Indian Soldier killed as Pak troops violate ceasefire.

The Last Stand

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
1,406
Likes
980
Country flag
If India, a country with nowhere near the combat experience, equipment, training or technology as our soldiers, can kick Pak's ass, we can do it better. But don't overestimate your enemy, you might become the next India losing territory to China without a fight.:)


:dude:

When did French soldiers get combat experience. Mali is nothing. Most serving Indian soldiers fought in Kargil and have fought in the two skirmishes that followed.

We don't overestimate our enemy. Let our tech be inferior, let our training be ridiculous. Your total armed forces (inclusive of all three branches) is just 228,656 personnel and 180,000 reserve personnel. Compare that to our ridiculously lopsided armed forces with 1,325,000 active personnel and 2,142,821 reserve forces. Are you denying the fact that 3 billion people can't kick butt better than 400,000?

If Pakistan attacks and we retaliate, our "friendly" neighbours i.e. China, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal which are all best friends with Pakistan might join up with Papa China and attack us from all sides. China alone is enough to overwhelm us, if you add Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal into that, it just becomes a boxing match, only 4 boxers take on one. It's in their favour, not ours, we have to fight an all front war, West with Pakistan, North and East with China and Bangladesh and South with Sri Lanka.

Of course, mauling Sri Lanka will be easy, but I can't say the same for the others.

If New Delhi goes down, I guess SFC will be willing to take down Beijing, Colombo, Dhaka and Islamabad along with it.

I'm not an analyst and you remain forever a French Salesman, advertising French military products and forever denying that Russian technology is in some areas superior to the West. :)

Peace
 
Last edited:

Bhadra

Professional
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
11,991
Likes
23,758
Country flag
If your goal is to strengthen Nawaz Sharif relative to the Pakistani Army and ISI, shooting back and/or shipping arms to Afghanistan is the wrong way to go about it.
We leave shipping arms and militray destructive material to other for China...

Every bulet Indian soldiers and policemen face is Chinese...
 

AVERAGE INDIAN

EXORCIST
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 22, 2012
Messages
3,325
Likes
5,407
Country flag
India should not seek to buy 'world peace' at her own cost. One should remember the story of the Mahabharat and Ramayan. Avoid wars but in the face of continuous intransigence and hatred from the enemies of India fight HARD, viewing it as the first and supreme duty.The only cure for a rabid dog is to kill it. India has to work at breaking up Pakistan.
 

Tronic

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
1,915
Likes
1,282
If India, a country with nowhere near the combat experience, equipment, training or technology as our soldiers, can kick Pak's ass, we can do it better. But don't overestimate your enemy, you might become the next India losing territory to China without a fight.:)
Agree with everything minus the combat experience.. Indian soldiers are more combat hardened than the French..
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
When did French soldiers get combat experience. Mali is nothing. Most serving Indian soldiers fought in Kargil and have fought in the two skirmishes that followed.
:facepalm:

:dude: you are talking about an operation conducted 3000km away from home with a combined arms effort against a foreign occupation that was successfully defeated in 2 weeks. You are still battling Naxal insurgents in your backyard that are 10X easier to defeat yet still hasn't been accomplished. Kargil was 15 years ago with less than 1%of the IA in combat with most of them now out of uniform. Over 50% of the Armee de Terre has seen combat in Afghanistan or Africa in the last 4 years and they are still on active duty. Who has more combat veterans = France by far.

We don't overestimate our enemy. Let our tech be inferior, let our training be ridiculous. Your total armed forces (inclusive of all three branches) is just 228,656 personnel and 180,000 reserve personnel. Compare that to our ridiculously lopsided armed forces with 1,325,000 active personnel and 2,142,821 reserve forces. Are you denying the fact that 3 billion people can't kick butt better than 400,000?
Not only is size not everything, it is also a hindrance. It would takes months to mobilise a quarter of IA against Pakistan and the logistics would be a nightmare. France wields a technologically superior and flexible force that can act within weeks. Within two-three weeks Islamabad would be flying the Tricolor with the PN and PAF in flames. Could the entire country be occupied... no, but it doesn't have to be to get them to surrender and free Balochistan.

If Pakistan attacks and we retaliate, our "friendly" neighbours i.e. China, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka and Nepal which are all best friends with Pakistan might join up with Papa China and attack us from all sides. China alone is enough to overwhelm us, if you add Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Nepal into that, it just becomes a boxing match, only 4 boxers take on one. It's in their favour, not ours, we have to fight an all front war, West with Pakistan, North and East with China and Bangladesh and South with Sri Lanka.
WWIII is not going to be started for standing up for yourself. We are talking about teaching Pak a lesson. If you don't stand up now, they will continue walking all over you.
 

The Last Stand

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 14, 2013
Messages
1,406
Likes
980
Country flag
you are talking about an operation conducted 3000km away from home with a combined arms effort against a foreign occupation that was successfully defeated in 2 weeks. You are still battling Naxal insurgents in your backyard that are 10X easier to defeat yet still hasn't been accomplished.
Naxals? IA doesn't give a crap. Police and CRPF are battling insurgents. Not IA. Full deployment will wipe them out in 2 weeks. Remember the IRA. A situation like that. And Naxals aren't easy to defeat when they are hiding in jungles where radars don't work properly.

Not only is size not everything, it is also a hindrance. It would takes months to mobilise a quarter of IA against Pakistan and the logistics would be a nightmare. France wields a technologically superior and flexible force that can act within weeks. Within two-three weeks Islamabad would be flying the Tricolor with the PN and PAF in flames. Could the who country be occupied... no, but it doesn't have to be to get them to surrender.
We did better than what you can do now in 1971. 1 week, 1 week and whole of East Pakistan was liberated, 92,000 POW's captured, 20% of West Pakistan was in our hands. We just gave it back to them. Problem now is our politicians don't care about Pakistan, just money.

WWIII is not going to be started for standing up for yourself. We are talking about teaching Pak a lesson. If you don't stand up now, they will continue walking all over you.
Pakistan doesn't like to learn. We've blitzed them four times and they still want to attack us. Teaching Pak a lesson, leave it to our armed forces. We will teach Pakistan a lesson if they dare to perpetrate a full scale infiltration like in 1965 or Kargil.

Standing up to them, we can, as I said, our politicians are more concerned with money than upholding the country.

:facepalm:
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
Naxals? IA doesn't give a crap. Police and CRPF are battling insurgents. Not IA. Full deployment will wipe them out in 2 weeks. Remember the IRA. A situation like that. And Naxals aren't easy to defeat when they are hiding in jungles where radars don't work properly.
If you can wipe them out in two weeks, why don't you do it? :facepalm:

We did better than what you can do now in 1971. 1 week, 1 week and whole of East Pakistan was liberated, 92,000 POW's captured, 20% of West Pakistan was in our hands. We just gave it back to them. Problem now is our politicians don't care about Pakistan, just money.
Is anyone still serving that was there in 1971? Nope... we had a similar victory in Iraq smashing the 45th mech division within 2 hours of contact and within a day controlled all the highways headed to Baghdad. Is anyone still serving from the 91' victory... they are in the leadership.

Pakistan doesn't like to learn. We've blitzed them four times and they still want to attack us. Teaching Pak a lesson, leave it to our armed forces. We will teach Pakistan a lesson if they dare to perpetrate a full scale infiltration like in 1965 or Kargil.
Teaching the lesson means kicking them out of Kashmir. France would never tolerate another nation occupying our land.

Standing up to them, we can, as I said, our politicians are more concerned with money than upholding the country.
That is the whole point, grow some balls.
 

Immanuel

Senior Member
Joined
May 16, 2011
Messages
3,541
Likes
7,446
Country flag
:facepalm:

:dude: you are talking about an operation conducted 3000km away from home with a combined arms effort against a foreign occupation that was successfully defeated in 2 weeks. You are still battling Naxal insurgents in your backyard that are 10X easier to defeat yet still hasn't been accomplished. Kargil was 15 years ago with less than 1%of the IA in combat with most of them now out of uniform. Over 50% of the Armee de Terre has seen combat in Afghanistan or Africa in the last 4 years and they are still on active duty. Who has more combat veterans = France by far.



Not only is size not everything, it is also a hindrance. It would takes months to mobilise a quarter of IA against Pakistan and the logistics would be a nightmare. France wields a technologically superior and flexible force that can act within weeks. Within two-three weeks Islamabad would be flying the Tricolor with the PN and PAF in flames. Could the entire country be occupied... no, but it doesn't have to be to get them to surrender and free Balochistan.



WWIII is not going to be started for standing up for yourself. We are talking about teaching Pak a lesson. If you don't stand up now, they will continue walking all over you.
An average Indian infantry platoon unit in the IA can outperform an entire company of French SF units. The training and experience is far better. More than 30K Pigs have been gunned down since 94 in India with well over 30k rifles, . No other nation, save Israel and US have an equal amount of battle hardened experience.

Armand, what's up with the BS, you're indeed comparing rag tag militia in Africa to a nuke armed nation with one of the fastest growing nuke arsenals. Even Pak is capable enough in a conventional sense to teach France a hard lesson. Pak may be our enemy but they do have very well trained forces.

Naxals are not a easy fight since its easy for them to blend into civvies and they are a close knit force, human intel is not easy but slowly but surely India will crack them.

Less than 1% IA in combat, seriously? There is more fire on daily basis at the LOC than the entire French armed forces have ever seen since their conception. More IA men are deployed along the daily hostile borders than any French force can compare. Let's not do the stupidity of comparing French military might to Indian, India will run through France faster Hitler did. Matter of fact your whole ***king nation owes its pathetic existence to the bravery of other nations, kinda pathetic for you to be comparing your nation to India. If it wasn't for nukes France wouldn't even rate more powerful than Germany. Germans would run through you.
 

sorcerer

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2013
Messages
26,920
Likes
98,472
Country flag
Terrorism as an Instrument of Power Projection
Indian Strategic Studies: Terrorism as an Instrument of Power Projection

It seems there is no change in the policy of the Pakistan army in matters related to Kashmir. The top brass, along with a crop of retired generals, still believes that India should not be allowed to live in peace till it agrees to accept a solution to the Kashmir problem as visualised by Pakistan. Realising its inability to settle the problem by conventional military or diplomatic means, it continues to wage an unconventional conflict, hoping that India will bend finally. Pakistan-sponsored terrorism from across the border involves small, sparsely equipped groups exploiting operational constraints of stronger forces to continue terrorism and subversion in Kashmir. Unconventional war-fighting techniques of these groups have blurred the lines between war and peace, combatants and non-combatants, and rear and forward areas. There are indications that a renewed and more vigorous unconventional assault by Pakistan irregulars on India coinciding with the United States' withdrawal from Afghanistan is in the offing. India must anticipate the nature of the asymmetric war that it may face in the near future. To meet this new challenge, it may be necessary to reassess and review the basic concepts and theories that underpin the doctrines of fighting Pakistan-sponsored terrorism today.

The Pakistani onslaught can pose multiple threats, ranging from persistent mass terror attacks to simmering low-intensity conflicts waged through sub-national ethnic or religious entities within our country.

The exact nature, forms and contours that a covert war can take in the developing security environments in the South Asian region are still by and large obscure. The diverse forms and shapes the new Pakistani covert war can take may hold many surprises. The current doctrinal concepts for combating Pakistan-sponsored terrorism combined with subversive activities have proved largely ineffective. The dynamics of Pakistan's emerging asymmetrical strategies may render our superior military capability in J&K largely redundant. We must anticipate and pre-empt future Pakistani designs for evolving appropriate models to pre-empt the new challenges. However, the course of post-modern covert warfare is not easy to discern. The Pakistani onslaught can pose multiple threats, ranging from persistent mass terror attacks to simmering low-intensity conflicts waged through sub-national ethnic or religious entities within our country. This kind of war will not have high-profile military leaders or organised combat units but large, loosely organised groups operating with help and assistance from across international borders.

Large numbers of non-state actors [:tsk: a.k.a Pak Army ]operating at the behest of Pakistan may soon assume the shape of a prolonged armed conflict in Kashmir, along with catastrophic terrorist attacks on high-profile targets in other parts of India. The aim of the terrorist attacks and creation of internal disturbances will be eroding and disturbing the economic, sociocultural and political foundation of the country. Subversion of loyalties of the vulnerable groups, religious indoctrination and efforts to polarise the society will form an intrinsic part of the divisive campaign by Pakistan in India.


In this kind of war, a tailor-made mix of military and political forces and multifaceted action plans will be required to counter Pakistan's subversive plans and terror attacks. Quite obviously, the potential of conventional forces against an enemy that employs unfamiliar strategies is rather limited, although many political and military leaders maintain that Pakistan-sponsored terrorism has been by and large contained by our security forces. However, situations created by the combined use of sabotage and subversion, terrorism and insurgency by Pakistan have led to some embarrassing political and military problems in the recent past.

The destructive potential of Pakistani-trained terrorists is likely to undergo a radical change with the availability of sophisticated weapons and new technologies.

A covert war waged through non-state actors, fanatics and extremists supported by technology experts operating through secret networks based within the country has the potential to destabilise the country in the long run. The potential of shadowy groups against security forces has generally been underestimated, and the capability of non-state actors of conducting a prolonged and sustained conflict is often treated with disdain; tactical pauses, evasion and escape tactics are often mistaken for termination of hostilities and signs of victory.

Pakistan had chosen terrorism as the main instrument of belligerence in the initial phases of the covert war against India. It now wants to weaken the democratic setup, disrupt the normal life of the people and spread fear and despondency along with fomenting social unrest and subverting the administrative apparatus as a prelude to another covert armed intrusion in Kashmir.

The destructive potential of Pakistani-trained terrorists is likely to undergo a radical change with the availability of sophisticated weapons and new technologies. Postmodern terrorism may set entirely new standards. Future terrorist threats can no longer be measured in terms of small strikes by conventional weapons only. There is a distinct possibility that terrorists may be able to acquire and use chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) weapons. These weapons cannot be used by Pakistani terrorists in Kashmir because they need public support there. However, Pakistani-trained terrorists would have no hesitation in using these in selected areas in J&K and in the rest of India. In Kashmir, the effort will be to instigate mass resistance, "intifada" and insurgency and to sabotage and subvert; terrorist strikes will be mainly against government establishments, lines of communication and security forces.

Terrorism, due to its devastating impact, has become the most visible part of the proxy war in Kashmir, but Pakistan has realised that terrorism will not suffice to dislodge the elected governments in J&K or bring the administration to a grinding halt. Pakistan now wants to initiate a mass movement against the elected J&K government; however, it is likely to prove a non-starter because active support of large segments of the population of Kashmir will not be forthcoming.

Pakistan will focus on fomenting civil unrest in the valley, making full use of new technologies, stealth, surprise and deception, to neutralise the advantages of the security forces. If it succeeds in gaining and sustaining support of the local population, it will be able to infiltrate larger armed groups that could use the local population as a shield in thickly populated areas where the security forces will not be able to exploit their full military potential to avoid unacceptable collateral damage. Terrorists in Kashmir, however, will not able to haul heavy weaponry across the LOC to escalate violence or create a situation in which security forces will be forced to use heavy weapons in populated areas.

Civil unrest, combined with the armed action of radical groups, may assume dangerous proportions if the government does not adopt better and more effective methods to win over the local population. The situation requires greater attention and assistance of the central government to shore up measures of the Kashmir government. The greatest danger to the country is not posed by sponsored terrorism but by a new phenomenon in the form of simmering unrest along with strong armed groups entrenching themselves in thickly populated areas. Pakistan's new technique of spreading disorder and chaos may be facilitated by the absence of a strong and resolute political leadership, prevailing corruption and unemployment and lack of coordination between the centre and the state government.

Civil unrest, combined with the armed action of radical groups, may assume dangerous proportions if the government does not adopt better and more effective methods to win over the local population.

The prevailing concept of security doctrines will need a radical change for maintaining peace in Kashmir and defeating the new onslaught of a shadowy enemy. It is necessary to study the evolution of new Pakistani strategies and their impact on the people of Kashmir; the correlation between power and force may have to be adjusted greatly in the future to meet the challenges of the new Pakistani plans in Kashmir.

Pakistan Aided Terrorism in the South Asian Region

Pakistan does not accept that organisations such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad have been waging a covert war (jihad) against India from its soil with aid and assistance from the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). It is, however, now a well-established fact that the 2008 Mumbai attacks were planned and executed from Pakistan and the attackers were being directed by a Pakistan army officer and other handlers in Pakistan. The Pakistan government denies its involvement in such attacks and maintains that these attacks are the handiwork of non-state actors over which Pakistan has no control.1

The Pakistan army continues to organise, support and nurture mujahideen groups infiltrating into Jammu and Kashmir to wage a proxy war under the directions of the ISI. The banned Bangladeshi Islamic militant group Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami, responsible for some terrorist attacks in India, also functions under the ISI. Some such jihadi groups are active in Afghanistan to support the Pakistan army's pet "strategic depth" doctrine.2

According to the U.S. intelligence agencies, the ISI was involved in organising the attacks on the Indian embassy and the Kabul Serena Hotel in 2008 in Kabul. Various intelligence reports indicate that these attacks were carried out by the Jalaluddin Haqqani group and that the ISI operatives who coordinated these attacks with the Haqqani group were not rogues but working under the orders of their superiors in Pakistan.

It is amazing that the Pakistan army and the ISI still continue to nurture terrorist organisations with the aim of countering an invasion by the Indian army that is unlikely to come in the foreseeable future.

Pakistan is not only a base of Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed but also a training ground for the Afghan Taliban. According to a report by Human Rights Watch, the Pakistan army is assisting Taliban operations in Afghanistan by providing help in enlisting manpower for combat, planning and directing operations and providing direct combat support and logistic backup on several occasions.3

Presently, about 43 terrorist camps are reported to be running in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir under the supervision of the Pakistan army. According to confirmed reports, more than 3,000 militants from various nationalities are being trained in these camps. Although it is well documented that the Pakistan army and the ISI provide covert support to terrorist groups that are active in Kashmir, Pakistan maintains that it only provides political and moral support to the "secessionist" groups in Kashmir.4

State of Affairs in Pakistan

The pseudo-Islamist policies introduced by President Zia-ul-Haq threw up various jihadi groups that spread rigid religious dogmas leading to sectarian violence in all parts of the country. The Pakistan army later continued to support selected jihadi groups, mainly for targeting India, because of some ill-perceived strategic notions. The sectarian divide and religion-driven violence by fanatic groups responsible for uncontrolled terrorist violence and turmoil are a direct result of the Islamic policies introduced by General Zia-ul-Haq. This policy has led the country into uncontrolled terrorist violence and turmoil, creating a terrible mess that has made it a target of massive terrorist attacks that are being launched like clockwork by jihadi groups on security forces and government establishments. Pakistan army action against Islamic militant groups in the North-West Frontier area soon developed into a mini war in Waziristan and led to large numbers of casualties in the army and terrorist attacks all over the country.

Presently, about 43 terrorist camps are reported to be running in Pakistan-Occupied Kashmir under the supervision of the Pakistan army.

Based on various statistics released by Pakistan Institute of Peace Studies (PIPS) and Inter-Services Public Relations (ISPR) from time to time, it can be stated that militants and sectarian groups carried out a total of 1,577 terrorist attacks across Pakistan in 2012, claiming the lives of 2,050 people and injuring 3,822. The reports reflect that about 3,169 people were killed in 2,488 terrorist attacks. In a written reply to a question in the Upper House of the Parliament, Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that "1,579 people were killed in 2008-09 while another 1,590 lost their lives in 2009-10." He further stated that "there were 1,157 acts of terrorism during 2008-09 and 1,331 incidents of terror during 2009-10. Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province bore the brunt of suicide attacks, which killed 1,524 people in the region. Punjab recorded 605 deaths, Sindh 134, Islamabad 125 and Azad Kashmir [Pakistan-occupied Kashmir] 11."

According to data released by ISPR from 9/11 till now, 30,452 people have been killed or injured. These include 21,672 civilians and 8,785 military personnel. The ISPR said 78 Pakistani military officers and 2,273 soldiers were killed while 6,512 were injured.

The figures of terrorist-related violence by various agencies and the facts given out by Mr. Rehman clearly show that fanatics and terrorists are ruling the roost, creating chaotic conditions in the country and playing havoc with the stability and economic well-being of Pakistan.

It is amazing that the Pakistan army and the ISI still continue to nurture terrorist organisations with the aim of countering an invasion by the Indian army that is unlikely to come in the foreseeable future. The army brass is yet to realise that the poison these organisations are spreading is directly responsible for the growing chaos in Pakistan. The Pakistan army brass is supporting and nurturing those militants who are likely to turn against them like some other militant groups have done in the last few years.
 

Waffen SS

New Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2013
Messages
492
Likes
348
Pak troops violate ceasefire, 1 Indian soldier killed
Agencies
Jammu, June 07, 2013

First Published: 16:04 IST(7/6/2013)
Last Updated: 16:07 IST(7/6/2013)

Pakistan troops on Friday violated ceasefire again and opened fire in Mandi area of Poonch sector in Jammu and Kashmir in which one Indian soldier was killed,
Did they ever respect any Ceasefire or truce unless they were not being KICKED?

I wonder what Indian soldiers were doing? Why they did not return fire? Or were doing Gandhigiri? :lol: :mad:
 

sesha_maruthi27

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2010
Messages
3,963
Likes
1,803
Country flag
If you can wipe them out in two weeks, why don't you do it? :facepalm:



Is anyone still serving that was there in 1971? Nope... we had a similar victory in Iraq smashing the 45th mech division within 2 hours of contact and within a day controlled all the highways headed to Baghdad. Is anyone still serving from the 91' victory... they are in the leadership.



Teaching the lesson means kicking them out of Kashmir. France would never tolerate another nation occupying our land.



That is the whole point, grow some balls.
You french fought along with NATO and are having hitech equipments. You are fighting war from 10 years.

Our Indian Defence Forces are fighting terror for 6 decades. Americans are taking training of Jungle warfare in India and are learning how to tackle the terrorists in mountainous ranges.

Don't talk about IA's preparedness, you are negligible when compared with IA.........

Our training is different from yours. We the people of India are born and bought up in Hill areas and we know our land better than you. You people on the other hand have no experience what so ever in the Indian Sub-continent.

It does not go the way it was in the second world war......
 

Armand2REP

CHINI EXPERT
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 17, 2009
Messages
13,811
Likes
6,734
Country flag
You french fought along with NATO and are having hitech equipments. You are fighting war from 10 years.

Our Indian Defence Forces are fighting terror for 6 decades. Americans are taking training of Jungle warfare in India and are learning how to tackle the terrorists in mountainous ranges.

Don't talk about IA's preparedness, you are negligible when compared with IA.........

Our training is different from yours. We the people of India are born and bought up in Hill areas and we know our land better than you. You people on the other hand have no experience what so ever in the Indian Sub-continent.

It does not go the way it was in the second world war......
You are talking about ancient history when none of that matters. 60-70 years ago... wtf? All that matters is the last decade or two, those are the men who fight the wars and that is where their experience is gained. In that time France has fought Iraq, Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Chad, Somalia, Cote d'Ivoir, Libya, Mali. Your combat experience doesn't even come close with the only thing on your CV being Kargil. If you were applying for a job with that, I would win every time.

French troops have been fighting in the hills of Afghanistan and the mountains of Mali... we know that terrain. We have a premiere jungle school as well, it is called CEFE where all the major EU and SA commandos train. I have been through it myself... French soldiers are trained to fight in all environments. We have bases all over the world just for that.
 

Snuggy321

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
506
Likes
241
That is why you have nukes, so they won't use theirs. It has already been done in Kargil, no one is launching nukes.
The problem is that the government in Pakistan does not own a military.... the military and the ISI which is infected with braindead islamists who would be too glad to launch nukes at India for any reason... and those idiots dont care about retaliation.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top