Jump to content

Operation sindoor

Trichromatic

By Trichromatic
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

gattaca Grand Master

gattaca

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

Is India to Russia what Pakistan to China is? 

India could have trusted Soviet Union though, but Putin ... 

 

 

 

lol no wonder Pakistanis can be easy fooled. He is not in any position in govt. he is victor gao. He is Chinese lawyer. 

Alam_dar Community Regular

Alam_dar

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, gattaca said:

If Pakistan keeps killing innocents and expect  water that cannot happen. In 70 years they have sent terrorists and multiple wars with India. They should have stopped after first war but we didn’t and thought Pakistan would change. They should not send water at all because we can’t trust Pakistan 

 

I hope you realise it clearly that this argument is not going to win hearts or minds in Pakistan. In fact, Pakistan is already using this very narrative on international platforms — portraying India’s stance as collective punishment. And based on current trends, they might gain some traction.

On the ground, the consequences are visible: people cheering for the army in the streets, and, more dangerously, clerics openly chanting for Ghazwa-e-Hind while figures like Hafiz Saeed and Masood Azhar are being glorified as national heroes.

So, I find myself asking: was it really wise to link the Indus Waters Treaty to terrorism? I don’t have a clear answer. Maybe only time will tell.

 

Thus, I have asked this question to myself, if it was a wise move to link IWT to terrorism? I don't know. Only the time will tell. 

 

 

 

 

 

G_B_ Grand Master

G_B_

Posted
Posted

I think if it ends here, militarily 

 

(a) The Air defence systems of India have done really well. If there is one aspect which India has a huge edge over Pakistan is that its air defence. Pakistan are sitting ducks.

(b) Drones have been deployed effectively. 

(c) Artillery remains robust. More to be added.

(d) The Su30 seems to have given itself a very good account. Remember this was the jet with the most issues in 2019. Has been deployed to its strengths. Avoided the PL-15

(e) Punjab and Lahore are in play. I am glad that this is not limited to JnK.

 

Negatives

(a) The general lack of air dominance. If it turns out that Rafales and few more jets shot down and out-ranged by the PL15 then this raises a serious issue. Meteor has a longer no escape z.one, but PL15 capitalised on the fact that it had longer range. BVR continues to be a struggle. Especially if you cannot attack effectively with a Rafale then its a bit blunt and you need to have other missile based approaches.

(b) The navy IMO should have come to the party. You want to stretch Pakistan. Why not a sphere with the most delta? Why is Karachi port not choked off?

G_B_ Grand Master

G_B_

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Alam_dar said:

 

I hope you realise it clearly that this argument is not going to win hearts or minds in Pakistan. In fact, Pakistan is already using this very narrative on international platforms — portraying India’s stance as collective punishment. And based on current trends, they might gain some traction.

On the ground, the consequences are visible: people cheering for the army in the streets, and, more dangerously, clerics openly chanting for Ghazwa-e-Hind while figures like Hafiz Saeed and Masood Azhar are being glorified as national heroes.

So, I find myself asking: was it really wise to link the Indus Waters Treaty to terrorism? I don’t have a clear answer. Maybe only time will tell.

 

Thus, I have asked this question to myself, if it was a wise move to link IWT to terrorism? I don't know. Only the time will tell. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

blunt truth, most powers (barring china) want a trading relationship with India. Even if they agree with the stance internally, wont really do much about it.

coffee_rules Grand Master

coffee_rules

Posted
Posted
7 minutes ago, Austin 3:!6 said:

Are we not going to take revenge of yesterdays attack? They are coming and hitting us and we seem to be doing nothing

That's what hopefully the high level meeting was for , today. We need a 2 lbs for 1 lbs of defense. You kill 1, we will kill 2 in return until you stop. The retailiation should be doubled.

Alam_dar Community Regular

Alam_dar

Posted
Posted
10 minutes ago, putrevus said:

India and Indians in general don't think like that, if they thought like that, they would have done lot of things to crush Pakistan in 1971 itself.

 

The current perception, however, is quite different. For decades, the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) wasn’t seen as an issue, until the BJP came to power. Since then, the BJP has been challenging the treaty, claiming that Pakistan is siphoning off India’s water unfairly. Now, many believe the terrorism angle was introduced as a pretext to dismantle the treaty altogether.

 

 

10 minutes ago, putrevus said:

This is the narrative your army has been propagating since 1947 to mislead Pakistanis to justify their existence.

 

This narrative is working for them. And the real question is: what’s the counter-narrative to win hearts and minds in Pakistan?

You could argue that India doesn’t need to win hearts in Pakistan, but only to overpower and crush them. But that approach has its consequences. It strengthens radical elements, fuels anti-India rhetoric, and ultimately plays into the hands of exactly those forces we hope to weaken.

 

Previously, there are many people in Pakistan who are against terrorists like Azhar Masood and Hafiz Saeed, and want Pakistani State to end their activities. For example, Baraivis and Shias and all other minorities and secularists and many more (while these terrorist outfits are Wahabi). 

 

However, it is linking to IWT that no opposition is being seen at this time, and all seems to be angry with this decision. 

 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...