Y Pak army dont want war with India as India want war with Pak. Its most strategist question

[SoulSpokesman]

@TMA,

But Modi and Co actually want to realize Akhand Bharat eventually, don't they?

No, they dont TMA sb. Modi and Co know that if they get Akhand Bharat it will be 35% Muslim, it will be difficult for them to rule India. Akhand Bharat is the last thing they want, altho they wont admit it.

Regards

 

[Mugwop]

Will someone in Pakistan help me buy a Wren and Martin? Or does Amazon do deliveries there?



You were going to hit one of us? That's scary.



What is your point, actually? That you lost the war and won the peace? It's a difficult read.



Really? Zia delivered an ultimatum? And it's stayed concealed in your bosom until now? Must say you are good at keeping secrets.



So what our idiots in charge did from 2014 gives you the chance to generalise it to the other 68 years? do you read what you write before posting?

joe you are not a politician or a keyboard warrior.

The sense of invincibility that they both have pisses me off, it's not their views but the fact they believe that they are untouchable.

They are the ones who want war and others to fight their battles for them.

 

[Joe Shearer]

joe you are not a politician or a keyboard warrior.

The sense of invincibility that they both have pisses me off, it's not their views but the fact they believe that they are untouchable.

They are the ones who want war and others to fight their battles for them.

Dear Lady, you must forgive me my evil moments, when the dark side takes over. It was just the thought of you mowing down a platoon of us half-politician half-keyboard warriors with your bare fists that overcame my decorum and composure and got me into that damfool mood. Forgiveness, please?

 

[H!TchHiker]

I am sorry to disagree. I was there.

Regret to admit that it was Indian Army that won the Bangla Desh for the Bengalis not the Mukti Bahini. I witnessed the coward AK Niazi surrendering to Lt Gen Aurora in Paltan Maidaan Dacca on Dec 16, 1971 on PTV. Indians took 90,000 Pakistani POW's. I would hate that day until the day I die, but I would not deny a historical fact.

Sir, why would he let his soldiers die for a lost cause ?out number, out gun and with a stab in back from locals,fighting a war with full indian might at front and locals at back with no support from Head quater (what is now Pakistan).In fact he saved many life...He was the last one to cross back into Pakistan after prisoner release..Even his request for court martial was never granted..Its quite strange to blame one person for such an act..I believe he was instructed from central government to surrender..Given the circumstance one would wonder to declare him Coward..

• 
  
  
  • Our 45,000 troops were fighting against half a million Indian
    troops, lakhs of Mukti Bahinis (Bengali freedom fighters supported by
    India) and a hostile Bengali population. I actually needed around
    300,000 troops to simply combat insurgency. By that time, we were
    already cut from the base but still fighting without any respite.

 

[niaz]

Sir, why would he let his soldiers die for a lost cause ?out number, out gun and with a stab in back from locals,fighting a war with full indian might at front and locals at back with no support from Head quater (what is now Pakistan).In fact he saved many life...He was the last one to cross back into Pakistan after prisoner release..Even his request for court martial was never granted..Its quite strange to blame one person for such an act..I believe he was instructed from central government to surrender..Given the circumstance one would wonder to declare him Coward..

• 
  
  
  • Our 45,000 troops were fighting against half a million Indian
    troops, lakhs of Mukti Bahinis (Bengali freedom fighters supported by
    India) and a hostile Bengali population. I actually needed around
    300,000 troops to simply combat insurgency. By that time, we were
    already cut from the base but still fighting without any respite.

Sir,

My post was in reply to the claim that Indian Army did not defeat Pakistan but Bangla Deshis did. Regrettably these days text books have been doctored and many historical facts are incorrectly represented. I was attempting to correct this distortion of history because I saw the surrender with my own eyes on PTV.

Regarding your point; had Niazi fought bravely and only surrendered when they ran out of ammunition and / or provisions, one could accept the humiliation. India conquered East Pakistan in just 13 days! I have read Hamudur Rahman Report where it is implied that Gen Niazi lost his nerves from the very beginning and never really fought. Niazi was hiding away and the conduct of war was left to his Chief of Staff Gen. Rao Farman Ali.

In my humble opinion army enjoys all kinds of privileges during peace; however it is their duty to die for their country in case of war and not meekly surrender when the going gets tough. You can call me irrational, but Dec. 16, 1971 was the most humiliating day of my life. Tipu Sultan also lost to the English, but he is respected as a hero to this day. Tipu believed:

“It is better to live like a lion for one day than survive like a jackal for a thousand years”.

Obviously Gen A K Niazi was a ‘Jackal’.

 

[BATMAN]

After 3 and 1/2 wars, probably someone understood. They will not gain an inch of land with conventional war. So changed strategy to bleed by thousand cuts.

So how many cuts have you counted thus far?

Obviously Gen A K Niazi was a ‘Jackal’.

How so?
Did he had better options?

But Modi and Co actually want to realize Akhand Bharat eventually, don't they?

Don't blame it all on Modi... who himself is a product of popular Indian culture.
Actually Modi is FAR FAR moderate than a common hindu in street.

 

[Signalian]

He was outnumbered and didn't have a damn hope of winning.

Don't blame the guy for surrendering, we'd all do the same.

he made

How so?
Did he had better options?

Niazi volunteered for the job. He knew it was going to be struggle yet he was unprepared while he did have a few months to prepare for the worst. He blamed Yahya at the end whilst he could have turned the tide by taking things in his hands when he saw that policies directed by Yahya couldn't be utilised effectively in E-Pak.

He made many mistakes and then chickened out.
He couldnt win hearts of Bengali people and took all the wrong steps to fuel the hatred.
He couldnt deal with political entities in the correct manner and even use them as a tool to calm the outrage against W-Pak.
He couldnt raise the morale of the Army fighting in extreme conditions, the commanding officers did that for the troops.
He couldnt manage cross border movement by MK and Indian spies.
He took no steps to curb desertion and mutiny by Bengali troops.
He couldnt plan the defense properly, making fortress of towns which were by-passed by IA through airborne ops. He couldnt even make a proper defence of Dhaka and around Dhaka to make IA bleed.
He readily accepted surrender whilst troops in many areas were still fighting and could hold the enemy longer.
He didnt counter-attack the enemy and make groups of mobile/amphibious forces to sever Enemy supply lines when he saw IA rapid advance.
He didnt use SSG effectively in targeting enemy commanders like GOC's.
He didnt utilise ISI effectively in countering MK infiltration into E-Pak and with-in ranks of PA.

How he could have averted defeat militarily:

His defensive plans were inadequate and his offensive plans were non existent. He should have seen where the enemy is advancing with rapid speed and should have kept enough counter-attack forces on pattern of WW2 Ardennes offensive and halted the advance of IA's strongest forces, this would have delayed the enemy and Yahya would have got time to bargain a negotiation by bringing in super powers and also the events on W-Pak offensive might have seen some better results to avert a defeat in E-Pak.

Alternatively, he could have made guerilla groups with hit and run tactics which would have harassed the enemy forces all the way to Dhaka and would have ensured in delaying IA advance. Such groups would have used local terrain knowledge and already established hiding spots and supply points to replenish and keep striking the enemy constantly.

Conversely, he could have made a last stand at Dhaka and would have made a plan for his forces to keep falling back to Dhaka as the enemy progressed towards Dhaka to enable a large sized force to defend Dhaka and its outskirts. This would have enabled him easily to assemble a sizeable force to counter attack the enemy when he saw the opportunity instead of just being on the defensive. A siege of Dhaka could have bought the time required for a negotiation. Out of 90,000 surrendered POW's, roughly around 40,000 were Armed Forces Personnel. He had an adequate force at his disposal at the time of surrender had he played his cards correctly.

 

[H!TchHiker]

Sir,

My post was in reply to the claim that Indian Army did not defeat Pakistan but Bangla Deshis did. Regrettably these days text books have been doctored and many historical facts are incorrectly represented. I was attempting to correct this distortion of history because I saw the surrender with my own eyes on PTV.

Regarding your point; had Niazi fought bravely and only surrendered when they ran out of ammunition and / or provisions, one could accept the humiliation. India conquered East Pakistan in just 13 days! I have read Hamudur Rahman Report where it is implied that Gen Niazi lost his nerves from the very beginning and never really fought. Niazi was hiding away and the conduct of war was left to his Chief of Staff Gen. Rao Farman Ali.

In my humble opinion army enjoys all kinds of privileges during peace; however it is their duty to die for their country in case of war and not meekly surrender when the going gets tough. You can call me irrational, but Dec. 16, 1971 was the most humiliating day of my life. Tipu Sultan also lost to the English, but he is respected as a hero to this day. Tipu believed:

“It is better to live like a lion for one day than survive like a jackal for a thousand years”.

Obviously Gen A K Niazi was a ‘Jackal’.

Sir,

Agreed with most of the Part what you've said but
1) Why his request for court martial was not accepted ?
2) Was he not order by Yahya to surrender ? Being in Army one can't deny orders coming from COAS..
What i disagree here is making him the scapegoat...Tipu was King all in all in matters of decisions..Niazi was subordinate and bound to follow the seniors with no authority to rule people
3) Army fight for people and for there lives..What was left to fight for ? When Majority of Bangladeshis turned there side for whatsoever reason..Why to die for someone like that ?

 

[BATMAN]

@Signalian
General Niazi was there to fight a war not for politics.
Neither he was their to crush public or let's say protests.
On the other hand, India, USSR, Israel and US were united to dismember Pakistan and build Mukti Bahni terrorists.
After Mukti Bahni and Indians started to kill locals, it was all being blamed on Pak Army, which was totally isolated and out numbered and out gunned with respect to invading Indians.
Its just propaganda which people carryout, to secure US /India visa.

Forget the general Niazi... why Pakistan didn't followed up 90'000 prisoners which India took in custody?
Why recently Indian naval submarine was not taken in custody or shot down?
Too many traitors in Pakistan are trying to divert the attention from real criminals.

 

[.]

Well the @OP could've done a bit better With his thread.
Anyways we all know if war breaks out what can happen , we have a fair idea of what happened in last two wars.

In my opinion India cannot take on Pakistan because of a two front war and we have to fight India on other grounds like education ,healthcare improving the living standards , tourism, systematic control / reforms over economic policies , better governance , political stability , scientific research , space exploration beat the enemy on other grounds .

We all have to realise that we have paid an enormous amount of sacrifice for Kashmir and we're willing to fight till the end despite all our problems.
I don't give a rats *** About what Indians think on this matter , they were first slaved by the British and next responsible for breaking a united India and forcing Pakistani society and a state much smaller than its own towards a militaristic path.
Only the Indians to blame here , they never wanted to settle disputes with us Pakistanis, rather it was the mental state of their leaders that let episodes like 71 happen . Badtareen dushmen hai wo hamare , they still massacre muslims drive them out of their native places (watch the Al Jazeera documentary on Indian religious fundamentalism) then they talk about "secularism" yipi Yapa .

 

[Sinnerman108]

Sir,

My post was in reply to the claim that Indian Army did not defeat Pakistan but Bangla Deshis did. Regrettably these days text books have been doctored and many historical facts are incorrectly represented. I was attempting to correct this distortion of history because I saw the surrender with my own eyes on PTV.

Regarding your point; had Niazi fought bravely and only surrendered when they ran out of ammunition and / or provisions, one could accept the humiliation. India conquered East Pakistan in just 13 days! I have read Hamudur Rahman Report where it is implied that Gen Niazi lost his nerves from the very beginning and never really fought. Niazi was hiding away and the conduct of war was left to his Chief of Staff Gen. Rao Farman Ali.

In my humble opinion army enjoys all kinds of privileges during peace; however it is their duty to die for their country in case of war and not meekly surrender when the going gets tough. You can call me irrational, but Dec. 16, 1971 was the most humiliating day of my life. Tipu Sultan also lost to the English, but he is respected as a hero to this day. Tipu believed:

“It is better to live like a lion for one day than survive like a jackal for a thousand years”.

Obviously Gen A K Niazi was a ‘Jackal’.

All wars are means to political differences.
In our case, the political war was already lost.
thus there were no ends to justify the means.

Try imagining fighting a war, in a place where local population is against you.
No supplies, no support, no morale.

 

[TMA]

@TMA,

But Modi and Co actually want to realize Akhand Bharat eventually, don't they?

No, they dont TMA sb. Modi and Co know that if they get Akhand Bharat it will be 35% Muslim, it will be difficult for them to rule India. Akhand Bharat is the last thing they want, altho they wont admit it.

Regards

In the process of getting Akhand Bharat, Pakistan has to be neutralized. It is the biggest hurdle in realizing Akhand Bharat. Should this happen, even if the Muslim population were 50%, Modi et al would have no problem ruling.

Turkic Muslim Dynasties ruled over the Subcontinent for centuries over majority non Muslims and the British did this as well, then why cannot Modi rule over 35% Muslims (who will be in a weak position anyways).

They are burning with desire for Akhand Bharat!!!

The real question is how to neutralize Pakistan?

 

[Signalian]

Oh man...I wish you had solid points for a good discussion as i will be repeating most of what i have said already.

@Signalian
General Niazi was there to fight a war not for politics.

Ok, lets suppose he was there to fight a war only. He couldnt do fight a war even. Then what was he doing there?

When a military commander is given command of a region, whether cut off from main-land or any part of country, he has to lead the troops as well as the win over the crowd and the public of his assigned area. He has to ensure with civil leadership that situation of his command area doesnt get out of hand as this will cause trouble to his responsibility and mission also. Niazi failed to have foresight in every matter.

Taking part in politics is entirely different. I explained in easy words in previous post about civilian leadership and public.

Neither he was their to crush public or let's say protests.

He didnt stop the crushing of the public even. He continued with the operation searchlight for one more month. This way he lost one more month (April-May 1971) which he could have turned in his favour and advantage.

On the other hand, India, USSR, Israel and US were united to dismember Pakistan and build Mukti Bahni terrorists.

This is being even done now. Israel, US, India and other countries are united to dismember Pakistan at any given opportunity. Instead of using MB, today TTP is being used.

whats the difference today? The commander of our forces is not Niazi.

After Mukti Bahni and Indians started to kill locals, it was all being blamed on Pak Army, which was totally isolated and out numbered and out gunned with respect to invading Indians.Its just propaganda which people carryout, to secure US /India visa.

When something like that happens, there are ways and means to counter it.
Can you list a few ways in which Niazi countered this threat?
Anyone can list a few ways, if such an intention is on the agenda, but there wasnt.
Secondly, can propaganda be countered? ofcourse it can be, if you are willing to do so.

It is expected of a military officer to find solutions and get on with his tasks instead of listing the problems and blaming others (Yahya) for everything happening around him. He kept listing the problems, ordered a surrender and then blamed everything on Yahya. He had 7 months to make a difference in E-Pak, but he didnt do what had to be done.

He blamed Yahya correctly, BUT, this again makes me ask the question, what was Niazi doing in E-Pak?

Was he sent as reporter to E-Pak? to report all the happenings and do nothing that could have made a difference?and the only thing that he did was to order retreat.

Forget the general Niazi...

No, lets not divert from Niazi here.

He is a very good example for young leaders to stop giving excuses and only reporting situations INSTEAD start finding solutions and start planning for coming years with a good foresight.

why Pakistan didn't followed up 90'000 prisoners which India took in custody?

what kind of follow up were you expecting?

Why recently Indian naval submarine was not taken in custody or shot down?
Too many traitors in Pakistan are trying to divert the attention from real criminals.

Traitors will be everywhere. So will the criminals be.
Let me ask you, amidst of all traitors and criminals, why is Pakistan currently coming on top when it has been mired by uncountable problems like terrorism, corruption, debts, security issues and what bloody not?
The answer is: Leadership.

 

[.]

People who argue the case of Bangladesh as a lost cause are deeply mistaken and idiots .
Let's not forget Pakistan was able to halt Indian offensives on GT road just outside Lahore in 1965.
Former COAS and president Mush is on record for having admitted we failed militarily in 1971.
Bangladesh is a country with series of river channels and cannals territory that favours guerrilla tactics ideal for holding out invaders , during the initial stages of war Indian forces even having been surrounded alongside the border found difficulty in facing the PN because PA was stationed on the border areas.
It was the decision of PA eastern commanders to order the army from border areas into towns and villages with no proper use of terrain or defenses.
Bangladeshis were still willing to fight for Pakistan and it was the decision of the morons at the time that gave orders to PAF to bomb towns and villages alongside the army that used flame throwers to burn down city blocks in Dhaka.
We started the civil war massacring common people this is on record by PA officers written in their biographies serving at the time and sadly lost it in 18 days , that goes to show the credibility of the people in that point of time.

History will never forgive those filth.

 

[SoulSpokesman]

@Northern

we have to fight India on other grounds like education ,healthcare improving the living standards , tourism, systematic control / reforms over economic policies , better governance , political stability , scientific research , space exploration

Well said sir. What is true for Pak is also true for India. Both nations have huge challenges on nation building and giving its citizens irrespective of caste, creed and colour a life of dignity. This is what we both must seek to achieve rather than fight each other.

Yeh samay nahin hai ladne ka, yeh waqt hai mehnat karne ka.

Regards