pak troops cross LoC, kill 2 Indian jawans brutally (decapitated)

[CSK Fan]

There are plenty of options between total capitulation and full blown nuclear war. But if we are gonna totally surrender, I would like to give Pakis our PSLV technology. Why you ask? So that they can build ICBMs of their own. And then Pakistan becomes the world's problem and not just India's. Hopefully, then Amreekis and its poodles will stop funding that shithole.

When someone's hatred for something becomes so big that they are ready to destroy themselves in order to bring harm to the enemy, its time to have a long hard look at oneself

[punjabi_khota]

There are plenty of options between total capitulation and full blown nuclear war. But if we are gonna totally surrender, I would like to give Pakis our PSLV technology. Why you ask? So that they can build ICBMs of their own. And then Pakistan becomes the world's problem and not just India's. Hopefully, then Amreekis and its poodles will stop funding that shithole.

Thinking like a Canadian ...letting US do the work :hysterical:

[surajmal]

When someone's hatred for something becomes so big that they are ready to destroy themselves in order to bring harm to the enemy' date=' its time to have a long hard look at oneself[/quote'] I suppose you don't have family members or relatives who have/had served (and died) due to a long line of gandhian douchebags who force the army to fight with both arms tied behind their back? We must be ready to dare all for our country. For history does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. We must acquire proficiency in defense and display stamina in purpose. We must be willing, individually and as a Nation, to accept whatever sacrifices may be required of us. A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. These basic precepts are not lofty abstractions, far removed from matters of daily living. They are laws of spiritual strength that generate and define our material strength. Patriotism means equipped forces and a prepared citizenry. Moral stamina means more energy and more productivity, on the farm and in the factory. Love of liberty means the guarding of every resource that makes freedom possible--from the sanctity of our families and the wealth of our soil to the genius of our scientists. Dwight Eisenhower

[surajmal]

Thinking like a Canadian ...letting US do the work :hysterical:

It'll give them a real enemy for the first time to fight in 60 years and make good use of their 800 billion dollar yearly budget. That is unless they are tired of bullying around 2 bit warlords.

[KeyboardWarrior]

:hysterical:

[Muloghonto]

There are plenty of options between total capitulation and full blown nuclear war. But if we are gonna totally surrender, I would like to give Pakis our PSLV technology. Why you ask? So that they can build ICBMs of their own. And then Pakistan becomes the world's problem and not just India's. Hopefully, then Amreekis and its poodles will stop funding that shithole.

Who said anything about total surrender ? What part of 'exploit your enemy to make 10x more money than he does' sounds like surrender to you ?! :omg: You havn;t answered my question- what would you do with your enemy when fighting him is not an option ? Close your eyes and hope he goes away ? never talk to him ever again ? Or involve him in a scheme that nets you 10x more capital than your enemy ?

[Muloghonto]

I suppose you don't have family members or relatives who have/had served (and died) due to a long line of gandhian douchebags who force the army to fight with both arms tied behind their back? We must be ready to dare all for our country. For history does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. We must acquire proficiency in defense and display stamina in purpose. We must be willing, individually and as a Nation, to accept whatever sacrifices may be required of us. A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both. These basic precepts are not lofty abstractions, far removed from matters of daily living. They are laws of spiritual strength that generate and define our material strength. Patriotism means equipped forces and a prepared citizenry. Moral stamina means more energy and more productivity, on the farm and in the factory. Love of liberty means the guarding of every resource that makes freedom possible--from the sanctity of our families and the wealth of our soil to the genius of our scientists. Dwight Eisenhower

How many nukes did Eisenhower launch against Russia ? None ? Ok koi baat nahi. You will say 'there is a gulf of options between total surrender and nuclear holocaust'. So how many Ruskie soldier did the yanks kill under Eisenhower's regime ? How many fishing skiffs did they screw over ? Also none ? So you see my friend, while pussilanimous vacillations and bombasticity might make good soundbytes, when cooler and logical head prevails, we see it as nothing more than empty talk. Behind all your facade of patriotism, hatred of the enemy, etc. i am yet to see a SINGLE proposal from you that is not from the nonsensical 'lets get ourselves, our children & their children all killed and irradiated due to a false notion of patriotism' pile of nonsense. So what would you like to do ? You can't attack them, not even Amreeka can attack them in full frontal military assault and we know why- BECAUSE YOU DO NOT ATTACK DECLARED NUCLEAR NATIONS!!! My idea, is to exploit your enemy when the option to eliminate him does not exist. What is your idea ? to not interact with them ? Kindly enlighten us, with cold hard logic (and not bombastic nonsense that you are prone to quoting), why is ignoring interacting your enemy a better option than exploiting your enemy. As far as i am concerned, my idea ( to play Pakistan in cricket, kabaddi, badminton and whatever) is more patriotic than yours- through my idea, my nation (a select few only, but still,they are a part of my motherland) profits by exploiting the enemy. By your ideas, we say a whole bunch of high-falutan chest-thumping and ego-boosting soundbytes but we gain or lose nothing from our enemy.

[KeyboardWarrior]

How many nukes did Eisenhower launch against Russia ? None ? Ok koi baat nahi. You will say 'there is a gulf of options between total surrender and nuclear holocaust'. So how many Ruskie soldier did the yanks kill under Eisenhower's regime ? How many fishing skiffs did they screw over ? Also none ? So you see my friend, while pussilanimous vacillations and bombasticity might make good soundbytes, when cooler and logical head prevails, we see it as nothing more than empty talk. Behind all your facade of patriotism, hatred of the enemy, etc. i am yet to see a SINGLE proposal from you that is not from the nonsensical 'lets get ourselves, our children & their children all killed and irradiated due to a false notion of patriotism' pile of nonsense. So what would you like to do ? You can't attack them, not even Amreeka can attack them in full frontal military assault and we know why- BECAUSE YOU DO NOT ATTACK DECLARED NUCLEAR NATIONS!!! My idea, is to exploit your enemy when the option to eliminate him does not exist. What is your idea ? to not interact with them ? Kindly enlighten us, with cold hard logic (and not bombastic nonsense that you are prone to quoting), why is ignoring interacting your enemy a better option than exploiting your enemy. As far as i am concerned, my idea ( to play Pakistan in cricket, kabaddi, badminton and whatever) is more patriotic than yours- through my idea, my nation (a select few only, but still,they are a part of my motherland) profits by exploiting the enemy. By your ideas, we say a whole bunch of high-falutan chest-thumping and ego-boosting soundbytes but we gain or lose nothing from our enemy.

why indian friends dont understand THIS :idunno:

[jairamesh]

Thinking like a Canadian ...letting US do the work :hysterical:

I second this. Hopefully Pakistani and Cuba become bestest of friends and Paki generals install nuclear missiles in Cuba. India only needs to encourage Paki-Cuba freindship. Play Iago.

[surajmal]

Who said anything about total surrender ? What part of 'exploit your enemy to make 10x more money than he does' sounds like surrender to you ?! :omg: You havn;t answered my question- what would you do with your enemy when fighting him is not an option ? Close your eyes and hope he goes away ? never talk to him ever again ? Or involve him in a scheme that nets you 10x more capital than your enemy ?

But if we are gonna totally surrender, I would like to give Pakis our PSLV technology. Why you ask? So that they can build ICBMs of their own. And then Pakistan becomes the world's problem and not just India's. Hopefully, then Amreekis and its poodles will stop funding that shithole.

[surajmal]

How many nukes did Eisenhower launch against Russia ? None ? Ok koi baat nahi. You will say 'there is a gulf of options between total surrender and nuclear holocaust'. So how many Ruskie soldier did the yanks kill under Eisenhower's regime ? How many fishing skiffs did they screw over ? Also none ?

How many American citizens and soldiers did Russia kill directly? And who the **** is talking about launching nukes?! And comparing Cold War to Indo-Pak Conflict? Here I thought we are going to have an intelligent discussion. (yes Eisenhower statement was in the backdrop of Cold War but that statement is applicable generally as well).

My idea, is to exploit your enemy when the option to eliminate him does not exist. What is your idea ? to not interact with them ?

Stick to reading novels.

Kindly enlighten us, with cold hard logic (and not bombastic nonsense that you are prone to quoting), why is ignoring interacting your enemy a better option than exploiting your enemy.

Because you don't have the resources to exploit them when the big powers of the world do **** that is counter productive to your supposed "plan".

As far as i am concerned, my idea ( to play Pakistan in cricket, kabaddi, badminton and whatever) is more patriotic than yours- through my idea, my nation (a select few only, but still,they are a part of my motherland) profits by exploiting the enemy. By your ideas, we say a whole bunch of high-falutan chest-thumping and ego-boosting soundbytes but we gain or lose nothing from our enemy.

Making couple of millions here and couple of millions there is your response to them killing indian citizens and soldiers? Nice one chewtiya.

[Muloghonto]

How many American citizens and soldiers did Russia kill directly? And who the **** is talking about launching nukes?! And comparing Cold War to Indo-Pak Conflict? Here I thought we are going to have an intelligent discussion. (yes Eisenhower statement was in the backdrop of Cold War but that statement is applicable generally as well).

I am trying to have one and so far you've been a disappointment. You have not explained why your idea of boycott is a logically better idea than mine, which is to exploit your enemies.

Stick to reading novels.

I am not the one waxing poetic with Eisenhower quotes and movie chest-thumping nonsense. C'mon. Lets see the logic in your position.

Because you don't have the resources to exploit them when the big powers of the world do **** that is counter productive to your supposed "plan".

Sure we do. We play cricket with them. We make billions, they make millions. Our position improves exponentially relative to our enemies. Any questions ?

Making couple of millions here and couple of millions there is your response to them killing indian citizens and soldiers? Nice one chewtiya.

I would rather make a few millions off of my enemies than sit here talking about a whole load of BS that actually accomplishes nothing. You don't have a plan, i do- which is to exploit the hell out of them. Heck, we should negotiate with them so PAK cricket team can play its home games in India and pocket 90% of the fee. Plus the television rights. My compatriots make trillions, my enemies make peanuts. So mr high-horse, can we have a tangiable idea from you that improves India's position vis-a-vis Pakistan that does not involve direct warmongering against a declared nuclear power ? ; which IMO, puts you straight into the idiotic nutter camp for even contemplating such an idea.

[Vijay.Sharma]

I am trying to have one and so far you've been a disappointment. You have not explained why your idea of boycott is a logically better idea than mine, which is to exploit your enemies. I am not the one waxing poetic with Eisenhower quotes and movie chest-thumping nonsense. C'mon. Lets see the logic in your position. Sure we do. We play cricket with them. We make billions, they make millions. Our position improves exponentially relative to our enemies. Any questions ? I would rather make a few millions off of my enemies than sit here talking about a whole load of BS that actually accomplishes nothing. You don't have a plan, i do- which is to exploit the hell out of them. Heck, we should negotiate with them so PAK cricket team can play its home games in India and pocket 90% of the fee. Plus the television rights. My compatriots make trillions, my enemies make peanuts. So mr high-horse, can we have a tangiable idea from you that improves India's position vis-a-vis Pakistan that does not involve direct warmongering against a declared nuclear power ? ; which IMO, puts you straight into the idiotic nutter camp for even contemplating such an idea.

Your plan seems well thought out and you may have good reasons for it. However, the more important question is why do you want to make money off them when you can make the same money playing with Aus or Eng or SA? Why do you want to give them the opportunity to make a million even given we make a billion? We can make that billion without them...we don't need them to make our money. That is the whole point. India does not need Pakistan for becoming rich so why go out of the way to allow them an opportunity to make even a pittance from us (even though we might earn a great deal - understand that earning this great deal of money does not need Pakistan as a necessary criteria)

[Clarke]

There are plenty of options between total capitulation and full blown nuclear war. But if we are gonna totally surrender, I would like to give Pakis our PSLV technology. Why you ask? So that they can build ICBMs of their own. And then Pakistan becomes the world's problem and not just India's. Hopefully, then Amreekis and its poodles will stop funding that shithole.

That could translate into additional aid to keep them quiet and attempt to bring stability, like it did with nukes. I'm not sure you'd like that.

[Muloghonto]

Your plan seems well thought out and you may have good reasons for it. However, the more important question is why do you want to make money off them when you can make the same money playing with Aus or Eng or SA? Why do you want to give them the opportunity to make a million even given we make a billion? We can make that billion without them...we don't need them to make our money. That is the whole point. India does not need Pakistan for becoming rich so why go out of the way to allow them an opportunity to make even a pittance from us (even though we might earn a great deal - understand that earning this great deal of money does not need Pakistan as a necessary criteria)

1. India-Pakistan generates more television viewership than any other non world-cup matches, so there is a greater incentive to host India-Pakistan 2. In the years where we are 'supposed to' host or visit Pakistan according to the FTP, we are left with few tests. Eg: 2013. We are 'supposed to' play Pak according to the FTP, which would've given us 10 tests for the year- a healthy number. Now that we don't play PAK, we are playing 4 tests vs AUS and 3 vs RSA and thats it. 7 tests in a non-world cup year or build-up year is unacceptable. Therefore, if we take it upon ourselves to host PAK during the FTP slots for India-Pakistan, not only would we be exploiting our enemy, we'd not be going through 'boom and bust' seasons of test cricket, where one year we play 12, next year we play 6. 3. If we offer to host ALL Pakistan home engagements,until a time when other teams are comfortable to visit Pakistan (which IMO is still a couple of years away), then it equates to billions of dollars revenue generated for us ( for surely, if we host it for them, we'd pocket atleast 80% of the revenues generated and the 20% we generate for them is probably greater than what PCB can generate in the first place), the PAK players interacting a lot more with the Ranji/ net practice level players and with 15 more players of test callibre hanging around the grounds and facilities in India clearly would aid our cricketing culture. PS: Thank you for being the first one on this thread to approach my idea with a calm, logical and clinical mindset.

[KeyboardWarrior]

There are plenty of options between total capitulation and full blown nuclear war. But if we are gonna totally surrender, I would like to give Pakis our PSLV technology. Why you ask? So that they can build ICBMs of their own. And then Pakistan becomes the world's problem and not just India's. Hopefully, then Amreekis and its poodles will stop funding that shithole.

Who knows we already have ICBMs :dontknow: becoz indian govt didnt know before that we have Cruise Missiles too :hysterical:

[panther]

The beheading of an Indian soldier on the LoC and the mutilation of another were undoubtedly unacceptable and unpardonable. This was barbaric behaviour. The anger and revulsion it’s provoked is understandable. There’s no denying that. However, there’s one question we need to ask but mainly failed to raise. Have we ever been guilty of similar behaviour ourselves? From what I can tell the answer seems to be yes. On the 10th, The Hindu reported that last year, during a skirmish at Karnah, “Indian Special Forces responded by attacking a Pakistani forward post, killing several soldiers, and by the account of one military official which The Hindu could not corroborate independently, beheaded two.” What makes this claim credible is that it’s reported by military sources who not only ought to know but would not denigrate the reputation of Indian soldiers. Alas, there’s more evidence. This time from eye-witnesses. In her ‘Confessions of a War Reporter’, published in June 2001 by Himal, a well-known Nepalese magazine, Barkha Dutt recounted how she witnessed a decapitated Pakistani soldier’s head at Kargil. This is what she wrote: “I had to look three times to make sure I was seeing right … “Look again,” said the army colonel, in a tone that betrayed suppressed excitement. This time, I finally saw. It was a head, the disembodied face of a slain soldier nailed onto a tree. “The boys got it as a gift for the brigade,” said the colonel, softly, but proudly.” Harinder Baweja, the editor (Investigation) of this paper, witnessed something similar. This is the account from her book A Soldier’s Diary, Kargil — The Inside Story: “The experiences of 18 Garhwal show another side of the war … one of them took out his knife and slit the head of a Pakistani soldier in one stroke. The head was sent to Brigade Headquarters at Drass and pinned to a tree trunk … the enemy head, a grisly trophy, became an exhibition piece. Major General Puri came down from Mughalpura to see it. Other officers dropped in to Brigade Headquarters to take a look. So did some journalists … it was there pinned on the tree for anyone who could bear to look at it.” So is this proof that Indian soldiers, both in the recent past and during Kargil, have done to Pakistanis what they did to our jawans last week? The Hindu report is clearly not proof. On the other hand, what Barkha and Harinder saw seems like it. They are eye-witnesses. They’re highly regarded journalists. They have a reputation for telling the truth. More importantly, they have no reason to lie. However, my intention is not to establish moral equivalence between Indian and Pakistani soldiers, although some might come to that conclusion. It’s to ask why did the media, other than The Hindu, not point this out? You can’t argue it was irrelevant information. More importantly, it would have put a different complexion on the decapitation of our soldiers. And, certainly, it would have tempered the furious discussions on television. As journalists we owe our audience not just the truth but both sides of it when that’s pertinent. To not be evenhanded is to leave them half-informed. In this instance, we whipped up passions when we should have helped audiences realise the LoC is a tough place, where brutal actions often happen and both sides retaliate in equally gruesome ways. When tempers cool and time lends perspective, our audience won’t forgive us for half-truths.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/KaranThapar/The-lines-of-control/Article1-995289.aspx

[Muloghonto]

Beheading enemies at time of war on native soil cannot and never can be compared with beheading enemies on foreign soil in a state of peace. As usual, Pakistanis miss the point/shift goalposts to obfuscate the issue. As such, we have examples of wartime conduct with peacetime conduct, which Pakistanis cannot seem to differentiate between.

[jairamesh]

http://www.hindustantimes.com/News-Feed/KaranThapar/The-lines-of-control/Article1-995289.aspx

Okay, even IF it happened, it was during a state of war between two nations. Worse things have happened during war. Ask your paki soldiers about 1971, responsible for one of the worst crimes against humanity by a foreign army in modern times. What the Paki soldiers did last week was not under the pretext of war.

[panther]

The first paragraph does not indicate a time of peace. either way no one has seen the Indian soldier head or the Pakistanis, all speculation, except the Indian media gave it significant coverage.