Surgical strikes inside Pak. Possibility?

[rockey 71]

Nehru sent Sk Abdullah to Pakistan in 63 so that there can be a amicable solution Kashmir ... The Pakistani authorities immediately arrested the POK Kashmiri leader Qayuum [ I may be forgetting his name] thus a opportunity lost... Then came the 65 war started by Pakistan to take force fully which they failed miserably...

The same Pakistan came and occupied the un attended Kargil heights when Vajpayee made a historic bus journey to Pakistan for peace...

Pakistan has zero credibility in the eyes of Indians...

Did not India resolved boundary issue with Bangladesh to her satisfaction ? India has issue with Pakistan only ...

Oh c'mon don't bring BD into this. Enclaves were exchanged after ages of feet dragging by India. And India, to our knowledge, has exacted huge price for this. But let's not discuss this here.

 

[Bangalorean]

1.In 1962 when PLA entered into NE, Ayub had publicly offered a joint defense pact. Nehru had rejected this sincere move summarily. Again at Agra Musharraf and Bajpai had initialed a draft agreement to be formally signed next morning. Hawks in Indian establishment scrapped this causing an irritated Musharraf to leave without saying goodbye. Therefore, it is not correct to blame Pakistanis for the deteriorating Indo-Pak relations.
2. When India herself bleeds under insurgencies it is silly to talk about balkanizing others. Instead India must take the lead to establish peace and friendship in the region.

I don't believe you.

As it happens, I just concluded Hussain Haqqani's book - "Magnificent delusions". Among other things, he explains in great detail in the book, the thought process and internal machinations of the Pak establishment during the 1962 war.

Let alone Ayub, not a single Paki leader ever wanted peaceful and productive relationship with India. I suggest you pick up a copy of the book.

 

[bose]

Nehru sent Sk Abdullah to Pakistan in 63 so that there can be a amicable solution Kashmir ... The Pakistani authorities immediately arrested the POK Kashmiri leader Qayuum [ I may be forgetting his name] thus a opportunity lost... Then came the 65 war started by Pakistan to take force fully which they failed miserably...

The same Pakistan came and occupied the un attended Kargil heights when Vajpayee made a historic bus journey to Pakistan for peace...

Pakistan has zero credibility in the eyes of Indians...

Did not India resolved boundary issue with Bangladesh to her satisfaction ? India has issue with Pakistan only ...

Oh c'mon don't bring BD into this. Enclaves were exchanged after ages of feet dragging by India. And India, to our knowledge, has exacted huge price for this. But let's not discuss this here.

It was in response to your highlighted quote below :
----------------------------------------------------
2. When India herself bleeds under insurgencies it is silly to talk about balkanizing others. Instead India must take the lead to establish peace and friendship in the region.
-----------------------------------------------------

No one gives land to anyone... It may be late but India did carried out agreement ...

Please elaborate of what price India has extracted ...

 

[Mad Indian]

I don't believe you.

As it happens, I just concluded Hussain Haqqani's book - "Magnificent delusions". Among other things, he explains in great detail in the book, the thought process and internal machinations of the Pak establishment during the 1962 war.

It is true that Pakis offered a joint defence pact vs the Chinese, but that was not feasible for various obvious reasons. that is why they ceded territory to Chinese and then concluded treaties with chinese instead

 

[Mad Indian]

2. When India herself bleeds under insurgencies it is silly to talk about balkanizing others. Instead India must take the lead to establish peace and friendship in the region.

No its silly that insurgencies in India are any threat to India or even has a chance to materialise, specially when it is dying a quick and painful death. On the other hand, your pakistan is actually going experience even worse insurgencies which is going to get even worse

 

[brational]

1.In 1962 when PLA entered into NE, Ayub had publicly offered a joint defense pact. Nehru had rejected this sincere move summarily. Again at Agra Musharraf and Bajpai had initialed a draft agreement to be formally signed next morning. Hawks in Indian establishment scrapped this causing an irritated Musharraf to leave without saying goodbye. Therefore, it is not correct to blame Pakistanis for the deteriorating Indo-Pak relations.
2. When India herself bleeds under insurgencies it is silly to talk about balkanizing others. Instead India must take the lead to establish peace and friendship in the region.

1. Height of Pakistani lies. Even if it were true, only a fool can trust the country which attacked India immediately after separation in 1947. Why are you bringing worthless scenario for discussion?
2. India is bleeding due to Pak sponsored terrorism. We will do whatever to get rid of this menace. Another terrorist attack on India, Pakistan will be crushed. Death to Pakistan is the solution.
PS:- Many Urdu Speaking Pakistan loyalists are still living in Bangladesh. They fail to acknowledge the fact that they are not welcome in the Indian subcontinent as both Pakistan and Bangladesh rejected them. India did not accept them too though many of them sneaked into India illegally.

 

[Nicky G]

1.In 1962 when PLA entered into NE, Ayub had publicly offered a joint defense pact. Nehru had rejected this sincere move summarily. Again at Agra Musharraf and Bajpai had initialed a draft agreement to be formally signed next morning. Hawks in Indian establishment scrapped this causing an irritated Musharraf to leave without saying goodbye. Therefore, it is not correct to blame Pakistanis for the deteriorating Indo-Pak relations.
2. When India herself bleeds under insurgencies it is silly to talk about balkanizing others. Instead India must take the lead to establish peace and friendship in the region.

Yup because it would have been so wise to trust the 'sincere' move, what a silly point. It was probably the only sane thing Nehru did. Its irrelevant who's to blame for the relationships, we only care about our interests, Pak's interests are immaterial to us. We have many cards including control over the water that feeds whole of Pak. We could turn it into a dessert if we really wanted to.

Dude, we have faced and defeated insurgencies for decades, poor Pakis have just begun to feel the heat. As for Paki balkanization, your nation's creation was teh first step, there's more to come.

Pak as a state is simply unsustainable, they are essentially a military with a state to loot their people. They are just a begging bowl that service new masters for their daily survival. People use and throw them like tissue paper. There can be no future for such a nation. On top of that they were retarded enough to create terrorists that are now biting them. That will only hasten their disintegration. China will try and fail to keep them together, but eventually the benefit of working with India will be too great to bother with Pakis.

i could go into great details about Paki disintegration but this is not really the thread for that.

The point is even a small war will do much more damage to Pak than it will ever to India. The Pakis will whine and cry about their nukes, but of course, that's just an impotent threat as we have sen in Kargil. Forget nukes, even their air force did not have the guts to get into the fight while we pounded their people for days.

 

[Compersion]

Afgans needs grow a few also remove their ladies jewellery and do exactly what being implied by this khurishd that pakistan is the origin and source of terror.

Afgans have had multiple Mumbai type attacks and will continue to do unless they do exactly what is being said above. We are going to have a few mig21s that are upgraded but ready to replaced ... Does afgans need some ... You know self defense.

Pakistan might need a few more minutes and years of research to understand what that really implies and means. A surgical strike from Afghanistan ... That needs to be talked about. Pakistan always complain they are not treated equally ... With afgans they have chance to try and do that.

Does afgans have a air force and missiles and can they reach Pakistan ...

 

[DingDong]

Oh c'mon don't bring BD into this. Enclaves were exchanged after ages of feet dragging by India. And India, to our knowledge, has exacted huge price for this. But let's not discuss this here.

India isn't Bangladesh's daddy which will submit to Bangladesh's whims and tantrums. India did settle land and maritime border disputes with Bangladesh. India delayed exchange of enclaves because India won't give away an inch to a hostile government, which was the case with the past Bangladeshi regimes (both civilian and military). When situation became conducive and there was an eagerness to improve ties from both sides, India responded positively.

It shows that India is willing to talk peace with neighbouring countries. As far as Pakistan is concerned, it is our cultural enemy, India and Pakistan cannot coexist.

 

[sabari]

[QUOTEIs"rockey 71, post: 1090447, member: 15997"]1.In 1962 when PLA entered into NE, Ayub had publicly offered a joint defense pact. Nehru had rejected this sincere move summarily. Again at Agra Musharraf and Bajpai had initialed a draft agreement to be formally signed next morning. Hawks in Indian establishment scrapped this causing an irritated Musharraf to leave without saying goodbye. Therefore, it is not correct to blame Pakistanis for the deteriorating Indo-Pak relations.
2. When India herself bleeds under insurgencies it is silly to talk about balkanizing others. Instead India must take the lead to establish peace and friendship in the region.[/QUOTE]
There Is no use in speaking to mad leader of Pakistan

 

[sabari]

Pakistan always threaten us about use of nuke against India .through this speech we understand that they never consider guilt of killing civilian then why should India consider pak civilian life valuable .
Simple dump radio active waste in sindu rever .sindu rever will do the rest

 

[Bornubus]

Unlike Myanmar,no surgical strike could be success in pakistan which has 100s of terrorist camps all over the country apart from terrorist madarsas otherwise terrorism would have been ended in pakistan by pak army long ago which use jets,tanks and UCAV on its own people turned jihadis.

However Indian army could raid any pakistani post on loc at will like in the past.

 

[Compersion]

Afghanistan would love to send its ammounition into Islamic state of Pakistan ...

 

[no smoking]

Yup because it would have been so wise to trust the 'sincere' move, what a silly point. It was probably the only sane thing Nehru did. Its irrelevant who's to blame for the relationships, we only care about our interests, Pak's interests are immaterial to us. We have many cards including control over the water that feeds whole of Pak. We could turn it into a dessert if we really wanted to.

Well, if you turn it into a dessert, what will Pakistan do? Come to fight you to the death. Yes, I know, India can win. But at what cost? Obviously, your government doesn't agree with you.

Dude, we have faced and defeated insurgencies for decades, poor Pakis have just begun to feel the heat. As for Paki balkanization, your nation's creation was teh first step, there's more to come.

"Defeated"?
No, insurgencies are still there. You are far from winning the war.

Pak as a state is simply unsustainable, they are essentially a military with a state to loot their people. They are just a begging bowl that service new masters for their daily survival. People use and throw them like tissue paper. There can be no future for such a nation. On top of that they were retarded enough to create terrorists that are now biting them. That will only hasten their disintegration. China will try and fail to keep them together, but eventually the benefit of working with India will be too great to bother with Pakis.

Let's stick to the real world. After 60 years of the similar kind of wishful thinking, Pakistan is still there.

The point is even a small war will do much more damage to Pak than it will ever to India. The Pakis will whine and cry about their nukes, but of course, that's just an impotent threat as we have sen in Kargil.

As a world power wannabe, 60 years ago, you were talking about Pakistan threat; 60 years later, you are still talking about Pakistan threat. Strategically, you are losing more than Pakistan.

Forget nukes, even their air force did not have the guts to get into the fight while we pounded their people for days.

No, their nuke make your 1971 victory never happen again.

 

[Sakal Gharelu Ustad]

Well, if you turn it into a dessert, what will Pakistan do? Come to fight you to the death. Yes, I know, India can win. But at what cost? Obviously, your government doesn't agree with you.



"Defeated"?
No, insurgencies are still there. You are far from winning the war.



Let's stick to the real world. After 60 years of the similar kind of wishful thinking, Pakistan is still there.



As a world power wannabe, 60 years ago, you were talking about Pakistan threat; 60 years later, you are still talking about Pakistan threat. Strategically, you are losing more than Pakistan.




No, their nuke make your 1971 victory never happen again.

Typical Chinese fanboys always forget getting a bloody nose by puny Vietnam while India created Bangladesh around the same time!!

 

[Black knight]

Some important points to discuss:
- Under what circumstances and when should India do it? Another Parliament type attack etc.
- Would India be able to avert a full-blown war with Pak after such strikes?
- What defence capabilities does India need for successfully carrying out such strikes? And is India ready for it?
- Are surgical strikes a capable deterrent to terrorism related incidents?
- Or instead of surgical strikes Indian artillery should keep pounding the Pak positions for next month after a big terrorist attack?

The nature of such strike inside Pak would be much different than what we saw in the Burma this year. Probably India would use more fire power than sending elite commandos to completely finish off the terrorists.[/QUOTE]
i would say we should hit the head nt the limbs we should kill their leaders atleast some commanders so that we can alwys make them to be in paranoia

 

[Nicky G]

Well, if you turn it into a dessert, what will Pakistan do? Come to fight you to the death. Yes, I know, India can win. But at what cost? Obviously, your government doesn't agree with you.

Every move is a cost-benefit analysis.

Turning a country into a desert is likely to be a long process, we are building the infrastructure required for it, while we have some already in place.

Governments change, times change, strategies change. Neither you nor I really know what GoI's real stance on this is, no one is going to come out in the open.

"Defeated"?
No, insurgencies are still there. You are far from winning the war.

Where did you read we have defeat all insurgencies, we have defeated those in the past, we are slowly wiping out the rest.

Do read carefully.

Let's stick to the real world. After 60 years of the similar kind of wishful thinking, Pakistan is still there.

In the real world, Pak was cut in half, so obviously, it has not been the same for 60 years.

As a world power wannabe, 60 years ago, you were talking about Pakistan threat; 60 years later, you are still talking about Pakistan threat. Strategically, you are losing more than Pakistan.

If anyone is a world power wannabe, its China; this however, is not a thread on that particular delusion.

No we have obviously moved ahead with the inevitable Paki balkanization. They lost half their land in '71, now they are struggling with Baloch and Fata; that too without India really doing anything significant. Imagine trying to use your air-force to kill your own citizens. What a retardedly desperate nation.

The day we decide to really light up Baloch as Pakis tried their best to with Kashmir in the 90s, it'd be losts of fun. You guys will run around trying to save your investments, more comedy.

No, their nuke make your 1971 victory never happen again.

Pakis could have decided to fight on in '71, they meekly surrendered, the most humiliating and largest post WWII surrender.

Nukes are a bluff. They were around during Kargil, as I said, let alone nukes, even their PAF was afraid to enter for fear of further escalation and inferiority compared to IAF at the time. The disparity has since only increased.

Your JF-17 your a poorer Mig-21 is hardly going to make any difference. The F-16 they fly was rejected by IAF.

Face facts, if you want Pak to survive, you guys need to a lot more. Get moving.

 

[Spectre]

Guys, can't the brahmos with a cluster munition warhead be used effectively. I'm saying this because this missile was made to attack and neutralise enemy targets effectively

 

[hardip]

यक्ष प्रश्न : जो हर न्यूज चैनल पर एक आतंकवादी हमले के बाद पुछा जाता है..



we can not.. Strike over Pakistani.. Otherwise I like to say our politicians ( leader) can't take any action like that.. because only that. we have not surgical strike capability lack of our military technology. (we must have up to the mark military hardware.






we just.enjoy.. this kind of dream... only in Movies...

 

[Kshatriya87]

Please use this thread to discuss about the chances of India carrying out cross border surgical strikes inside Pak.

Some important points to discuss:
- Under what circumstances and when should India do it? Another Parliament type attack etc.
- Would India be able to avert a full-blown war with Pak after such strikes?
- What defence capabilities does India need for successfully carrying out such strikes? And is India ready for it?
- Are surgical strikes a capable deterrent to terrorism related incidents?
- Or instead of surgical strikes Indian artillery should keep pounding the Pak positions for next month after a big terrorist attack?

The nature of such strike inside Pak would be much different than what we saw in the Burma this year. Probably India would use more fire power than sending elite commandos to completely finish off the terrorists.

Surgical strikes should be carried out. This will not only help the moral of Indian citizens but also prove to the world that we do not just sit quiet after every single attack.

These strikes shall only be carried out as a response to extreme attacks like parliament, Mumbai etc.

Defence capability that India needs is S400 system along the Indo-Pak border. These systems will neutralize any retaliatory threat coming our way. After the strikes, to calm them down we should keep pounding their forward posts to let them know that we are not afraid of a full blown war.