dream on. Indian army does not have that capacity. I say this because I read somewhere, and that was not a paksitani source, when the Indian army was on pakistani borders for one year after the parliament attack it was the Indian generals who advised the Indian govt not to attack Pak as they were not ready for it. Now dont ask me for the source, i am sure you can google it and find it.
^^^ I totally agree with you. You are right and I’m wrong!
Just an FYI, Indian Generals are more than happy to attack, just like a 40 years old virgin wants to loose his virginity.
Indian Army General was almost dismissed from service, when he criticised Govt for not taking any action…Defence minister has dismissed Indian Navy Chief before for crossing his line…Can you imagine Pakistani defense minister dismissing Kiyani??? Personally I want to see that Pakistan where people have the power not people with the gun.
It was not during their Parliment attack drama when they did 10 month long chakka dance at the border but during Bombay Taj Hotel drama their Army chief informed their govt that in case of an attack on Pak they may end up losing territory to Pak. I am sure little googlie can come up with plenty…
Glad to see that no amount of global outrage on Pakistan will get rid of the vast capacity of a lot of Pakistanis to diss India with the same ol cliches.
On a serious note… I haven’t seen any Indian officials or major news outlets seriously suggest a similar military operation by the Indian forces. So why so much attention on this no-name news source? Isn’t the title of this thread misleading?
The ideal situation would be for the Indian govt/forces and the Pakistani govt/forces to work TOGETHER against terrorists. Unfortunately there is a significant presence (note - significant does NOT mean majority) of extremist elements within the Pakistani govt and forces which means an efficient joint process against terrorism won’t be successful.
Indian army ‘backed out’ of Pakistan attack
By Siddharth Srivastava
NEW DELHI - Reluctance for battle by an ill-prepared army could have resulted in India not launching an attack on Pakistan in the aftermath of the Pakistan-linked terror attack in the Indian city of Mumbai on November 26 in which nearly 200 people died.
High-level government sources have told Asia Times Online that army commanders impressed on the political leadership in New Delhi that an inadequate and obsolete arsenal at their disposal mitigated against an all-out war.
I don’t think its the political will…under the current Pakistan setup/attitude…its safe to say…if India or some other country give enough $$ to Pakistan… like the US & the West do…they can carry out raids in Pakistan as their right… with the minimum consequences…
So if Indian mothers have started giving birth the real men - why dont India do something about 6 Indians , made hostage by Somalian Pirates since August 02, 2010
strike them - will ya please … if you cant then ask your parliamentarian K.D singh to stop being an arse and pay the money - so these hostages get released …
There are three main reasons that India has not attacked Pakistan in spite of Pakistan’s misadventures in Kargil and Mumbai:
There is fortunately enough common sense amongst Indian leadership that neither of these are worth risking a nuclear confrontation where there are no winners and only losers.
Even if it is somehow limited to a war that only uses conventional weaponry, there is really nothing to be gained by defeating the Pak military. All we’ll be doing is creating another tiger-by-the-tail situation
There are other ways to stop Pakistan from continuing the Kashmir type of incursions
So why would we jump into a war which would be orders of magnitude more difficult than dealing with these misadventures the way we have been?
Pakistan’s nuclear posture has neutralized India’s conventional options for now; limited retaliation would be militarily futile, and more significant conventional retaliation is simply off the table.
As I said before you have a very serious comprehension problem, or is this some kind of hard core obsession and hatred for bad Pakis that you cannot think before your rebuttal? Either way read again and again and if you still don’t get it I have another one from an Indian source… How about that…
Dude… YOUR INDIAN. Half the people in your country couldn’t even read what your wrote!!
The condescending attitude of most Indians is laughable. I mean, do you guys realize you are still a developing country with an Army which is in desperate need of an overhaul? The best excuse for not choosing war would be the fact that a significant number of your people are illiterate and wretchedly poor, and your money spent on your people would far better serve your needs then a War which you are deluded enough to think you can win.
India really is the mouse that roared…
India has never been able to defeat Pakistan in a fair fight, at best you could create a stalemate.
The best way for India to protect its interests is to pursue peace and end the occupation of Kashmir. Its the refusal to resolve core issues that causes India problems. These delusions of ever being able to fight a war to secure said interests is a pipe dream.
As for Kargil. We have every right to intervene in Kashmir, be it Kargil or any where else.
As for Mumbai, Pakistans govt is as responsible for the actions of terrorists as your govt is for the actions of Hindu extremists. The best way for India to prevent such attacks in the future is to quite these delusions, and pursue a peaceful settlement to Kashmir.
@Med911 & mo293: other than spewing generalities, are you disagreeing with any of the three causes I have described? I am really not interested in a name calling debate which you guys do a grand job of amongst yourselves.
Just so you guys are clear of my message - some people here in this thread were writing about India attacking Pakistan. I responded that India has no such interest and gave three reasons. So you guys can stop being paranoid