2019 India-Pakistani border clash

PhilFYW said:

@maint1234

Also, although sources of opposing prospectives are difficult to take in due to their opposing nature, it would be good to still look through it to take in some different perspectives that would help you make a better judgement of the situation. If the sources are biased and possess an agenda, it should be easily determinable based on the language, logic and use of evidence. If you find these sources biased or was placed to suit an agenda, you could list down the evidence and we could have a more intellectual debate on the bias and reliability of the source which would frankly be a better argument compared to your statement which is not very convincing.

Click to expand...

And that source presented was an Indian defence analyst, former Army officer and author: Praveen Sawhney. Google him. Before starting his own defense magazine, he was the South Asian correspondent for Jane's International Defence Review. So this source is far from trivial.

PhilFYW said:

Guys, please calm down.
We all know this is a controversial issue, and no need to get testy over it.

@maint1234,

For your argument, I mainly see 2 main premises:

1. Pakistan was successfully bombed with malicious intent. (evidence: Pakistan government did not give immediate access of the balakot madrassa)
2. Pakistan did not retaliate with the same intensity. (evidence: Pakistan "deliberately " missed Indian army posts in retaliation.)

Such leads to your conclusion that Pakistan is unable and possibly afraid to retaliate.

As others pointed out, premise 1 does not stand due to the variety of reasons that could have led to the late access to balakot madrassa, so you argued that
3. Successful or not, Pakistan was bombed with malicious intent.
so together with premise 2 your argument still stands.

I would like to refute your premise 3.

Although Pakistan was bombed, it was highly likely that the bombing run was not successful, and India suffered a huge embarrassment (loss of a Mig 21 and a Mi 17). Keep in mind that it was close to the elections, and should Pakistan organise a successful retaliation, it would lead to poorer popularity of the current ruling party and may lead to unnecessary escalation. As such Pakistan has plenty of reason to "deliberately" miss. Not that your premise 3 must be wrong, but that it was not a convincing one since there are other explanations and without further information, it is hard to make that sort of assumptions.

Feel free to disagree or clarify anything you felt that was illogical or misrepresented.

Click to expand...

"PHIL" huge embarrassment ? Haha..
90000 Pakistani soldiers surrendering in 13 days in 1971 and Pakistan losing half their country is a huge embarrassment.
No wait you are right, that's not a huge embarrassment but a huge humiliation.
The cards were with Pakistan establishment and they could have just opened the madrassa to scrutiny.
And this BS of India missing but Pakistan being nice and deliberately missing is so laughable, that it transcends reality. Maybe they could have been nicer and not fired scores of mraams at our fighter jets ?
And why I didn't see the video is because as I have written before, let's refer to official statements only. Media and YouTube is a deep dark hole.

Mohsin77 said:

And that source presented was an Indian defence analyst, former Army officer and author: Praveen Sawhney. Google him. Before starting his own defense magazine, he was the South Asian correspondent for Jane's International Defence Review. So this source is far from trivial.

Click to expand...

So why have faith in only one Indian analyst who supports your viewpoint, you should trust all our ex army guys. Do you ? For the record I don't trust anything your ispr propaganda chief says. He is like our clueless politicians, who we have no faith in.

Bro I wish you can see yourself from the outside. Go back to PDF or DFI, the rest of us still retain our logic since it’s not our war.

maint1234 said:

So why have faith in only one Indian analyst who supports your viewpoint

Click to expand...

You're not getting it. It's about whose argument lines up with the facts. Yours does not. His does. Period. And people here have provided a ton of other credible sources besides that one.

Anyways, I'm done with you. Have fun running in circles.

@maint1234,
Brother, your arguments are light on evidentiary facts and you are looking at things through a highly biased lens. I say this as someone who is relatively objective. I'm neither Indian, Chinese nor Pakistani. I also have no skin the the game in regards to preference of one over the other however your posts and conjectures are frankly quite infantile.
There are certain irrefutable facts but many conjectures regarding this case. Examine the facts and facts only and hopefully you will realized your conjectures doesn't hold much water.
Your hard focus on Pakistan delaying site exploration or initial reports of them claiming 2 pilots when it was just 1 captured (which they have officially amended) etc. while FACTUAL does NOT alter nor change anything substantial to your incessant claims.
Aside from all that, the Trump admin is trying to shore up relations with India as a counter to China's expansion and have had relatively cold relations with Pakistan. IF for even a single hot second there are evidences pointing to Pakistan breaking any regulations or doing anything less than kosher, I promise you they would be joining ranks with India and jumping down Pakistan's throat. That did NOT happened.
Sometimes what is not said or done speaks volumes.

kwaigonegin said:

@maint1234,
Brother, your arguments are light on evidentiary facts and you are looking at things through a highly biased lens. I say this as someone who is relatively objective. I'm neither Indian, Chinese nor Pakistani. I also have no skin the the game in regards to preference of one over the other however your posts and conjectures are frankly quite infantile.
There are certain irrefutable facts but many conjectures regarding this case. Examine the facts and facts only and hopefully you will realized your conjectures doesn't hold much water.
Your hard focus on Pakistan delaying site exploration or initial reports of them claiming 2 pilots when it was just 1 captured (which they have officially amended) etc. while FACTUAL does NOT alter nor change anything substantial to your incessant claims.
Aside from all that, the Trump admin is trying to shore up relations with India as a counter to China's expansion and have had relatively cold relations with Pakistan. IF for even a single hot second there are evidences pointing to Pakistan breaking any regulations or doing anything less than kosher, I promise you they would be joining ranks with India and jumping down Pakistan's throat. That did NOT happened.
Sometimes what is not said or done speaks volumes.

Click to expand...

What is the whole incident about ?
Crux is that for the first time in 50 years india used air power to bomb mainland Pakistan. To try to sideline this as unimportant is Questionable.
Deterrence for future Pakistan origin terrorist attacks is the core of this incident.
Media and esp social media is now so polarised that I don't want to refer to them at all. I am sure their are ppl on this forum who believe with all their heart that 9/11 was a US/Israeli conspiracy and bin laden was never shot in Pakistan. After all for a decade Pakistan claimed that bin laden was never in Pakistan.
That's the only reason I try to find holes in official statements and behaviour. See the ispr generals first presser. He says that due to bad weather access to balakot is not possible today but in a few days access will be granted. Then why close the madrassa for 20 days and grant access after 40 days for only 20 minutes. These are irrefutable facts. The terrorist angle is overblown. A place can be cleared of terrorist infra in a few days. Its not as if terrorists have grouted heavy machinery in that remote place. What was being hidden from reuters and other news agencies ?
And if I go by irrefutable standards, where is the evidence that even the mig21 was shot down by any pak jets ?? Maybe it was a ground to air missile. Or even the mig had a malfunction as were the initial reports.
And its nice of you to be "relatively objective" . Which country do you claim to be from ?
These attacks were not in isolation a bombing run or a mig21 down. Google the Pakistani support for terrorism in India from the 80s. And India's inaction till now.

kwaigonegin said:

Aside from all that, the Trump admin is trying to shore up relations with India as a counter to China's expansion and have had relatively cold relations with Pakistan. IF for even a single hot second there are evidences pointing to Pakistan breaking any regulations or doing anything less than kosher, I promise you they would be joining ranks with India and jumping down Pakistan's throat. That did NOT happened.
Sometimes what is not said or done speaks volumes.

Click to expand...

Suffice to say that US/India /Pakistan know that the f16 were bought for attacking India, which is not a issue. Also US desperately requires Pakistani help in Afghanistan.
IAF showed the amraams to nail another ispr lie that no f16s were used, which was accepted by ispr after 3 weeks. See a trend here.?

maint1234 said:

What is the whole incident about ?
Crux is that for the first time in 50 years india used air power to bomb mainland Pakistan. To try to sideline this as unimportant is Questionable.
Deterrence for future Pakistan origin terrorist attacks is the core of this incident.

Click to expand...

You are very bad at catching the point. The whole incident is about India thinking it could attack Pakistan and be impervious to retaliation and Pakistan sent a clear message in humiliation to the IAF that that was not possible. The deterrence is for India to keep its junk on its side of the line unless it wants more shoot-downs.

There is no evidence at all that any anti-terrorism is involved because India bombed an empty lot and then it claimed to kill 300 people with absolutely nothing to show for it, by satellite or any other means. Anti-terrorism is not relevant to this conversation.

manqiangrexue said:

You are very bad at catching the point. The whole incident is about India thinking it could attack Pakistan and be impervious to retaliation and Pakistan sent a clear message in humiliation to the IAF that that was not possible. The deterrence is for India to keep its junk on its side of the line unless it wants more shoot-downs.

There is no evidence at all that any anti-terrorism is involved because India bombed an empty lot and then it claimed to kill 300 people with absolutely nothing to show for it, by satellite or any other means. Anti-terrorism is not relevant to this conversation.

Click to expand...

I know you have to defend your friends but how do you explain the Pakistani minister's last week panicked call to the P5 members and even dates for future Indian attack ? He obviously believes India is not fettered in further attacks.
A paradigm shift has taken place whether you like it or accept it or not.
India has never claimed to be impervious to attacks, its just defending itself against terrorism emitting from pakistan.
And Pakistan had the perfect opportunity to prove the empty lot theory but dropped the ball by blocking access to the balakot madrassa.