The General and Kargil

Re: # 197

Salim,

Does Azad Kashmir include Northern Areas like Balitstan and gilgit
and Skardu, the area that borders China etc.?

#186 by Salim_Chauhan


[First you twist facts, create your own version of aggressor/victim, and then your delude yourself into faking and claiming victory. If that is all you want, go ahead and declare yourself a self-proclaimed winner - both you and I are aware of the TRUTH. ]

As expected, when cornered, you resort to ad-hominems.

[Pakistan DID NOT invade Kashmir. There was a genuine uprising by the local Muslim-majority Kashmiri population agains the ruthless rule of the Dogra raj. The Kashmiri refugees, with their tales of horror, arrived in Pakistan and were a catalyst for a Pathan-led Jihad against the State forces of J&K. When the Dogras were facing defeat all over Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh asked for Indian help. India said that it would help ONLY if he acceded to India, which he did out of sheer desperation. The Indian regular army beat back the invaders who had succumbed to looting and not holding territory - which is why Punch, Uri, and places like Kargil were lost to Indian forces. In the north, it was the Gilgit Scouts and rebellious forces of the Maharaja`s own army who were fighting for freedom from Dogra rule. Pakistani forces were not able to intervene because of their British officers. When they did, it was to stop the total collapse of the Kashmiri freedom struggle and to check the advance of the Indian forces into what is Azad Kashmir. ]


The above is so full of holes that it resembles swiss cheese. But I don`t have time to delve into that right now (I will, later). So let`s just ASSUME that everything you say above is true.

So NOW could you answer my question (from my Post#145) that you have so skillfully evaded:

``Tell me, why then did they choose to include that part of Kashmir as Pakistani territory? They could just have honoured the treaty, instead of consolidating their position and making it ``officially`` part of Pakistan. ``



[Now, if you think that the Maharaja`s accession to India was legitimate, why didn`t India recognize the Nawab of Junagadh`s accession to Pakistan which was declared and accepted in within weeks of independence in 1947? So, it`s OK for the Hindu Maharaja to accede Muslim Kashmir to India, but not OK for the Muslim Nawab to accede Hindu Junagadh to Pakistan? ]

We will address this point AFTER you answer my question.


[Krishna, your logic of ``heads I win, tails you lose,`` is no different from your mantra of ``Ram Ram japna, paraya maal apna.`` ]

In Pakistan, as in Bangladesh, the richer community were the Hindus. When they were driven out, their property was misappropriated by the muslim hordes. ``Paraya maal apna`` is a slogan started by Muhammad and his bunch of cutthroats. Ask me - I will quote chapter and verse from historic references.

#194

as you already convinced me training, arming, transporting was no big deal, they just needed to be pointed in the right direction, so I dotn see how you can then ten point to it being logistically implausible.

Bongy,
The Pakistani Army was under British control. The Pakistani government was overwhelmed by the departure of millions of Hindus and Sikhs and the arrival of millions of Muslims. There was no money in the treasury. India had not yet released the money from the divorce. In the middle of all this, the Paki government found time to conspire, train, arm, transport, and support the Afridi and other tribesmen?

I think that your Islamophobia and Paki hatred have crossed the bounds of rationality. Please consider the facts and not the Indian government dictated ``history.`` Remember the point I made about the Indian government dictated ``geography`` that places Gilgit, Skardu, and the surviving part of Muzaffarabad in India. :) LOL

#192

ok grandstanding apart, do you really believe that the Afridi`s raided Kashmir without support from the Pakistan government?

Bongdongs #187 {``um lets see, the refugees from Pooch ignored the entire length and breadth of Pakistan traveled to NWFP and read there sob story to the Afridi`s whereupon a few hundred trucks and few thousand Lee Enfield .303 rifles miraculously appeared to carry the momin and help them liberate Kashmir.

why don’t you stick to your sexual innuendo, you are better at that than at your bedtime stories.``}

Bongy,
I said ``Kashmiri refugees...arrived in Pakistan.`` You used the term ``refugees from Poonch`` and ``traveled to NWFP`` to create some sort of dichotomy to ridicule the undeniable fact that I presented. As pointed out by my friend HP, NWFP does border Kashmir. At the time of partition, Pathans were all over Pakistan trying to help in another jihad - the protection and resettlement of refugees arriving from India. The tales of horror recounted by the Kashmiri refugees spread all over Pakistan, including NWFP and FATA. As any informed person knows Pathans have dominated the transport industry and never have a shortage of trucks. We all know about their possession of arms. So, if you prefer, I will stick a few sexual innuendos in you, and even throw in some bedtime lullabies to help you dream about the events in Kashmir according to Hindutva propaganda.

#189 by bongdongs

``yeak OK, I put my foot in my mouth there.``

Okay, I am begining to change my opinion abt you...Being impulsive does not work for you...
I take my words back too....

`Musharraf panicked after Kargil`

Wednesday, 11 October , 2006, 20:19

Islamabad: Pakistan President General Pervez Musharraf, who was the army chief during the Kargil war, panicked when the 1999 conflict broke out with India and decided to brief the then Pakistan premier Nawaz Sharif only in order to solicit his support, Sharif`s party has claimed.

The Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N), which released part-1 of the fact-sheet on Kargil, questioned the version of Musharraf in his book In the Line of Fire, where he claims that he had informed Sharif about the operation.

Giving out his party`s version to the media, PML-N secretary Ahsan Iqbal said that according to Musharraf`s version, Sharif was first briefed in May 1999.

The chronology of events that led to the Kargil conflict, however, started much earlier.

``It was amply clear that when the war had broken out between armies of the two nuclear states, General Musharraf panicked and decided to brief the prime minister for soliciting his support,” he was quoted as saying by The Nation on Wednesday.

Iqbal said this briefing on May 17 was not complete either as it became evident later from the recorded conversation between Musharraf and then DGMO General Aziz, which came to light in the first week of June.

It was only then that the prime minister came to know that our troops were involved in the Kargil conflict, Iqbal said.

#188

yeak OK, I put my foot in my mouth there.

#187 Stupid Khasi
Gadhay!


``the refugees from Pooch ignored the entire lenght and breadth of Pakistan travelled to NWFP ``

Try and look at the map sometime. ``lenght and breadth of Pakistan`` shows your stupidity and nothing else. NWFP actually borders Kashmir and its distance from Poonch may not be more than couple of hundred miles.

#186

The Kashmiri refugees, with their tales of horror, arrived in Pakistan and were a catalyst for a Pathan-led Jihad against the State forces of J&K

um lets see, the refugees from Pooch ignored the entire lenght and breadth of Pakistan travelled to NWFP and read there sob story to the Afridi`s whereupon a few hundred trucks and few thousand Lee Enfield .303 rifles miraculously appreared to carry the momin and help them liberate Kashmir.

why dont you stick to your sexual innuendo, you are better at that than at your bedtime stories.

Krishna_abcd #145 {``The reason that you always lose any argument with me is not because you are not smart. It is because you are trying to defend the indefensible.
...I suggest you read some history books before looking for ``root`` causes.
Pakis invaded the Princely state of Jammu and Kashmir in 1947.
The Hyderabad police action ended after five days on September 17, 1948. ``}

Krishna,
First you twist facts, create your own version of aggressor/victim, and then your delude yourself into faking and claiming victory. If that is all you want, go ahead and declare yourself a self-proclaimed winner - both you and I are aware of the TRUTH.

Pakistan DID NOT invade Kashmir. There was a genuine uprising by the local Muslim-majority Kashmiri population agains the ruthless rule of the Dogra raj. The Kashmiri refugees, with their tales of horror, arrived in Pakistan and were a catalyst for a Pathan-led Jihad against the State forces of J&K. When the Dogras were facing defeat all over Kashmir, Maharaja Hari Singh asked for Indian help. India said that it would help ONLY if he acceded to India, which he did out of sheer desperation. The Indian regular army beat back the invaders who had succumbed to looting and not holding territory - which is why Punch, Uri, and places like Kargil were lost to Indian forces. In the north, it was the Gilgit Scouts and rebellious forces of the Maharaja`s own army who were fighting for freedom from Dogra rule. Pakistani forces were not able to intervene because of their British officers. When they did, it was to stop the total collapse of the Kashmiri freedom struggle and to check the advance of the Indian forces into what is Azad Kashmir.

Now, if you think that the Maharaja`s accession to India was legitimate, why didn`t India recognize the Nawab of Junagadh`s accession to Pakistan which was declared and accepted in within weeks of independence in 1947? So, it`s OK for the Hindu Maharaja to accede Muslim Kashmir to India, but not OK for the Muslim Nawab to accede Hindu Junagadh to Pakistan?

Krishna, your logic of ``heads I win, tails you lose,`` is no different from your mantra of ``Ram Ram japna, paraya maal apna.``

#182 sure sure..

what was paki establishment goal (obective) in kargil
was it met? if not why not?
did they (miltry) work out all the possible scenarios or were betting that they will cut-off sianchen for sure?
how supportive were the chinese? what did they tell mushy on his visit there?
was sharif down with it? if not why not?

#146 by tahmed32

[krishna: How do you determine who wins an argument? ]

When the other side has no more facts to back up their past statements.

That`s when.

For example, Salim_Chauhan has lost this argument with me, as usual. Because the FACTS show that he is wrong. So he has kept quiet.


[actually, both sides always lose in an argument. from chowk it seems most desi babus - whether it is you or echoboom - live in a make-believe world. ]

Yes. We are all wrong. Only those who believe in winged creatures in caves are right. And I`m a desi babu. But you are not. Of course.

Ranjit #141 {``My point is that there were no formal jihads or crusades as compared to the middle-east where such formally declared wars went on for centuries!! Occasional communal riots, while despicable, do not scale up to the level of crusades. ``}

Ranjit Bhai,
The Crusades, which lasted over 2 centuires, were not initiated by Muslims. In fact, Muslims were surprised by the First Crusade of 1099, and suffered a horrific defeat in the loss of Jerusalem, Antioch, and other places - accompanied by wholesale slaughter of both Muslims and Jews by the invading Europeans. Any concerted Jihad was a reaction to the initially successful Crusade. In fact, while repulsing the Crusaders, Muslims were dealt a double whammy thanks to the Mongol invasion of the 13th century. Defeating both the Mongols and the Crusaders, at great cost in lives and civilization, had such a militant impact on the psyche of Muslims that to this day they have not overcome this obligation to ``defent the faith and the heartland`` at all costs.

#181 by jang

Ok Jang. What do you want to know? If you ask me clearly ... bulleted points, I promise to answer truthfully and honestly.

And yes, I do belong to the elite structure of Pak and do know a lot ...... so you can count on what I say.