Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

The Kargil Conflict

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: The Kargil Conflict
    Posted: 05-Aug-2006 at 20:56
Why dear digs,
I'm having the same problem again
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 03:07
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Why dear digs,
I'm having the same problem again


You will continue to have this problem until you give up the madarsa logic.

 Since have not chimed on Nawaz Sharif your ex prime minister it is clear you have accpeted that Kargil war was fought by Pakistani regulars and they were decimated by Indian army.



-Digs


Edited by Digvijay - 06-Aug-2006 at 03:09
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 03:15
madrasa digs, not madarsa.

Of course I haven't, I remember looking up all the facts last time I had this discussion back when I could be bothered with it. I can't remember, but I think this Nawaz quote only appeared in Indian newspapers and no where else.

Its a pity the Indian army struggles to fight kashmiri guerilla's. The next war should be a walkover LOL
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 03:45
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

madrasa digs, not madarsa.

Of course I haven't, I remember looking up all the facts last time I had this discussion back when I could be bothered with it. I can't remember, but I think this Nawaz quote only appeared in Indian newspapers and no where else.

Its a pity the Indian army struggles to fight kashmiri guerilla's. The next war should be a walkover LOL

We call it madarsa in India.  Nawaz Sharif your ex prime minister has written a book which is out in the stands and this book is what is being referred to here. Do buy it and read it.
Pakistan has lost four wars to India and you still think that you can win the next one? What is the source of this delusion?

-Digs
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 04:18
Personally I don't think either country has won a war over the other, but in the interest of irritating you:
We clearly won '65, Kargil wasn't a war (and it really wasn't), '47 was a clear victory, and '72 a draw.
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 06:38
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

Personally I don't think either country has won a war over the other, but in the interest of irritating you:
We clearly won '65, Kargil wasn't a war (and it really wasn't), '47 was a clear victory, and '72 a draw.


This is what I mean by madarsa logic. You guys are brain washed to believe only certain things and have no acumen to analyse facts and evidence. That is why your country is in such a mess!

So your ex prime Minister is not believable on Kargil but you are! (madarsa logic #1)
 
In 71 your troops surrendered on both fronts and it was a draw! (madarsa logic #2)

In 65 Ayub Khan's  ass was kicked  and you won that war! (madarsa logic #3)

1948 all the territory occupied (sans POK) was retaken by Indian army and you won that war! (madarsa logic #4)

Amusing.

-Digs
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 07:38
In 1948 we took 40 % of kashmir.
In 1965 we took a  portion of the Punjab till the Beas (remeber Khem karan) most of the Kutch. Your two main assualts at Chawinda, and at lahore were pushed back across the border
 
In 1971, we took Chamb, defeating a much larger force.
In the East, you army never got anyware near Dacca or indeed crossed the dacca bowl in any numbers, in fact your main assualt at Hilli, failed. The surrender took place because they were in enemy country, cut off from all reinforcements. Two understreght infantry divsions, plus a brigade and a headquater of a third division. 30,000 men against 300,000?
 
The wars have seen great valor and courage on both sides.
 
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 07:57
Originally posted by Sparten

In 1948 we took 40 % of kashmir.

No. In 1948 your troops were occupying pretty much all of kashmir from which they were routed by Indian army. Indian army was not allowed to enter POK by Nehru because he had gone to the UN and UN asked Pakistan to leave POK so that India could hold plebistice. General Thimayya was ready with his troops to flush out rest of your brethern but he was stepped by our own PM. So just feel lucky that yoou got a chance to hold POK.

In 1965 we took a  portion of the Punjab till the Beas (remeber Khem karan) most of the Kutch. Your two main assualts at Chawinda, and at lahore were pushed back across the border

Sure your American donated Patton tanks came into Indian territory but your army had to leave them on Indian soil. Heck we even named a town "Patton Nagar" after all the Patton tanks captured. And no after the war you had not an inch of Indian soil.
 
In 1971, we took Chamb, defeating a much larger force.
In the East, you army never got anyware near Dacca or indeed crossed the dacca bowl in any numbers, in fact your main assualt at Hilli, failed. The surrender took place because they were in enemy country, cut off from all reinforcements. Two understreght infantry divsions, plus a brigade and a headquater of a third division. 30,000 men against 300,000?

Oh really. So East Pakistan was enemy country for Paki troops and home of Indian troops. Awesome!. Which madarsa did you attend?  Pakistan had its ass whupped both in the east and the west. Our troops were ready to capture Lahore and the army officers are still bewildered why indira did not make handing over of POK a demand before Indian troops left Paki soil. Stop day dreaming.

What? No mention of Kargil. Oh you are the one who agrees with Nawaz. Fine.


-Digs

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 10:23
1)Pakistani troops only eneterd kashmir after the Indian army did in 1948
2) We took Khenm karan and it remained in pakistani hands until after the war. The thing you mention, Patton nagar, was Assal Utter, when elements of the 1 Armoured Division attacked an entrenched Indian position and suffered several losses. We hardly lost "all" the Pattons.
 
3)Really per general Sam marnekshaw, who commanded your forces, it was the Indian startegy to be on the defensive in the Western front in 1971. In 1971 the Indian Army did not even attempt a major thrust in Lahore sector, lesson on 1965, too many obstacles, canals etc.
 
One can admire your enthusiam in propagating your country, but one must also attempt to ensure that the truth be told.
 
4) And no I don;t count Kargil as a war. Nawaz Sharif never said what you claimed. And Pakistani army fightingin kargil was done mostly by the 323 Brigade, which has a streght of around 3000 men. Your figure exceed the total manpower of the formation.
 
That quote was only in Rediff. An Indian site.
 
 
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 15:24
Originally posted by Sparten

1)Pakistani troops only eneterd kashmir after the Indian army did in 1948

Give up the madarsa mentality and start appreciating the truth. Why is it that all Pakistanis afraid of the truth?

Any way here is what three eminent historians have to say about Paki role in Kashmir at the time of Indian independence:

Soldiers of Pakistani army on leave, aided by tribesmen of NWFP, led by Pakistani army officers attacked Kashmir on 22 October 1947, along the Jhelum valley road. The chief of operations was Major-General Akbar Khan of the Pakistan army using the pseudonym General Tariq. [1]. There objective was to celebrate Id on October 26 at Srinagar, with Jinnah riding in triumph into the capital of Kashmir. The undefended city of Domel was the first to fall. Brigadier Rajendra Singh, Chief of Staff of Kashmir State, organized a force of 150 men at Garhi and checked the advance of Pakistani army. By 26 October Pakistani army had only managed to reach Baramulla instead of Srinagar. Pakistani troops committed horrendous crimes against Hindus and Europeans living in the valley. Robert Trumbull, of New York Times sent this dispatch, published on 10 November:

The city had been stripped of its wealth and young women before the Pakistanis fled in terror, at midnight friday, before the advancing Indian army. Surviving residents estimate that 3000 of there townsmen including four Europeans and a retired British army officer, Colonel Dykes, and his pregnant wife were slain. St Joseph Franciscan Convent and the convent hospital was stormed and four nuns were shot.

Pakistan kept insisting that it was not involved but foreign journalists quickly exposed there lie. Alan Moorehead of the Observer (London) reported that recruitment for the invasion had been going on not only in NWFP but all of Pakistan[2]. Trumbull secretly interviewed American mercenary, Russell K. Haight Jr. who fought along with Pakistanis[2].:

Mr Haight also found Pakistan army personnel running the Azad Kashmir radio station, relaying messages through there own Pakistan army receivers, organizing and managing Azad encampments in Pakistan, and supplying uniforms, food, arms and ammunition which, he understood, came from Pakistan army stores through such subterfuges as the 'loss' of ammunition shipments..Mr Haight charaterized the Azad Kashmir provisional government, headed by Sardar Mohammed Ibrahim Khan, as 'Pakistan puppets'. He also deeply implicated Pakistan government officials, notable the Premier of the NWFP.

Evidence emerged from within Pakistan itself, Michael Brecher quotes an appeal made by the Minister of Health for Sind:

to all trained and demobilized soldiers to proceed as volunteers to the Kashmir front.[3].

British officers and officials working in Pakistan had got wind of the impending invasion some time before it happened. A letter Sir George Cunningham, governor of the NWFP, wrote to General R.M.M Lockhart, Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Army, before the attack ended with the postscript:

Some people up here have been acting very foolishly. You will know what I mean by the time this letter reaches you.

General Frank Messervy, Commander-in-Chief in Pakistan, formally advised Liaqat against such adventurism, and repeated his advice before flying to London on work.

Indian Government launched Operation JAK to defeat the Pakistan army. V.P.Menon wrote:

Never in the history of warfare has there been an operation like the airlift of Indian troops to Srinagar on 27 October and on subsequent days, an operation put through with no previous thought, let alone organized planning, and at such remarkably short notice... In the early hours of morning of 27 October over a hundred civillian aircraft and R.I.A.F (Royal Indian Air Force) planes were mobilised to fly troops, equipment and supplies to Srinagar. The R.I.A.F and civillian pilots and ground crews rose to the occasion and worked heroically to make the airlift a success.

Lord Mountbatten wrote:

in all his war experience he had never heard of an airlift of this nature being put into operation at such a short notice and he complimented all concerned on the astonishing performance.

When Jinnah learnt that Indian troops had reached Srinagar, he ordered Sir Francis Mudie, Governor of Punjab, to phone General Sir Douglas Gracey, acting chief in absence of General Douglas Messervey, to send Pakistan army into Kashmir via the Banihal pass and Rawalpindi Srinagar route. Gracey refused to take orders from Jinnah and told him that he would need orders from Field Marshall Auchinleck, the Supreme Commander. Auchinleck told Jinnah on 28 October that Kashmir was legally part of India and sending the Pakistan army would amount to a formal declaration of war. And if Pakistan went to war, Auchinleck said, he would withdraw every British officer serving in the Pakistan army. Jinnah was stumped[2].

By morning of 8 November Major General Kalwant Singh and Brigadier L.P.Sen had reached Shalteng the stronghold of Pakistani army and showed them what war was all about. Battle lasted eight hours and the Pakistanis were routed. They left 300 dead behind. Soon winter snow helped Pakistanis as Indian army could not advance any further. Next spring and summer Indian army had major successes and Pakistan gave up its pretencce and formally entered war. Major-General K.S.Thimmaya, who succeeded Kalwant Singh, was confident--and he would nurse this complaint all through his life--that he would have taken Muzaffarabad had he not been stopped by the politicians[2].

  1.  Hodson, H.V. (1969). The Great Divide: Britain, India, Pakistan.
  2. Akbar, M.J. (2002). Kashmir Behind the vale.
  3.  Brecher, Michael (1953). The Struggle for Kashmir.


2) We took Khenm karan and it remained in pakistani hands until after the war. The thing you mention, Patton nagar, was Assal Utter, when elements of the 1 Armoured Division attacked an entrenched Indian position and suffered several losses. We hardly lost "all" the Pattons.
 
Yeah. Your army left more then a 100 patton tanks in one battle field at Assal uttar a.k.a "Patton Nagar" (city of abandoned patton tanks) and you are bragging about it. Way to go!

3)Really per general Sam marnekshaw, who commanded your forces, it was the Indian startegy to be on the defensive in the Western front in 1971. In 1971 the Indian Army did not even attempt a major thrust in Lahore sector, lesson on 1965, too many obstacles, canals etc.
 
Why did your troops surrender on both western and eastern front? Look being delusional is not helping you. Start collecting some facts otherwise you just sound plain stupid.


One can admire your enthusiam in propagating your country, but one must also attempt to ensure that the truth be told.
 
Truth is being told.  It is something about you and your countrymen who are just brainwashed to accept only what mullas tell you.

4) And no I don;t count Kargil as a war. Nawaz Sharif never said what you claimed. And Pakistani army fightingin kargil was done mostly by the 323 Brigade, which has a streght of around 3000 men. Your figure exceed the total manpower of the formation.

Are you and Hashimi one and the same? It is getting pitiful that I have to repeat a gazillion times for you pakis.   Nawaz Sharif has written a book "Ghaddar Kaun? Nawaz Sharif ki Kahani unki Zubani". Go read it.
 
-Digs
 
Back to Top
Jay. View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 24-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1207
  Quote Jay. Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 22:13
Some of you stated that the Kargil conflict was not a war. Why not? It was an armed conflict between to nations. It also had the techniques and procedures of war. So, why not? In the wikipedia article, it states that it is also known as the Kargil war, that's where I got it from.
Samo Sloga Srbina Spasava
Only Unity Can Save the Serb
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 06-Aug-2006 at 22:37
I don't think that Kargil should be called a war because of the indisputed reasons:
1) The conflict did not spread outside the Kargil region
2) Pakistani Airforce was not used
3) The number of combatants was small
4) There wasn't any declearation of war or similar
In addition, pakistani side is that no pakistani troops other than recon and special forces crossed the LOC. Most of the fighting was between India and Kashmiri militants (which I think is also how it was reported in Aus)

In the history of the region, kargil is a minor conflict. If it were a proper war, then the involvement of both sides would've been much greater, just like the 3 wars.
Back to Top
TeldeInduz View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 07-Mar-2006
Location: Paraguay
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 857
  Quote TeldeInduz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 00:50
Wikipedia isn't a very good source for Indo-Pak wars/conflicts. Very one-sided.
 
Kargil was definitely not a war though. It was at most some skirmishes between the two sides, involving some regulars and irregulars. It wasn't large scale, and the two sides avoided direct conflict (by not using the Pakistani regular forces)  
 
Calling the Kargil Operation a skirmish, these retired officers and armymen said that lack of media exposure earlier has resulted in disparity in the compensation amounts between those wounded in Kargil and elsewhere.
http://www.newkerala.com/news3.php?action=fullnews&id=28710 
 
As Sparten pointed out, there's some Indian Army people that claim Kargil peaks are still in the hands of these irregular Pakistani forces.
 
'Key peak still in Pakistani occupation'
[ 7 Jun, 2004 2128hrs ISTIANS ]
CHANDIGARH: A former Indian Army officer has claimed a few strategic peaks in the Kargil sector of Jammu and Kashmir, including the crucial Point 5353, were still under occupation by Pakistani forces.
 
Brig. Surinder Singh, who was dismissed from service in June 2001, also claimed the Indian defence establishment had misled the country by claiming it had gained control on the peaks in Kargil, where India and Pakistan fought a brief border conflict in 1999.
 
Singh was sacked after being embroiled in a controversy with his superiors about alleged lapses and intelligence failures that led to Pakistan-backed intruders occupying strategic features along a 140-km stretch of the Line of Control.
 
He asserted he had proof that Point 5353, a hill in the Drass sector of north Kashmir, was still under Pakistani occupation.
"I have evidence of this claim including satellite images," he told reporters.
Singh said the alleged inaction of the defence and political leadership during the Kargil conflict was only the tip of the iceberg.
 
"The defence establishment had misled the nation about getting every intruder out of the Kargil sector. I can give proof of this to whatever committee the new government at the centre sets up," Singh said, noting he had written about the matter to Defence Minister Pranab Mukherjee.
Singh said he had asked Mukherjee to order a thorough probe into the Kargil conflict and issues that were deliberately hidden by the previous coalition government led by the Bharatiya Janata Party.
 
Kargil is the same as Siachen. Kargil is in IOK, Siachen is in Pakistan's side. Siachen is more of a war than Kargil, so if you include Kargil as a war, Siachen is also one. Kargil, Siachen are just battles or skirmishes. 


Edited by TeldeInduz - 07-Aug-2006 at 01:00
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................
Back to Top
TeldeInduz View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 07-Mar-2006
Location: Paraguay
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 857
  Quote TeldeInduz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 02:30
This was on another thread, but it's the same answers, you don't provide any links for what you post, so it's could just be made up.
Soldiers of Pakistani army on leave, aided by tribesmen of NWFP, led by Pakistani army officers attacked Kashmir on 22 October 1947, along the Jhelum valley road.

Pakistan Army had nothing to do with the tribals joining forces with the Pooch uprising. This has been stated by Sir George Cunningham, the governor of the NWFP at the time. The British paid attention to the reports of Sir George Cunningham, the Governor of North Western Frontier province, that tribesmen entering the state of Jammu and Kashmir were acting on their own and that the government of Pakistan was unable to prevent their invasion.This, along with the British belief that the atrocities committed by the Hindu Maharaja were the root cause of the Kashmir conflict, generated the Pro-Pakistani stance of the British delegation in the United Nations.

http://artsandscience.concordia.ca/faculty/tremblay/pdf_word_excel/Links/Indo-US.doc

On 22 October, thousands of Pathan tribesmen from Pakistan, recruited by the Poonch rebels, invade Kashmir along with the Poonch rebels, allegedly incensed by the atrocities against fellow Muslims in Poonch and Jammu.

http://www.indiatogether.org/peace/kashmir/intro.htm

According to the findings of Alastair Lamb it seems that a few resistance commanders in Poonch had "toyed" with the idea of getting assistance from Pathan tribes in the North-West Frontier. Pathans had a reputation for being vicious fighters but not very disciplined, even in their home region. Kashmiri rebels in Pooch, unlike the Pakistani authorities, had not anticipated the level of fierce brutality the Pathan tribes would employ. Lamb points out that as a result of the prospects of Pathan intervention: "More experienced Pakistani soldiers and politicians who were aware of what was brewing were seriously alarmed."
[12] Unfortunately, however, once contacted for assistance, it was too late to turn them back. Kolodner notes that: "the Pathans had mobilized for battle and little could stop them from joining it."[13] Thus, "Contrary to the claims of some pro-Indian writers, it seems unlikely that Pakistan was involved in sending the Pathans to Kashmir in order to capture the territory without using the Pakistani army."[14]


http://www.globalresearch.org/view_article.php?aid=461136933#552451653

The chief of operations was Major-General Akbar Khan of the Pakistan army using the pseudonym General Tariq. [1]. There objective was to celebrate Id on October 26 at Srinagar, with Jinnah riding in triumph into the capital of Kashmir. The undefended city of Domel was the first to fall. Brigadier Rajendra Singh, Chief of Staff of Kashmir State, organized a force of 150 men at Garhi and checked the advance of Pakistani army. By 26 October Pakistani army had only managed to reach Baramulla instead of Srinagar. Pakistani troops committed horrendous crimes against Hindus and Europeans living in the valley. Robert Trumbull, of New York Times sent this dispatch, published on 10 November:

The city had been stripped of its wealth and young women before the Pakistanis fled in terror, at midnight friday, before the advancing Indian army. Surviving residents estimate that 3000 of there townsmen including four Europeans and a retired British army officer, Colonel Dykes, and his pregnant wife were slain. St Joseph Franciscan Convent and the convent hospital was stormed and four nuns were shot.

It is a well known fact that Pakistan did assist the uprising, not with men, but with logistics as the ruler of Kashmir Hari Singh, asked for assistance from the Mahrajah of Patiala (and was provided a Batallion of troops) to put down the insurgency. This is clearly stated

It was between September and early October, 1947, that Maharaja Sir Hari Singh asked the Sikh Maharaja of Patiala state for help in suppressing the Poonch rebellion. He received assistance in the form of a battalion of infantry and a battery of mountain artillery supplied by the Sikh ruler from his State Armed Forces.[11] The government of India subsequently took steps to protect the Maharajas position in power and prepare for a possible military intervention. When the Maharaja began to open discussions with Sheikh Abdullah, the prominent Muslim leader jailed by the Maharajas regime, it became obvious that Jammu and Kashmir was about to accede to India.

It is around this time that Pakistan began to accelerate its support of the indigenous rebellion against the Maharajahs rule. Pakistani army officer Major General Akhbar Khan, who was given responsibility for the operation to support the Kashmiri rebellion, reports in his book Raiders in Kashmir: "As open interference or aggression by Pakistan was obviously not desirable it was proposed that our efforts should be concentrated upon strengthening the Kashmiris internally and to prevent arrival of armed civilian or military assistance from India into Kashmir".

However, the resulting Pakistani military assistance cannot be equated with the raiding Pathans who took advantage of the tensions for their own sordid purposes.


http://www.globalresearch.org/view_article.php?aid=461136933#552451653

Pakistani troops were not involved in the advance into Kashmir. It's been stated by the British delegate at the UN who would have been in a good position to know. There was plenty of horror stories during partition in Kashmir, many of them committed by the Dogra Army, and then tribals out to seek revenge - this was all the more relevant because of the partition riots where Muslims were killed. Here's a couple from the Times of London and the Kashmir Times's Hindu editor (an Indian website..)

Commenting on the Raja's reign of terror, the Times of London observed. 237,000 Muslims were systematically exterminated, unless they escaped to Pakistan along the border by the force of the Dogra State headed by the Maharaja in person

GK Reddy, a Hindu editor of Kashmir Times, said in a statement published in The Daily Gazette, a Hindu paper of Karachi, in its issue of October 28, 1947: "The mad orgy of Dogra violence against unarmed Muslims should put any self-respecting human being to shame. I saw armed bands of ruffians and soldiers shooting down and hacking to pieces helpless Muslim refugees heading towards Pakistan I saw en route State officials freely distributing arms and ammunition among the Dogras From the hotel room where I was detained in Jammu, I counted as many as twenty-six villages burning one night and all through the night rattling fire of automatic weapons could be heard from the surrounding refugee camps."

The communal violence that gripped Jammu was not altogether one-sided. A large number of Hindu and Sikhs too were butchered in some parts of the region, particularly in Rajouri, Mirpur and areas now under Pakistani occupation. But the fact that there was an obvious bid by State forces to patronise the killings and victimisation of Muslims was a more glaring occurrence. Trouble was brewing in Poonch where a popular non-communal agitation was launched after the Maharajas administration took over the erstwhile jagir under its direct control and imposed some taxes. The mishandling of this agitation and use of brutal forces by the Maharajas administration inflamed passions, turning this non-communal struggle into communal strife.

Pakistan kept insisting that it was not involved but foreign journalists quickly exposed there lie. Alan Moorehead of the Observer (London) reported that recruitment for the invasion had been going on not only in NWFP but all of Pakistan[2]. Trumbull secretly interviewed American mercenary, Russell K. Haight Jr. who fought along with Pakistanis[2].:

Mr Haight also found Pakistan army personnel running the Azad Kashmir radio station, relaying messages through there own Pakistan army receivers, organizing and managing Azad encampments in Pakistan, and supplying uniforms, food, arms and ammunition which, he understood, came from Pakistan army stores through such subterfuges as the 'loss' of ammunition shipments..Mr Haight charaterized the Azad Kashmir provisional government, headed by Sardar Mohammed Ibrahim Khan, as 'Pakistan puppets'. He also deeply implicated Pakistan government officials, notable the Premier of the NWFP.

Evidence emerged from within Pakistan itself, Michael Brecher quotes an appeal made by the Minister of Health for Sind:

to all trained and demobilized soldiers to proceed as volunteers to the Kashmir front.[3].

It's well known where the Poonch got their ammunition from, but it wasnt the Pakistani government. It was gotten from the Pathans at the border. There was no reason to get any ammunition from the Pakistani government.

Initially, maharaja Hari Singh attempted to argue for an independent status for Jammu and Kashmir. However, events in different parts of Jammu and Kashmir forced him in the direction of accession to India. Demobilised Muslim soldiers returned to Poonch and Mirpur in Jammu and Kashmir to find that the maharaja was refusing to accept them into his army. In the post-war period, the maharaja increased taxes, leading to widespread poverty. This provoked massive protests, particularly in Poonch where, in October 1947, an uprising was led by demobilised soldiers, armed by tribes in the North-West Frontier Province region of Pakistan.

British officers and officials working in Pakistan had got wind of the impending invasion some time before it happened. A letter Sir George Cunningham, governor of the NWFP, wrote to General R.M.M Lockhart, Commander-in-Chief of the Indian Army, before the attack ended with the postscript:

Some people up here have been acting very foolishly. You will know what I mean by the time this letter reaches you.

If you read the link above, Sir George Cunnigham states that Pakistan Army were not involved with the tribals.

Pakistan Army had nothing to do with the tribals joining forces with the Pooch uprising. This has been stated by Sir George Cunningham, the governor of the NWFP at the time. The British paid attention to the reports of Sir George Cunningham, the Governor of North Western Frontier province, that tribesmen entering the state of Jammu and Kashmir were acting on their own and that the government of Pakistan was unable to prevent their invasion.This, along with the British belief that the atrocities committed by the Hindu Maharaja were the root cause of the Kashmir conflict, generated the Pro-Pakistani stance of the British delegation in the United Nations.

http://artsandscience.concordia.ca/faculty/tremblay/pdf_word_excel/Links/Indo-US.doc

General Frank Messervy, Commander-in-Chief in Pakistan, formally advised Liaqat against such adventurism, and repeated his advice before flying to London on work.
 
Indian Government launched Operation JAK to defeat the Pakistan army. V.P.Menon wrote:
 
Never in the history of warfare has there been an operation like the airlift of Indian troops to Srinagar on 27 October and on subsequent days, an operation put through with no previous thought, let alone organized planning, and at such remarkably short notice... In the early hours of morning of 27 October over a hundred civillian aircraft and R.I.A.F (Royal Indian Air Force) planes were mobilised to fly troops, equipment and supplies to Srinagar. The R.I.A.F and civillian pilots and ground crews rose to the occasion and worked heroically to make the airlift a success.
 
Lord Mountbatten wrote
 
in all his war experience he had never heard of an airlift of this nature being put into operation at such a short notice and he complimented all concerned on the astonishing performance.
 
When Jinnah learnt that Indian troops had reached Srinagar, he ordered Sir Francis Mudie, Governor of Punjab, to phone General Sir Douglas Gracey, acting chief in absence of General Douglas Messervey, to send Pakistan army into Kashmir via the Banihal pass and Rawalpindi Srinagar route. Gracey refused to take orders from Jinnah and told him that he would need orders from Field Marshall Auchinleck, the Supreme Commander. Auchinleck told Jinnah on 28 October that Kashmir was legally part of India and sending the Pakistan army would amount to a formal declaration of war. And if Pakistan went to war, Auchinleck said, he would withdraw every British officer serving in the Pakistan army. Jinnah was stumped[2]
 
By morning of 8 November Major General Kalwant Singh and Brigadier L.P.Sen had reached Shalteng the stronghold of Pakistani army and showed them what war was all about. Battle lasted eight hours and the Pakistanis were routed. They left 300 dead behind. Soon winter snow helped Pakistanis as Indian army could not advance any further. Next spring and summer Indian army had major successes and Pakistan gave up its pretencce and formally entered war. Major-General K.S.Thimmaya, who succeeded Kalwant Singh, was confident--and he would nurse this complaint all through his life--that he would have taken Muzaffarabad had he not been stopped by the politicians[2].
 
Hodson, H.V. (1969). The Great Divide: Britain, India, Pakistan.
 
Akbar, M.J. (2002). Kashmir Behind the vale.
 
Brecher, Michael (1953). The Struggle for Kashmir.
-Digs

Some of it looks made up by you like the Jinnah masterplan of riding into Kashmir. I have found bits of it on a site called "weeklyholiday.net". But it still doesn't say what you have written down.

http://www.weeklyholiday.net/300503/inret.html Until 7 November the road from Pakistan to Baramula was used by others who were neither malevolent nor directly involved in the conflict. For example, Sir George Cunningham, the Governor of the North-West Frontier Province, sent on two occasions during this first week of November small convoys of lorries to Baramula from Peshawar with the mission of trying to find out what was happening and, if possible, rescuing any stranded British residents. The Pakistan Army, too, despatched patrols along this route with the same objective (but with great care not to get involved in any conflict with the Indians). A surprising number of individuals, including Sydney Smith of the Daily Express, as we have already seen, were picked up by such Pakistani parties and evacuated by way of Kohala and Abbottabad

The 1948 Kashmir war was definitely a draw, the 1965 war ended basically in stalemate, though there Rann of Kutch and some others were victories. The 1971 war you could say was a defeat for Pakistan, but only because the East Pakistani Airforce deserted, as well as troops, leaving 30,000 ill-equipped West Pakistani regulars to fight against the Indian Army of over half a million regulars as well as a couple of million Mukihi Bahini, and Indian Airforce. The Pakistani Army still managed to hold off the Indian Army and Muktihi Bahini till there was the ceasefire agreement.



Edited by TeldeInduz - 07-Aug-2006 at 02:57
Quoo-ray sha quadou sarre.................
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 05:35
The guy should read Sam Marneckshaws own accounts of the whole war.
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 11:55
Originally posted by TeldeInduz

This was on another thread, but it's the same answers, you don't provide any links for what you post, so it's could just be made up.

Amazing stupidity. Mullah/Madarsa behavior is oozing out.  If entire evidence is against you start accusing the other side of lying!

Do you even understand what citing references means? It means you go read the books mentioned. 

I have to say your country/madarsas do a good job at brainwashing people!.

-Digs
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 12:00
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

I don't think that Kargil should be called a war because of the indisputed reasons:
1) The conflict did not spread outside the Kargil region
2) Pakistani Airforce was not used

Irrelevant.  Once your army's ass got kicked pakis just did not have the guts to attack at other places and bring out the air force and face more emabrassment and ridicule.


3) The number of combatants was small

Paki army left more then thousand dead behind. (Source Nawaz Sharif)

4) There wasn't any declearation of war or similar

Nothing new. Pakis love to fight unannounced wars.

In addition, pakistani side is that no pakistani troops other than recon and special forces crossed the LOC. Most of the fighting was between India and Kashmiri militants (which I think is also how it was reported in Aus)

Bullsh*t. Your own ex PM is saying in his book paki troops were involved and were killed in heavy numbers.

In the history of the region, kargil is a minor conflict. If it were a proper war, then the involvement of both sides would've been much greater, just like the 3 wars.

Oh so now you accept 1948 as a war!


Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 12:02
Originally posted by Sparten

The guy should read Sam Marneckshaws own accounts of the whole war.

Have you read the sources provided on Kashmir article I wrote?

-Digs
Back to Top
Omar al Hashim View Drop Down
King
King

Suspended

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5697
  Quote Omar al Hashim Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Aug-2006 at 21:28
(prod)
 
I have to say your country/madarsas do a good job at brainwashing people!.
Which one? England, Australia or Pakistan?
Back to Top
Digvijay View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jul-2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 194
  Quote Digvijay Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Aug-2006 at 10:47
Originally posted by Omar al Hashim

(prod)
 
I have to say your country/madarsas do a good job at brainwashing people!.
Which one? England, Australia or Pakistan?


Does it matter? You guys are just loyal to your religion and not any country and your madarsa mentality is groomed from day one. Look at Telde's behavior. I have provided three books as reference on the topic of Kashmir (one of a Muslim and two by Westerners) and without reading a single one of them he is accusing me of lying.  Is this how learned people behave?

-Digs
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.