; there is nothing PRIVATE about FACTS. I do not subscribe to the "theory of Selective Honesty or Integrity".

And I say again that the figure of 60,000 Mukti Bahini is way off the mark.
Just as I say (as I said earlier) that India did not need to push anybody. They were just fired up already and they were inside East Bengal. While they were a motley bunch, they were extremely highly motivated (as I explained in our conversations). The Men and Boys who made up the Mukti Bahini had looted the Local Armories and were led in their battles by the Personnel of the EBR, EPR and local Police who were being massacred by the Pakistani Army and who consequently mutinied and escaped into the East Bengal country-side. These Men were the nucleus of the Mukti Bahini who then attracted young students by the droves after the massacre of students in the Dormitory Halls of Dhaka University that was carried out by the Pakistani Army. Read up about how the Bengali Men of the PA in Chittagong mutinied, routed their superiors and compatriots from West Pakistan till the Sabres of the PAF were sent to strafe them. That group of Men became one of the Strongest and most Well-trained Forces of the Liberationists.
I can tell you even more; but your scant respect of Historical Facts dissuades me from doing so. If you wish to discuss anything with any semblance of seriousness, then it will be better to eschew "intellectual dishonesty".

Btw, @FaujHistorian; I still await your response (with FACTS) to my post to you on that other thread where you presented some "fable" about Nehru and Azad.

Do you know what Gen. Mankeshaw called the 60,000 insurgents?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Do you know what Gen. Mankeshaw called the 60,000 insurgents?

LOLLL, What did Sam tell you about them? When you attended that Cabinet Meeting with Indira, her ministers, Sam Maneckshaw, Inder Malhotra and Rediff onthe Net.com!!

At least desist from dishing out fables. Not once have you given any source or link.

 

[FaujHistorian]

LOLLL, What did Sam tell you about them? When you attended that Cabinet Meeting with Indira, her ministers, Sam Maneckshaw, Inder Malhotra and Rediff onthe Net.com!!

At least desist from dishing out fables. Not once have you given any source or link.

I just asked a simple question specific to Gen. Mankeshaw's interview.

That's all.

Either you can say you do not know or tell me the term.

It is that simple.

 

[toxic_pus]

LOLLL, What did Sam tell you about them? When you attended that Cabinet Meeting with Indira, her ministers, Sam Maneckshaw, Inder Malhotra and Rediff onthe Net.com!!

At least desist from dishing out fables. Not once have you given any source or link.

Manekshaw did call them cowards.

"Every time I sent them in, every time they saw a burly Punjabi or Pathan, they ran, leaving their weapons behind"

Manekshaw retreads thin red line between field marshal, dismissal