It is obvious to even a layperson (other then complete retarded) that Pakistan gave a good stick to India in Kargil war and if it were not for Nawaz Shareef, map of Kashmir would have been different.
If one reads western newspapers of the time (Kargil war and after-war), even British newspaper of the time when Musharraf took over Pakistan (October 1999), one can read a lot about what happened in Kargil and how Indian suffered huge casualties without achieving anything until Nawaz Shareef came to Indian rescue just to please USA. Well, many newspapers wrote that, Pakistan won Kargil war on the ground but lost on the table.
** Regardless, a very important ground reality followed Kargil war, is evidence itself (for people with little intelligence and not complete retard) about what happened during Kargil war.**
Before Kargil war, Nawaz Shareef was a very strong politician in Pakistan, got away with everything. He sacked President, Chief justice and even Chief of army staff without anyone daring to challenge him. He was the only prime minister ever in Pakistan that had over two-third majority in Pakistan parliament and was thinking to become ameer-ul-momeneen with absolute power [before Nawaz, it was only Z A Bhutto that had simple majority but no one ever had two third majority, that is needed to change the constitution]. He had full cooperation of Pakistan army and had huge popularity and absolute control over Punjab (that matters a lot in Pakistan politics as well as army).
No army chief could have challenged him (not even someone from Punjab, like Jahangir Karamat) and Musharraf with his minority province background was least person that could have challenged him even while he was army chief.
** What really happened in Kargil can be anyone’s guess looking at the after event, that made a big proportion of army not only loyal to Musharraf and against Nawaz, but army loyalty to Musharraf became so unquestioned that it did not mattered if he was army chief or not.**
We should remember that when army acted on behalf of Musharraf in October 1999, Musharraf was officially not army chief, as Nawaz (however improperly) sacked him and thus in theory Musharraf was no more army chief, something army did not recognised.
Regardless, the event shows how popular Musharraf became in the army after Kargil and how villain Nawaz became in Pakistan army after Kargil. Even people of Pakistan know a lot about Kargil and villain character Nawaz played, that showed from the way people of Pakistan reacted when Nawaz was kicked out of power by army on behalf of Musharraf.** Obviously, for such change of fortune amongst army and amongst people of Pakistan, something special must have happened in Kargil that army also knows as well as most Pakistanis (whatever the propaganda by Indians, Pakistani politicians and west).**
The event along with villainous role played by politicians was such that Pakistani politicians became so scared that even they started doing propaganda against army and Kargil war.
**Note: 1999 coup was something special in history of coup. Musharraf was a sacked army chief (Nawaz has sacked him), and was not even in the country. Army could have easily kept quite and could have stayed aloof, but why not? The answer is obvious, that was: **
‘Hero of Kargil (aka Pervaiz Musharraf)’, a brilliant thinking general, intelligent and brave, one that gave army a precious victory in Kargil and showed Indian forces the gutter they belong, was sacked by the ‘villain of Kargil (aka Nawaz Shareef)’. This action of Nawaz, that turned a victory on ground into defeat on table and caused lot of army casualties by asking them to retreat, just to make USA happy (and to get few dollars in his foreign account), was too much for the army to accept.
Now, any person (other then complete retard) would realise that if Pakistan had lost Kargil war and Nawaz had saved them, army would have never acted on behalf of Musharraf against Nawaz and people of Pakistan would not have been happy by sacking of Nawaz and President Musharraf taking over Power in Pakistan.
Even if Kargil war was stalemate and Pakistan did not gave a big stick to Indian forces and won it, army would not have taken such step to kick the prime minister (that was one of the most popular prime minister ever in the army and Pakistan) on behalf of an army chief who was on paper sacked. Actually, IF Musharraf had lost the Kargil war and Nawaz saved them, army would have been happier to see Musharraf back and would have been more indebted to Nawaz.
**Thus, ground reality speaks itself for any one with little intelligence but retarded would still say ‘may na manu’ 
**If anyone that think they are not retarded and still wants to question my analysis, than give a logical answer to counter what I wrote, that is:
Why army would side with a sacked general if that general led them to a loosing war, against a prime minister if that prime minister really gave them face saving retreat?
Why no Pakistani came out on the road for the most popular prime minister ever (even in his own constituency Lahore) against a general that was unknown other then of kargil episode, if Kargil was lost war?
How Kargil made Musharraf popular and Nawaz villain in the eyes of Pakistanis (army and people alike) even though political government of Pakistan wanted things differently by doing propaganda against army, Musharraf and Kargil war (if Kargil war was a loosing war for Pakistan)?
And many more facts I raised above, etc, etc .. read the post again
What I know, I never said what you are accusing me of saying.