Aparna Pande October 8, 2006
#181 Posted by jang on October 11, 2006 7:35:38 am
zee, i am as serious as anyone here. i am just trying to understand the paki stand (as explained by general in the book) that kargil was pakistans (armies) ``finest hour``. guys like you seem to be entrenched in the elite structure of pakistan so are able to make us understand it thats where i am coming from.
your #164 is something you can take-up with harish etc..i dont have anything to offer.
your #164 is something you can take-up with harish etc..i dont have anything to offer.
#180 Posted by zeemax on October 11, 2006 7:24:48 am
#179 by jang
I honestly answered your question and now you`re not being serious.
If you`ld like to participate, can you kindly answer the 3 questions in my #164? One by one so I`m clear of your arguments. Thanks.
I honestly answered your question and now you`re not being serious.
If you`ld like to participate, can you kindly answer the 3 questions in my #164? One by one so I`m clear of your arguments. Thanks.
#179 Posted by jang on October 11, 2006 7:19:56 am
#178 so why could not US govt lean on indian..especially since they were losing so badly?
IMO indians were not planning at all on sending columns across LOC..they had a good-enough handle on the infiltration situation after taking heavy personnel casualties. they were able to bomb position using air-force. they were content to use air-force and navy (untill winter) against a diplomatically isolated pakistan and this would have made paki armed forces look real bad, losing face in front of paki awam..with only option that of tacical nukes not available in absence of nice WW2 type columns of tanks and camp-followers nowhere in sight the army panicked and made sharif accept the short-sword.
IMO indians were not planning at all on sending columns across LOC..they had a good-enough handle on the infiltration situation after taking heavy personnel casualties. they were able to bomb position using air-force. they were content to use air-force and navy (untill winter) against a diplomatically isolated pakistan and this would have made paki armed forces look real bad, losing face in front of paki awam..with only option that of tacical nukes not available in absence of nice WW2 type columns of tanks and camp-followers nowhere in sight the army panicked and made sharif accept the short-sword.
#178 Posted by zeemax on October 11, 2006 7:07:59 am
#175 by jang
Ok Jang. Let`s be serious. It`s not about Pak scenario of looking good. It`s the truth which I wrote. Now you ask:
....they backed down from kargil under a ``heels`` order from bubba...
That`s correct. Clinton was real mad and brought Pak army to a halt, while assuring Nawaz of safety. You might recall that unprecedented statement by Clinton himself after Shahbaz Sharif had visited subsequent to Nawaz`s return, that `No unconstitutional action against the elected Pak governement will be acceptable to US.` Shahbaz had gone with that concern. But that didn`t help. Did it?
.........the ``treat`` being a meeting in the white-house ending hitherto diplomatic shunning of pakistan.....
I don`t know what you mean by `treat`. But it was clear US would not support a Pak escalation of Kargil. Pak was under huge sanctions at the time but trade was still going on, with US the chief trading partner. A full boycott would have meant total isolation. I suspect that was threatened.
Ok Jang. Let`s be serious. It`s not about Pak scenario of looking good. It`s the truth which I wrote. Now you ask:
....they backed down from kargil under a ``heels`` order from bubba...
That`s correct. Clinton was real mad and brought Pak army to a halt, while assuring Nawaz of safety. You might recall that unprecedented statement by Clinton himself after Shahbaz Sharif had visited subsequent to Nawaz`s return, that `No unconstitutional action against the elected Pak governement will be acceptable to US.` Shahbaz had gone with that concern. But that didn`t help. Did it?
.........the ``treat`` being a meeting in the white-house ending hitherto diplomatic shunning of pakistan.....
I don`t know what you mean by `treat`. But it was clear US would not support a Pak escalation of Kargil. Pak was under huge sanctions at the time but trade was still going on, with US the chief trading partner. A full boycott would have meant total isolation. I suspect that was threatened.
#177 Posted by arjun2 on October 11, 2006 7:07:28 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#176 Posted by zeemax on October 11, 2006 6:53:43 am
tahmed,
The ugly_macaca is a good for nothing low-social stratum lowly gofur macaca who pretends to be a code-coolie. He isn`t even that. I discovered as much with his copy/paste attempt at crashing Chowk on UP which was easily caught and the macaca duly kicked out.
The ugly_macaca is a good for nothing low-social stratum lowly gofur macaca who pretends to be a code-coolie. He isn`t even that. I discovered as much with his copy/paste attempt at crashing Chowk on UP which was easily caught and the macaca duly kicked out.
#175 Posted by jang on October 11, 2006 6:50:06 am
zeemax,
so the way i see is in the best paki scenario (meaning pakis looking good) they backed down from kargil under a ``heels`` order from bubba, the ``treat`` being a meeting in the white-house ending hitherto diplomatic shunning of pakistan, is that what you are arguing? pls confirm, thanks.
so the way i see is in the best paki scenario (meaning pakis looking good) they backed down from kargil under a ``heels`` order from bubba, the ``treat`` being a meeting in the white-house ending hitherto diplomatic shunning of pakistan, is that what you are arguing? pls confirm, thanks.
#174 Posted by zeemax on October 11, 2006 6:48:27 am
Ok hideous_macaca ran away to my #164
Maybe ugly_macaca can answer the 3 questions .. no?
Maybe ugly_macaca can answer the 3 questions .. no?
#173 Posted by tahmed32 on October 11, 2006 6:46:26 am
#171 I just asked hideously ugly macaca arjun for help. but i am afraid he doesnt help paki macaca cab drivers like me. :-(
#172 Posted by zeemax on October 11, 2006 6:46:20 am
LoL .... tahmed ... try once more ... LoL .. welcome to the macaca bashing club ....
#171 Posted by zeemax on October 11, 2006 6:45:05 am
#169 by tahmed32
LoL .. thanks for trying but copy/paste won`t work .. you`ll have to ask ugly_macaca how to get it right ... like this:
. ,****,
.((@..@))
.. ``(--)``
LoL .. thanks for trying but copy/paste won`t work .. you`ll have to ask ugly_macaca how to get it right ... like this:
. ,****,
.((@..@))
.. ``(--)``
#170 Posted by tahmed32 on October 11, 2006 6:44:13 am
goddam macaca picture!!!!!!! third try!!!!!
arjun macaca: how do i get this picture aligned without the dots. or you dont provide IT support to paki macacas like me??
..*******
..((@..@))
......(--)
#169 Posted by tahmed32 on October 11, 2006 6:38:44 am
I messed up the picture below. sorry, zeemax. dont kill me please. here is the corrected version (i hope).
******
((@..@))
``(--)``
#168 Posted by tahmed32 on October 11, 2006 6:37:18 am
i see master arjun is joining in the Zeemax-Harish Morning Ritual.
#166 ranjit: you have to admit this picture of a macaca zeemax came up with is cool. i am not saying what the nationality of this macaca of course is. :-)
******
((@..@))
``(--)``
#166 ranjit: you have to admit this picture of a macaca zeemax came up with is cool. i am not saying what the nationality of this macaca of course is. :-)
******
((@..@))
``(--)``
#167 Posted by arjun2 on October 11, 2006 6:31:18 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#166 Posted by Ranjit on October 11, 2006 6:28:51 am
Re:zeemax
Yaar, dont you get tired of this? Going on and on about some idiotic conflict, calling each other names.
You are most likely a Punjabi guy. I am a hindu of Sindhi origin from Delhi. How much difference do we have?
Take it easy!!
Yaar, dont you get tired of this? Going on and on about some idiotic conflict, calling each other names.
You are most likely a Punjabi guy. I am a hindu of Sindhi origin from Delhi. How much difference do we have?
Take it easy!!
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- tahmed32: and i once had... Dhokha and Being a
- tahmed32: pakistan: ok, you got... Dhokha and Being a
- pakistan3: Re: # 359 unlike you,... Dhokha and Being a
- Naqshbandi: and this link explores... Translation of a (Love)
- tahmed32: further to #257: although... Dhokha and Being a
- masanamuthu: Mystic: #325: One advice. CAPS... Dhokha and Being a
- tahmed32: #355 pakistan: point well... Dhokha and Being a
- Naqshbandi: I just came across... Translation of a (Love)








reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content