The General and Kargil

Currently Zeemax is banned from posting because of his continuous disregard of Chowk guidelines. This is a warning to all -- Anyone who continues name calling and/or hate-speech will be banned from posting any further.

Re:manto

P.S. The fact that Pakistan expelled almost its entire hindu/sikh population proves my hypothesis. There was no analogue to Kashmir for Pakistan i.e. it was not trying to hang on to some big hindu majority province. Hence there was no stopping of the communal violence until everyone had been expelled all over. The same exact thing would have happened in India too had Kashmir not been in play, since people on both sides think alike!!

Re:mantolives#241

[...5. Reading the chapter on Junagadh in H V Hodson`s brilliant book has convinced me that Pakistan as a matter of policy should never trust any Indian overtures, view with suspicion every Indian movement and be ready to take advantage of any and every Indian misfortune because the only language that India understands is a profoundly Gandhian one i.e. dishonest, deceitful and laden with hypocrisy... hence instead of playing fair as we did in 1947 ... we should be ready to bend the rules Injun` shytle.

6. The reason why Indian waited till September 13, 1948 was because till September 11, 1948, the man who put a big danda up their rearends was still alive....]

Manto, you should thank your stars that Nehru and Patel lusted after Kashmir and managed to get it for India. In my opinion, keeping Kashmir was the only reason that communal violence in India subsided by 1948 otherwise it was spreading to UP/Bihar in the same extreme manner as in Punjab and Bengal. It would have been very difficult for Nehru to justify holding on to Kashmir if muslims were forcibly expelled from all of India. At that time, the mood in India as well as in Pakistan was an extreme frenzy of communalism with refugees pouring in with horror tales. So no politician would have been able to stop a complete holocaust had Kashmir not been on the table as an obvious gain from stopping violence.

Also, I believe this was a prime reason for India to honor Congress pledges and adopt a secular constitution. If Kashmir had gone to Pakistan, it would have meant a 100% exchange of population as nothing would hold back hindus from expelling every muslim and declaring India a hindu state - i.e. take 2 nation theory to its ultimate culmination.

So in a way, whatever happened, happened for the best.

In 2... I meant ``Indians and their lackeys may say ends justify the means``

though it is equally true the other way around as well.

Dear Jang,

I wonder why is it that every Indian thinks its his national duty to dig another Indian out of the grave that he has dug for himself? Is this a Maccaca camaraderie thing? Poor Harimau has had a can of whoopass opened on rearend so many times that its had a rather injurious effect on his memory and reading skills...

To quote H V Hodson`s chapter on Junagadh:

On pages 429-430

``Why, we may ask, should Mr. Jinnah and his Government have been so keen to get, and have gone to such length to hold, a poor, communally divided State whose geography would make her adherence as great an embarrassment for Pakistan as her defection made it for India... the answer must surely be sought in Mr. Jinnah`s tactical shrewdness. He must have been- or, if he didn not see, it certainly turned out- that the accession of Junagadh to Pakistan placed India in an acute dilemma from which any escape could be turned to the advantage of Pakistan. If the Indian Government acquiesced, admitting the undoubtable legal right of the ruler to decide which way to go, the precedent of a Muslim prince taking a Hindu Majority State into Pakistan, notwithstanding geographical and communal arguments to the contrary, could be applied to the far greater price of Hyderabad. If the Indian Government intervened with force... it would set up a contrary precedent to be applied by Pakistan to Kashmir... if India demanded, as the alternative to force, a plebiscite in Junagadh, this could be adopted as a general principle which when applied to Kashmir and Jammu would , in Karachi`s estimate, take the State to Pakistan.``

And this was what happened ... on page 436, Hodson writes quoting Mountbatten- let us consider the machiavellian deception and lies of which Gandhians were masters:

``Pandit Nehru then declared that he considered that, in difficult cases like these, the will of the people should be ascertained... I emphasised the importance of Pandit Nehru`s statement to Mr. Liaqat Ali Khan, and assured him that the Government of India wouuld abide by it and that Pandit Nehru would agree that this policy would apply to any other state... Pandit Nehru nodded his head sadly.``

Ultimately a plebiscite was held in Junagadh.

Now here are my observations:

1. Pakistan had won the case for plebiscite in Kashmir legally and morally through this entire episode. Unfortunately the fact that Jinnah did not live long enough and the Indian leaders - especially Nehru and Patel - were utterly dishonest is the reason why the subcontinent to this day is living through a nightmare.

2. Indians and their lackeys may say means justify the ends, but one can see the utter dishonesty of Indian leaders` actions and what they stood for and this calls into a question a lot of things. My gutt feeling is that the definitive history of this region as well as a final chapter on Kashmir is not yet written.

3. It is clear that the British government was partisan and it was with British bayonets that Indians were able to perpetrate this travesty of justice in Kashmir.

4. Had it not been for tribal invasion of Kashmir, we wouldn`t even have a single inch of that land. The reason why we didn`t win it all was because the British officers all but mutinied against the civilian authority and the Pakistan government. The Indians should thank General Gracey and not Nehru and Patel, who were crooks of smaller ability, for the portion of Kashmir they have today.

5. Reading the chapter on Junagadh in H V Hodson`s brilliant book has convinced me that Pakistan as a matter of policy should never trust any Indian overtures, view with suspicion every Indian movement and be ready to take advantage of any and every Indian misfortune because the only language that India understands is a profoundly Gandhian one i.e. dishonest, deceitful and laden with hypocrisy... hence instead of playing fair as we did in 1947 ... we should be ready to bend the rules Injun` shytle.

6. The reason why Indian waited till September 13, 1948 was because till September 11, 1948, the man who put a big danda up their rearends was still alive.

7. Poor Harimau is probably an expatriate with nothing much going for him in his life... thus like any scounderel he revels in the great underhandedness of Chanakaya and Chanakaya`s tricks.

Hope my position on the matter is clear.

since i see zee and yasser, scions of paki elite (yassers family formed pakistan movement) i would repeat some questions..answer pretty please..dont fight with harimau, he will make you angry

#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?

awwww...pakis were kicked out of the land they sneaked up on and now they`re left with their own delusions..

Kashmir banega Pakistan!! Allah-o-Akbar..Inshallah....NOT!!!!

BTW: Should a father of 2 daughters be more worried about Pakiland`s quirky rape laws rather than what jinnah said at godforsakenabad in 1945?

Ref HP #221

[Where did that link say NA was administrative part of J &K?

Here is a little better link for this uneducated Macaca to read even tho it is doubtful that Macacas can read.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilgit_Agency

“The two regions were combined as the Gilgit Agency by the British in 1889.”


The regions of Gilgit and Baltistan were formerly principalities. The name Gilgit-Baltistan is also sometimes used to refer to the Northern Areas. The rulers of Gilgit (also known as Dardistan) were styled Raas ruling from the town of Gilgit. The rulers of Baltistan were styled with the Tibetan title of rGyal-po, having been founded as a western Tibetan kingdom in the thirteenth century. The state of Baltistan included the area of Kargil in modern Jammu and Kashmir. The two states, together with their neighbours Hunza and Nagar, became vassals of the state of Jammu and Kashmir in the middle of the nineteenth century but maintained considerable autonomy. The two regions were combined as the Gilgit Agency by the British in 1889.

The local rulers continued to appear at the Kashmir Durbars until 1947.]

So who was the overlord of these areas?

The Dogra kings.

That escapes what passes for our brain.

Dear Harish mian,

Back to personal attacks I see? Lets leave what some anonymous interactor had to say and what your opinion of his view is- if it makes you happy you are welcome to believe it ... but let us concentrate on what you said.. Now tell us what your view of General Musharraf`s recollection of the Kargil war as published in his memoir printed by your favorite Simon & Schuster is.

Yaar Yasser, this is what Hamzaad had to say about you sometime back, and I`m convinced it is absolutely true. You`re now sucking up to zeemax? As they say, misery loves company.

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00005750&channel=&threshold=1&layout=0&order=0&start=20&end=29&page=5#27

``The truth is manto, if born in India, would have been sucking Nehru`s nuts. If a non-qadiyani, then some mullah sack. This is called ghulaamana zehniyat and has no other purpose than the sheer pleasure of sucking.``

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Now what I don`t understand is that if the war was an abject defeat for Pakistanis... and India had won clearly... why did Zinni have to come to Pakistan to ask the Army to retreat from Indian territory. So many contradictions... and to think Harish mian is contradicting a book published by his favorite ``Simon&Schuster`` who he himself declared published only the truth and nothing but.

#230 by zeemacaca the Bhaand

US feared India might escalate but sent Zinni to Pak instead of India ...

Because it was Macaca-stan that had intruded into Indian territory and not the other way round, guess who would have been coerced into retreating? But I won`t press you on this, because I`m convinced Macacas don`t burden their brain beyond a point.

Nawaz did what the army wanted but despite that turned into a scapegoat for converting a ``military vitory`` into a ``diplomatic defeat``, but wasn`t the army getting defeated in the first place? Or was it actually winning?

Hey Macaca, did you even read the post properly? The Macaca Army wanted a scapegoat to cover up its abject defeat, and that`s why NS. In the days following the war, commentator after commentator toed the Macaca Army line that NS had squandered Macaca-stan`s victory by capitulating in Washington DC, despite the fact that it was the Macaca Army that had sent him there in the first place. The Macaca Army had set him up, and the poor guy was like between deep sea and the devil.

Macacia wasn`t shying away from escalating, but didn`t cross LOC because it``s objective was just to kick Paks out of Indian territory back....hahaha, but didn`t the macaca say in the first question that US feared India might escalate?

Of course it was, Bhaand Macaca. India didn`t want to escalate the conflict, but should it have found the going difficult, it could have done so, and that`s what the US was trying to prevent.

You`re an even bigger idiot than I thought you were.

Sure..the feeling is mutual.

Zee pai,

Here is why Harish mian won`t answer my question regarding his views on General Musharraf`s version of the Kargil war...

A few days before the book was released, we were discussing another author and another book published by Simon&Schuster ... blissfully unaware of Pervez Musharraf`s upcoming autobiography, Harish mian implied that Simon&Schuster only publishes true and factual stuff.

To quote Harish mian`s post 203 from Saving Pakistan through Constitution: Are you saying this whole book was made up by Margaret Bourke-White? Apparently, the publishers Simon & Schuster didn`t think so

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00007170&channel=civic%20center&threshold=0&layout=0&order=0&start=60&end=69&page=1#203

#223 by hideous_macaca

Haha .. there`re so many contradictions in this nonsense that it`s unbelievable ... US feared India might escalate but sent Zinni to Pak instead of India ... haha ... Nawaz did what the army wanted but despite that turned into a scapegoat for converting a ``military vitory`` into a ``diplomatic defeat``, but wasn`t the army getting defeated in the first place? Or was it actually winning? Hahaha ....Macacia wasn`t shying away from escalating, but didn`t cross LOC because it``s objective was just to kick Paks out of Indian territory back....hahaha, but didn`t the macaca say in the first question that US feared India might escalate? hahaha....

Forget it pissu_macaca. You`re an even bigger idiot than I thought you were.