India and Pakistan - Page 5




 
--
Boots
 
February 24th, 2005  
TBA_PAKI
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemontree
Quote:
Originally Posted by TBA_PAKI
And about Pak breakup that occcured in 1971 was due to un-favourable Geo-political and Geographical situation
There was no geo-political situation that was unfavourale in East Pakistan in 1971. The mess was a creation of the Pak Army, genocide was what forced the bengali muslims to saparate. Indian factor came in only when the bengalis were being butchered. These are mentioned in books written by Pakistani army officers who were posted in East Pakistan. If you want links i'll give it to you. They are quite an eye opener.
I acknowledge these facts and mentioned them in my previous post about wars with India. Just read them and you will understand as well !

I was only replying to godofthunder's point about Pakistan's existence in threat and you failed to acknowledge that before 1971 war, first political mess was created by making Mr. Butto the PM (instead of who actually won from Bengladesh) and that paved the way for hard feelings about us Pakistanis in minds of Bengladeshi people and Pak army genocide turned them totally to revolt for freedom movement!
February 24th, 2005  
Peter Pan
 
TBA,

Bhutto alone was not responsible for not letting Mujib (who later led the Freedom Movement of Bangladesh) become the PM of Pakistani.

The whole of West Pakistan did not want a Bengali to be the PM. Bengalis were always looked down upon by the others, especially the Punjabis.

In fact, it is these Punjabis who have this false superiority complex that is the cause of most of the problems of Pakistan. Take Balochistan, Waziristan, Northern Territories, Sindh. All these problems have some connection with Punjab being given a preferential treatment. Even the massive dam that is being built (Kalbagh?) will reduce the water to Sindh and inundate a large part of the fertile area in an arid land called Blochistan, just to ensure the fertility of Punjab. Pakistani newspapers are having a field day reporting about the dam.

It is time that Pakistani Punjabis see the reality and adjust to the call of the time.
February 25th, 2005  
Sexybeast
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Disregarding who is right and who is wrong in the matter of Kashmir, I can't help but be very impressed with the fact that Pakistan has not been completely obliterated many years ago. Seriously, consider the odds based on shear population: India - population 1,065,070,607 VS Pakistan - population 153,705,278. Those odds are ugly! About ten to one in favor of India! The surprising thing is that Pakistan has not been completely wiped out at some point. No doubt, this has a lot to do with a degree of restraint on India's part, but I think the world tends to overlook or forget the disproportionate odds that Pakistan faces.
truly agree on this one,

i think pakistan tactically lost most of wars with india, but they didn't lose much strategically speaking...

looking at map, paki and india still control fairly half of that region..

so why is that?
--
Boots
February 25th, 2005  
lemontree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sexybeast
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
Disregarding who is right and who is wrong in the matter of Kashmir, I can't help but be very impressed with the fact that Pakistan has not been completely obliterated many years ago. Seriously, consider the odds based on shear population: India - population 1,065,070,607 VS Pakistan - population 153,705,278. Those odds are ugly! About ten to one in favor of India! The surprising thing is that Pakistan has not been completely wiped out at some point. No doubt, this has a lot to do with a degree of restraint on India's part, but I think the world tends to overlook or forget the disproportionate odds that Pakistan faces.
truly agree on this one,

i think pakistan tactically lost most of wars with india, but they didn't lose much strategically speaking...

looking at map, paki and india still control fairly half of that region..

so why is that?
Sexybeast,
The answer to your query is in the post made by godofthunder, that has been quoted by you. I have highlighted that part for your reference.
February 25th, 2005  
lemontree
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sexybeast
lol...more than that man


according to the history of those wars, pakistan lost badly in some situation..
why not India take all of Kashimar than.....


i think Indians know taht going further into Pakistan will not be easy..

and do u think china has something to do with it? indirectly?
All the Indo-Pak wars that were fought had different objectives. Capture of Kashmir has never been Indian obsession.
1. In 1948 after major portions of Jammu and Kashmir were cleared of Pak army, the matter had been referred to the UN. Nehru being a believed that the UN would solve the problem. But that did not happen and the armies of both the nations have remained eyeball-to-eyeball since then.
2. The 1965 war was not started by India. But by Pakistan when they infiltrated guerillas in J&K in Aug '65. The Pak GHQ and then carried out a massive strike in Chamb sector to cut of a major road connecting Srinagar with Punjab. The strike was very successful and to relive pressure on that area India launched a two prong attack on the Pak cities of Lahore and Sialkot. This Indian threat forced the Pak army to abandon the Chamb attack and relieve their threatened areas. Kashmir was not our objective.
3. In 1971, the East Pakistan crisis poured millions of East Pakistani muslims into India. they were escaping the genocide being committed by the West Pakistani soldiers. The Indian Prime Minister saw this as an opportunity to separate the eastern wing of Pakistan. The result is Bangladesh. Again Kashmir was not an objective in the war.
4. Kargil war, is quite recent and you may be aware of some details. Again Kashmir was not out objective, we only wanted to clear the intruders.

The only influence China has had on the Indo-Pak wars has been the threat of opening a second front. Which it never did, because it knew that it could never win again. They made the required noises to keep the Pakistani govt happy, that is all. If India had been afraid of China then Bangladesh would have still been part of Pakistan.
The only indirect affect that China has had vis-a-vis Indo-Pak relations is when it provided nuclear technology. It created an arms race that has reduced Pakistan's economy to shambles, and helped in creating the juggernaught that the Indian Army is today. For that we are grateful to China.
February 25th, 2005  
TBA_PAKI
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemontree
The only indirect affect that China has had vis-a-vis Indo-Pak relations is when it provided nuclear technology. It created an arms race that has reduced Pakistan's economy to shambles, and helped in creating the juggernaught that the Indian Army is today. For that we are grateful to China.
-->Nuclear secrets were obtained from a western source through Dr Khan.

-->India learned first about it so Pakistan had to catch up!

-->@Weak economy, unfortunately, the sanctions and corruption in leadership played there roles in it. As Pakistan has access to cheaper weapons market from China and France, so it's not a big issue.

-->On the otherhand, India mostly enjoyed strong economy (despite of the sanctions) due to advancements in its industrial sector and better trade relations.

-->And you have some valid points on wars but India tried to take on complete Kashmir in 1948 (but logistics problem and final counter-repulsion played there part). And in 1965 war, India did tried to take on Lahore city but was stopped due to destruction of bridges in BRB canal and failure of IAF. Though I respect your thinking also !
February 25th, 2005  
Xion
 
TBA_PAKI ,
Could you comment on the state of terrorism control measures in pakistan and is the Pakistani Govt. really intent upon having good relations with India.
Pakistan has been characterized by military rule all through these years.I think the Pakistan Government cannot afford to have any more better relations with India than at present.The moment things start to stabilize the military rule would no longer be a neccesity as Pervez Musharraff justified his coming into power by overthrowing Mr.Nawaz Sharif.He claimed that Nawaz Sharif was a traitor and was letting India take undue advantage.So he had to overthrow his government to take a stringent stance against India.

Could you also comment upon how is Pakistan going to deal with the ever increasing threat of terrorists taking control of Pakistani nuclear weapons.
February 26th, 2005  
Xion
 
These are the comparisons according to a survey conducted in 2001



* = The nuclear weapon numbers are just a guess as neither India nor Pakistan ever publicly released their official count of these weapons








Quote:

By BBC Defence Correspondent , Jonathan Marcus

In straight numerical terms of population, economic might, military manpower and equipment it is almost meaningless to speak about an India-Pakistan balance.

"Imbalance" would be a more appropriate term since India dominates in every respect.

February 26th, 2005  
Xion
 
That wasn't a comparison just about the army, it was a comparison of the general military capacity, where Pakistan is clearly outnumbered in every case.
March 1st, 2005  
Duty Honor Country
 
 
This thread has one last chance for survival. All off topic posts have been removed. Any post that talks about India vs Pakistan will result in this thread being locked for good. The military comparison above is acceptable.

SGT Doody