The General and Kargil

#123 by Salim_Chauhan

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.

Here`s yet another example:

[The Paki hordes that you are referring to were Jihadists from NWFP and as Wana teaches us today, Pakistan has never been able to dictate to these wild tribesmen. Their actions in Baramula and failure to occupy the airport directly resulted in the loss of the valley to India for the Kashmiris.]

This is the same lie the Jinnah government told at the United Nations.

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.



[As for violence while the ``King`` was pondering his decision, do you remember the ``Police Action`` against the Nizam of Hyderabad or the Nawab of Junagadh? ]

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.



Instead of defending Paki/Islamic/Jehadi positions as taught in Paki schools and madrassas, why don`t you educate yourself for a change?

The truth IS important. Even if it hurts. And check your facts before you argue.

krishna: How do you determine who wins an argument?

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.

#109 by zeemacaca the Bhand

Abey macaca, if Pak was losing why was it readying the nukes which in any case was for escalation?

Precisely because it was losing, dear Bhand Macaca. Macaca-stan thought it would have India by the scruff of its neck, instead it turned out to be the other way. Answer this question: if Macaca-stan was indeed winning, why think of escalation? Didn`t we always hear macacas complain that it was meant to be a limited war and all that?

#147 by hideous_macaca

Hahaha .... Lol ....macaca blurts:

Answer this question: if Macaca-stan was indeed winning, why think of escalation? Didn`t we always hear macacas complain that it was meant to be a limited war and all that?

Because it was NOT meant to be a limited war ... see now? The entire plan was based on inviting the macacians to cross the LOC....which they chickened out to do.

See macaca, the plan was as follows:

Phase 1: Capture and hold route 1-A to Siachen.
Macacia would have two options: (1) Take casulaties and try to recapture; or (2) cross LOC to put pressure to withdraw. Pak response in case of (1) Inflict casualties. In case of (2) draw them in without much resistance where they`ll be sitting ducks and then nuke them with a small tactical warhead! Perfectly legitimate because they would be invaders.

Macacia chose the first option and took casualties, but could not dislodge Paks for 2 months, so decided on naval blockade.

Phase 2: Siege broken with short range conventional shore-to ship missiles. Macacians cross LOC, nuked inside Pak territory.

Phase 3:Two choices for macacia: (1) Prepare biggie nukes for cities and invite pre-emptive strikes; or (2) lose and give up Siachen and Kashmir.

Unfortunately it didn`t get to that poin this time around, but there`ll be other...

See now? I guess not BEACAUSE YOU ARE A:
. ,****,
.((@..@))
.. ``(--)``

#148 by zeemacaca the Bhand

Hahaha...now I`m convinced you don`t know the heads and tails of what you`re arguing about...LOL!!

Because it was NOT meant to be a limited war ... see now?

If it was not meant to be a limited war, why were macacas in Macaca-bad jumping up and down like you`re doing here complaining that the Indian response was disproportionate? Could it be because Macacas got more than they had bargained for? Macacas hadn`t exactly foreseen that the IAF would bomb the cr@p out of them, no?

Pak response in case of (1) Inflict casualties.

Aww..really? If Macaca-stan`s plan was merely to inflict casualties in case India merely attempted to get back the occupied peak, then what was the deal about escalating the conflict to a nuclear exchange? Is it because the Macaca generals in Macaca-pindi were cr@pping in their pants because the conflict had gotten out of their hand?

And pray tell us if Macaca-stan were indeed winning, why did Nawaz Sharif (on Mushy`s suggestion) run like a scared rabbit to Washington on a 4th of July? Winning nations don`t exactly run around to beg a reprieve, do they?

BTW, is that pic yours or is it your son`s? Now I know why you didn`t post it on your profile.

#149 by hideous_macaca

You`re truly an unqualified idiot. Read my responses # 95, 98 & 109 here
quoting Bruce Reidel`s article on the Clinton/Nawaz meeting at Blair House on 4th July 1997 for your answers.

.....read 4th July 1997 as 4th July 1999.

harish/zeemax: this daily early morning (which i guess is late afternoon and late night) ritual of your macaca posts is becoming a standard chowk feature now. kind of like the goosestepping and strutting of border guards that goes on at wagah border when the border gates are being closed. :-)

i meant late afternoon for zeemax, and late night for harish, in the post below.

#150 by zeemacaca the Bhand

Read my responses # 95, 98 & 109 here quoting Bruce Reidel`s article on the Clinton/Nawaz meeting at Blair House on 4th July 1997 for your answers.

Sure dear Bhand Macaca...here are excerpts of meeting from the horse`s mouth.

http://www.sas.upenn.edu/casi/publications/Papers/Riedel_2002.pdf#search=%22bruce%2Briedel%2Bkargil%22


``Sharif became increasingly desperate as he saw how isolated Pakistan was in the world. He urgently requested American intervention to stop the Indian counterattack. (Hey Macaca, why would he do that? After all, Macacas were winning, no?) Washington was clear — the solution required a Pakistani withdrawal behind the LOC, nothing else would do. In the last days of June Sharif began to ask to see President Clinton directly to plead his case. (doesn’t look like the PM of a winning nation, does he?) Sharif had met the President several times earlier, in New York and Washington and at the funeral of King Hussein in Amman. They had also spoken extensively in the spring of 1998 when the President had pleaded with Sharif not to follow India’s example and test its nuclear weapons. Although that effort failed (despite promises of enormous U.S. aid to Pakistan), the two leaders had developed a genuine personal bond and felt comfortable talking to each other.``

``On the 3rd, Sharif was more desperate and told the President he was ready to come immediately to Washington to seek our help (Hey Macaca, what’s with that? Macaca-stan was winning, wasn’t it? Then why was the Macaca PM desperate?). The President repeated his caution — come only if you are ready to withdraw, I can’t help you if you are not ready to pull back. He urged Sharif to consider carefully the wisdom of a trip to Washington under these constraints. Sharif said he was coming and would be there on the 4th.``

``Sharif’s intentions also became clearer. He was bringing his wife and children with him to Washington, a possible indication that he was afraid he might not be able to go home if the summit failed or that the military was telling him to leave. At a minimum, Sharif seemed to be hedging his bet on whether this would be a round trip.``

``Everyone left the room except Sharif, Clinton and myself. The President insisted he wanted a record of the event. Sharif asked again to be left alone, the President refused. The Prime Minister then briefed the President on his frantic efforts in the last month to engage Vajpayee and get a deal that would allow Pakistan to withdraw with some saving of face. He had flown to China to try to get their help to press India to agree to a fixed timetable for talks to resolve Kashmir. Sharif’s brief was confused and vague on many details but he seemed a man possessed with fear of war.``

``The Prime Minister told Clinton that he wanted desperately to find a solution that would allow Pakistan to withdraw with some cover <hey Macaca, why would winning nations seek cover?). Without something to point to, Sharif warned ominously, the fundamentalists in Pakistan would move against him and this meeting would be his last with Clinton.``

``The President dismissed this with a wave of his hand and then told Sharif that he warned him on the second not to come to Washington unless he was ready to withdraw without any precondition or quid pro quo. Sharif had been warned by others as well. The President said he had a draft statement ready to issue that would pin all the blame for the Kargil crisis on Pakistan tonight.``

The point to note here, dear Bhand Macaca, is at every point during the meeting, Clinton wasn`t treating Nawaz Sharif any better than his Chaprasi. Not exactly the way PM`s of winning nations are treated, isn`t it?

#154 by hideous_macaca

Hahaha ... why did you leave out the quotes re nukes etc ?... And what Gen Zinni said as quoted by your own #43 by ugly_macaca i.e. :

Zinni`s book throws light on Kargil withdrawal .... Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his civilian colleagues appeared reluctant to endorse a withdrawal. That got Musharraf`s attention, and he encouraged Prime Minister Sharif to hear me out,`` writes Gen. Zinni.

The quotes from Reidel`s article YET AGAIN ... are:

...On the third, more information developed about the escalating military situation in the area —disturbing evidence that the Pakistanis were preparing their nuclear arsenals for possible deployment.

...There was more disturbing information about Pakistan preparing its nuclear arsenal for possible use. I recommended that he use this only when Sharif was without hisaides, particularly not when the Foreign Secretary, Shamshad Ahmad, who was known to be very close to Pakistani military intelligence (ISI) was in earshot.

... Clinton asked ... Did Sharif order the Pakistani nuclear missile forceto prepare for action? Did he realize how crazy that was? You’ve put me in themiddle today, set the U.S. up to fail and I won’t let it happen. Pakistan is messing with nuclear war.

Now. Once and for all because I`m getting tired of this sh*t. Nawaz wasn`t a part of the plan nor was he taken into confidence. It was the military`s plan and they had planned for all out war. Pak had succeeded in infilterating and holding their positions right from Jan till July and when macacia threatened naval blockade, that was the punchline and point of no return. That`s when US found out and since it could not talk directly to the military due to Pak having an elected PM, they approached Nawaz through Zinni. Nawaz was reluctant to comply NOT because of Pak losing, but because of the impending coup against him if he DID comply as the army`s plan was going well. Only after Zinni assured Nawaz, that Nawaz went to see Clinton and took his family along ... just in case. Nawaz was worried for his and his family`s security ... not of Pak losing.

Get it now? No? Ok ... go jump up and down like the monkey you are ...

awww...peemax has become unhinged..Having to face the reality that you ended up abandoning the bodies of your soldiers without being able to hold on to the land you captured can do that to a person...

Kashmir banega Pakiland......NOT!!!

#155 by zeemacaca the Bhand

Nawaz wasn`t a part of the plan nor was he taken into confidence.....as the army`s plan was going well.

Hey Bhand Macaca, don`t you think you`re contradicting yourself, and rather badly at that? If Nawaz Sharif was not a part of the plan and if the Macaca Army`s plan was going well, then why did it abide by his decision to withdraw from Kargil? Can`t have it both ways can you?

#157 by hideous_macaca

Abey pissu ...

why did it abide by his decision to withdraw from Kargil?

One word ... US pressure ....!

BTW enough about this sh*t .... what happened to your deal? Congress didn`t approve it and went into recess eh?

Macaca Pissu_flea in US dog`s ear .............. LFMAO

Respected Harish_hyd, zeemax

Pl avoid using words like Bhand, Macaca, canine etc.

Your posts are intelligent anyway and need not be unnecessarily vitriolic.

respectfully submitted.

#158 by zeemacaca the Bhand

One word ... US pressure ....!

Umm..not really. It wasn`t that Bubba sought to meet NS to apply ``pressure``, it was NS at the Army`s prodding, because it was getting beaten black and blue, and India wasn`t shying away from escalating the conflict by threatening a naval blockade, forcing the saber-rattling by Macaca-stan.

BTW enough about this sh*t ....

Why? Getting uncomfortable with facts? LOL!