Siachen News & Discussion

rohitvats · Post by **rohitvats** » 21 May 2012 22:52

^^^OK. Baltistan area of the Northern Areas.

How about "Baltistan War"...after all, PA fears that we may roll down Bilafond La and threaten Skardu.

Yayavar · Post by **Yayavar** » 21 May 2012 23:04

rohitvats wrote:
johneeG wrote:An analogy on the Siachen De-militarization:
WKKs: Put your hands in fire.
Bharat: But why?
WKKs: Why not?
Bharat: Because my hands would burn.
WKKs: No. This time, the conditions have changed. Your hands will not burn. So, go ahead and put your hands in fire.
Bharat: What if they burn?
WKKs: No problem. The medicine is advanced these days. You can go to any hospital and they will cure you easily. So, go ahead and put your hands in fire.
Bharat: But, why take the risk?
WKKs: You misunderstood the concept...
EXCELLENT....Sau baat ki ek baat!!!

Also, the moment the economic argument is put first, it implies more of economic argument later when 'punishment' is to be enforced. The retribution phase will just not happen.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 21 May 2012 23:37

Excellent analogy JohneeG. I couldn't have put it any better. The retired brig has either gone senile or is simply a traitor who needs to be taken care off. Most of his arguments for demilitarization are bogus. US looked the other way when China supplied nukes and missile to porkis. Why would India trust them to enforce pakis keep their side of the bargain?
If anything India should put a pre condition that porkis will vacate POK. Entire POK including gilgit baltistan.Anyway its porki economy that is in the crapper let them deal with the consequence.

Secondly Shaurya asked what do we plan to do with 180 million muslims in porkistan. Why? Nothing at all. They can die there in any matter of their choosing. Or get busy killing each other like somalia. India just needs to ensure that its borders are mined, electrified and guards have enough ammo to kill any vermins trying to cross the border. A failed paki nation is a threat to the whole world including china and they will be forced to deal with it. A stable pakistan is only threat to India and should never be allowed. . The ???? MMS sponsored Aman ki asha should be put to an swift end immediately. If the army has to take serious military action to ensure India's survival then they must take action.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 22 May 2012 01:09

What, not a single post still by WKK's aka modern jaichands advocating that we willingly burn our hands in the spirit (hic) of bhaichara?
Ghor Kalyug Onlee!!!!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 May 2012 01:14

ShauryaT wrote:
Luxtor wrote: It would have collapsed a long time ago if it isn't for the perceived utility of the Pukis to the West and the Chinese.
Let us assume all of what you said to be true. Now, take the last part of your post and extrapolate further. What do you do with such a failed state on our strategic NW border, with 180+ million muslims living there next to you. Who do you think benefits and how do you think Indian interests are served?

ST, do you think giving up Siachen will stabilize the failing TSP state? I thnik they will fail anyway.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 May 2012 01:47

ShauryaT wrote: Let us assume all of what you said to be true. Now, take the last part of your post and extrapolate further. What do you do with such a failed state on our strategic NW border, with 180+ million muslims living there next to you. Who do you think benefits and how do you think Indian interests are served?

Siachen is not going to change the 180mi or state of Pakistan.

But looks like there is a Pakistan lobby getting created inside India. This needs to be removed. This entire lobby first has to be demolished and then later all the other things can be taken care of.

Most of the posters here are not aware that they may be working unknowingly for a Pak lobby which has tentacles inside WKK.

Such agreements are done with new players and not with old players. After the Mush regin there has been no real change in the WKK or the Pak side

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 22 May 2012 02:19

If Pakistan is in financial trouble, it is because they've diverted funds to their military and nuclear programs regardless of the cost.

If Pakistan has internal security problems, it is because they've spawned too many "non-state" ********.

Only in India would anyone consider giving away complete dominance over one's territory to lessen the burden of the hostile neighbour's stupidity.

This is like withdrawing from the battlefield at dusk after the blowing the conch. We all know how that turned out.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 May 2012 02:33

Nehru stopped the Indian Army from retaking all of J&K to give the TSP strategic frontyard. Otherwise IA would be within 30 miles from Rawalpindi. He latter sportingly admitted he should have given the IA two or three weeks to clear up the issues.

It didnt make a difference then nor will it now.

Thomas Kolarek · Post by **Thomas Kolarek** » 22 May 2012 02:35

Happy to see so many patriots arguing India's case, wondering why we cant show our knowledge and wisdom to capture the power at the helm and sail India's quest to the World order.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 May 2012 03:04

ramana wrote: ST, do you think giving up Siachen will stabilize the failing TSP state? I thnik they will fail anyway.

Not imagining Siachen to be the savior for a failing state by itself. I have repeated N times by now, it is to be looked upon as a CBM with acceptable risks. It is a small part of a larger vision to co-opt the state of Pakistan. Nothing less, nothing more.

On your thought that they will fail anyway, I will not debate this now but I do not share that they are likely to be a "failed" state in the generally understood sense of the term - with no semblance of order. But, assuming, your prognosis is correct, the question was, how does it serve Indian interests to have a failed state controlling our access to the asian land mass? With 180+ million muslims living in a failed state on Indian borders, it is bound to have an impact on us? Is that what we are waiting for, for TSP to fail? and then what?

What is the alternative vision? So far, I have gotten, let them rot in hell and do nothing. There are hopes of thrashing the PA and give them a bloody nose but cannot cut their heads off. A bleeding nose will heel in no time, the memory will linger. This memory will then somewhere down the line hurt the next generation and things will go on this way or may worsen. If we do not arrest Pakistan's slide, someone else will take advantage of their slide - which for certain shall not serve our interests. If someone does not help them, and they slide anyways, some of that slip will hurt us - through the sheer force of gravity. An offensive aggressive posture against Pakistan, is asking for a reaction from a paranoid state. Either we should be able to squash this reaction, which is very difficult now and Luyen's Delhi is certainly not upto it or we should have a plan B.

It is 2012. I hope we will be able to say the same things in 2022, 2032, 2042 and so on with seeming impunity that let them rot in hell, what goes my father's? The people and the land are not going anywhere. They are there attached to the Indian land mass forever. Impact on us they shall have, that much is destined. What type of impact would it be is something that we can try to control.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 May 2012 03:06

Acharya wrote: Most of the posters here are not aware that they may be working unknowingly for a Pak lobby which has tentacles inside WKK.

Such agreements are done with new players and not with old players. After the Mush regin there has been no real change in the WKK or the Pak side

Acharya: Do you include the PM the NSA in it too?

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 22 May 2012 03:09

So the Mumbai episode has not yet convinced some that the PM is not immune to incompetence.

Also, the suggestion that withdrawing from Siachen will save Pakistani's from hurt

is ludicrous. Pakistanis will continue to "hurt" till they get Kashmir. They will continue to hurt because they are taught to lament not having Kashmir from the day they get some sort of an education. What is the WKK's plan for that? Is Kashmir the next sacrifice?

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 May 2012 03:14

PratikDas wrote:So the Mumbai episode has not yet convinced some that the PM is not immune to incompetence.

That is a political judgment. Something which I actually share. Also, in the case of TSP, unlike ABV who along with LKA had the gumption to call Musharraf to Agra - AFTER Kargil, Parliament attack and Kaluchak, this PM has wasted precious time.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 May 2012 03:20

ramana wrote:Nehru stopped the Indian Army from retaking all of J&K to give the TSP strategic frontyard. Otherwise IA would be within 30 miles from Rawalpindi. He latter sportingly admitted he should have given the IA two or three weeks to clear up the issues.

It didnt make a difference then nor will it now.

It will be good to get an expanded sense of the highlighted words.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 22 May 2012 03:22

Very good. Under whose pressure were we forced to have talks with Pakistan "AFTER Kargil, Parliament attack and Kaluchak"? And what was the reason for Agra being a failure? Did Pakistan Army have something to do with it?

Now, who wants to demilitarise Siachen? The Pakistan Army, a day after the avalanche, not a day sooner. What does that tell you?

Who is then actually calling the shots? Pakistan Army.

Who is letting them? MMS and the bandwagon of WKKs.

What was the current PM's claim to fame from Sharm el-Shaikh?

The Bottom Line: You think India is in the driver's seat and being the generous benefactor, as utterly stupid as that is. You are being a puppet to US interests and plans for Asian dominance through a convenient proxytute in Pakistan. India's "generosity" (I vomit) will amount to absolutely nothing because the very next day the US will claim that they were instrumental in making this happen and Pakistan will claim that they have made the giant (India) see the light. They'll get Sweden to shove a Nobel peace prize down MMS' throat, something which can be bought off eBay perhaps since Obama got one for doing nothing and a WKK brigade will find new ways of finding pleasure from kandles.

In the meanwhile, India would have amply demonstrated the lack of a spine, with only a kandle in its place, perhaps.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 May 2012 03:49

ShauryaT wrote:
Acharya wrote: Most of the posters here are not aware that they may be working unknowingly for a Pak lobby which has tentacles inside WKK.

Such agreements are done with new players and not with old players. After the Mush regin there has been no real change in the WKK or the Pak side
Acharya: Do you include the PM the NSA in it too?

Please put a link to what they have said about the Siachen and a full explanation of why this is needed for CBM with Pakistan.
We can read from that what is their full explanation of the CBM with Pakistan and the trk II diplomacy

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 May 2012 03:53

ShauryaT, There is "your" view and there is "our" view. In between are the facts.

I will let others recount the 'our' view to avoid my coloring it.
I request you to recount your view.
And hope someone steps upto recount the facts.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 May 2012 03:55

Acharya wrote: Please put a link to what they have said about the Siachen and a full explanation of why this is needed for CBM with Pakistan.
We can read from that what is their full explanation of the CBM with Pakistan and the trk II diplomacy

In order to understand this, one has to take their nationalist blinders off and willing to look at things from the other side's PoV, even if one disagrees with it. At the end of the day, a fundamental question of vision and approach needs to be asked and then tactics and merits and risks of each plan needs to be assessed, within that vision.

I do not think, this thread is for debate anymore. It is a place to trade insults and epithets on one and all with no regard for basic courtesy or forum rules. So, unfortunately, I will not continue on this thread for some time, even if some questions are interesting.

The admins have to decide, what insults and epithets and to whom are acceptable to the forum.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 22 May 2012 03:56

ShauryaT wrote:
ramana wrote: ST, do you think giving up Siachen will stabilize the failing TSP state? I thnik they will fail anyway.
Not imagining Siachen to be the savior for a failing state by itself. I have repeated N times by now, it is to be looked upon as a CBM with acceptable risks.

The question remains - In exchange for what? Withdrawing from your own territory which is already claimed by your adversary, is a huge huge concession. What earth-shatteringly great response should we expect from Pakistan? This is something none of those advocating withdrawal have cared to lay down. Diplomacy does not work one way. You do not ever compromise on one thing unless you are getting something equally good or better in return.

BTW, I'm personally not in favor of using our own territory as a bargaining chip. It is just too disgusting for me to even think about. The only reason I'm asking that question is because I'm trying to understand the thought process of those asking for withdrawal.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 22 May 2012 04:02

ramana wrote:ShauryaT, There is "your" view and there is "our" view. In between are the facts.

I will let others recount the 'our' view to avoid my coloring it.
I request you to recount your view.
And hope someone steps upto recount the facts.

Whenever this happens, let us remember there are two versions of facts also! Ours and theirs. But, so far, even a mention of their version of facts seems haraam here.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 May 2012 04:08

No there are only one set of facts and two sets of views:ours and theirs(those who want give up Siachen). I dont care for TSP's views.
The discussion is only between Indians.

PratikDas · Post by **PratikDas** » 22 May 2012 04:08

ShauryaT wrote:
Acharya wrote: Please put a link to what they have said about the Siachen and a full explanation of why this is needed for CBM with Pakistan.
We can read from that what is their full explanation of the CBM with Pakistan and the trk II diplomacy
In order to understand this, one has to take their nationalist blinders off and willing to look at things from the other side's PoV, even if one disagrees with it. At the end of the day, a fundamental question of vision and approach needs to be asked and then tactics and merits and risks of each plan needs to be assessed, within that vision.

I do not think, this thread is for debate anymore. It is a place to trade insults and epithets on one and all with no regard for basic courtesy or forum rules. So, unfortunately, I will not continue on this thread for some time, even if some questions are interesting.

The admins have to decide, what insults and epithets and to whom are acceptable to the forum.

You also have to answer many unanswered questions to continue the debate. It is obviously proving to be difficult.

1) If India is well capable of detecting intrusions in Siachen and taking the intruders out with precision munitions, you have not answered why India needs to make any concessions at all for Pakistan. India could just as easily take a voluntary vacation from Siachen and bomb the same locations remotely at the slightest hint of an intrusion. After all, both options would save Pakistan Army plenty of funds in not having to man their locations, would it not? Surely that in itself is a sufficient CBM? Why then does India need to formally and legally withdraw from any locations?

2) Or answer this question: Will Pakistan, including the Pakistan Army, formally and permanently give up any claims to Kashmir? If the answer to this is no then I'm really not interested in anything you have to say.

3) Or answer this question: How much is pressure from the US responsible for the PM's concession at Sharm el-Shaikh vis-a-vis Balochistan, impotence after Mumbai, and the latest round of ~~capitulation~~ CBMs vis-a-vis Siachen? Is the PM even in the driver's seat or being remote controlled? Why is this important? Because even the slightest acknowledgement of coercion by the US administration or any other XYZ administration will give Pakistan the opportunity to boast that they have built confidence all right, confidence with XYZ, not India.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 22 May 2012 04:19

ShauryaT wrote:Whenever this happens, let us remember there are two versions of facts also! Ours and theirs. But, so far, even a mention of their version of facts seems haraam here.

That is a contradiction in terms. A "fact" by definition must be true. There cannot be two versions of the truth. There can be only two versions of claims. Now if you want to play the devil's advocate and try to prove that their claims are more legitimate than ours, please do so (although I cannot understand what possible reason you could have for doing so). But then be prepared to be called out when those claims don't stand up to scrutiny.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 22 May 2012 04:40

Simple question : Who decides what is a CBM with acceptable risks?

Indian army clearly does not. In terms of strategic and defense issues I would accept IA's view which is simply "You cannot trust a paki". Well maybe the dead ones buried under snow.

We have even put the theory to vote and you lost badly. So cut the crap about acceptable risk. The only acceptable risk is partition of pakistan into 4 smaller countries.

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 22 May 2012 04:45

ShauryaT wrote:I have repeated N times by now, it is to be looked upon as a CBM with acceptable risks.

Hmmm acceptable risks, we vacate Siachin and porkis will say to each other with tears in their eyes "Hafiz we were so wrong about Hindustanis, let's stop sending the jihadis over there."

Some fools say the porkis have a sense of entitlement for all the generosity shown by Bharatvarsh in past but they are.......... warmongers, fools.

I agree its an acceptable risk I have nowhere anyone in my relation in armed forces, so even if pissloving porki/panda combo takeover Siachin, 3 or 4,000 sainiks die to take it back, few helicopters go down with pilots, few Saurabh Kalias tortured and mutilated. It's ok after all its acceptable risk , the soldiers are paid to die anyway, and none of them are my rishtedaar (relative)!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saurabh_Kalia

sum · Post by **sum** » 22 May 2012 08:31

^^ Is it only an Indian concept that CBM= withdraw from own territory or show the other cheek to prove how sincere we are? Why is it that TSP which has caused innumerable suffering doesn't get this bout of inner awakening and decide to handover parts of Northern Areas as a sign of CBM and sincerity?

Genuine question since i never can recall any other country debating within itself of giving up some of its own territory to show good intentions with neighbor without wanting anything in return!

Manish_Sharma · Post by **Manish_Sharma** » 22 May 2012 09:05

Edited

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 22 May 2012 10:47

"Acceptable CBM building risk", this is the same argument as MMS has not moved an inch on india's position etc etc. The counter argument is the same how can you or anybody else for that matter decide that giving up Siachen is an "acceptable CBM building risk"?
What gives you and your ilk the liberty to assume mush less propose that India has to give up something to build this (sure to be taken advantage of) confidence?
Considering its perfidy and in view of its increasing inability in managing its affairs it should be Pakistan that should be giving uo some of the areas under its illegal occupation.Would the WKK's even dream to make such a suggestion. Of course not !!!!

Does not require much brains to figure out whats happening if you see who the people are on the Track II panel from each side.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 22 May 2012 10:58

ShauryaT wrote: Whenever this happens, let us remember there are two versions of facts also! Ours and theirs. But, so far, even a mention of their version of facts seems haraam here.

Rightfully so. Just do some research on how they distort even history to suit their POV and perpetuate historical frauds on aam abdul. Dont tell me next you are going to peddle "their version of facts" that it Was India that was the aggresor/attacker in all the 3.5 wars.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 22 May 2012 11:01

Manish_Sharma wrote:I'm always amazed to see the hypocrisy of these WKKs. They want Bharatvarsh to show complete generosity to a country which only lives to hate and destroy us.

But in there own personal life they're most unforgiving and ungenerous people. They'll selectively report posts of people who are against their view for using 'abusive language', but 'not report' the one supporting their points using same 'abusive language'.

Such disgusting behaviour.

The nation has to build CBMs with same enemy which is ever ready to back-stab us.

You Siachin withdrawal supporters! I hate you! I find you disgusting now - build CBMs with me instead of reporting/arguing against me.

Let's see the generosity of those who want the nation to be generous to a country which sees us as a mortal enemy.

Good point. Lets see how far the proponents of 'sacrifice' are ready to walk their talk. Obviously, one cannot have one yardstick for oneself and a different yardstick for the country.

Vipul · Post by **Vipul** » 22 May 2012 11:11

sum wrote:^^ Is it only an Indian concept that CBM= withdraw from own territory or show the other cheek to prove how sincere we are? Why is it that TSP which has caused innumerable suffering doesn't get this bout of inner awakening and decide to handover parts of Northern Areas as a sign of CBM and sincerity?

Genuine question since i never can recall any other country debating within itself of giving up some of its own territory to show good intentions with neighbor without wanting anything in return!

I have ranted here many times:why is it that we Indian's behave the way we do with respect to our adversaries(Calling someone an enemy may cause some affront/discomfort to WKK's).
Has to be some mutated/distorted DNA or Gene which causes this illogical/senseless/nonsensical/stupid/idiotic behaviour in our actions:
of conceding time and again self-goals, of thinking that we have to be magnanimous, that we have to always forgive, that we have to turn the other cheek, that we have to get kicked on the face.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 22 May 2012 11:15

ShauryaT and SudeepJ just dont give up !!

Anyway the Indian CBM is to give up its own territory with no corresponding equal Puki CBM.

The questionable Puki CBM as per ShauryaT etc is giving up on terrorism, jehadis etc which any normal country should not be doing in the first place ! Is becoming a normal country a CBM?

and obviously the Indian CBM should preceede the dubious/questionable Paki CBM.

ShauryaT ..do u see any inconsistency in ur stance/position ??

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 22 May 2012 11:25

. I really hope India postpones the talks on Siachen indefinitely citing domestic compulsions or some other excuse.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 22 May 2012 11:37

and all this this talk abt bombing with precision munitions to interdict intrusions in high mountains/glaciers is total BS. Neither are these so called precision munitions so precise ( unless ofc u r watching a hollywood flick) nor do we have the financial muscles to use them in any large numbers. These are figments of WKK imagination. Have u ever wondered why ISAF forces are not so effective in AfPak mountain inspite of having a inventory of the most 'precise' munitions?

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 22 May 2012 20:49

Why do one think that onus for making peace rests with India?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 22 May 2012 20:53

I am a late enterent to the vacate siachen discussion.

But I am amused by the number of posts and articles on this thread and national media. The TSPA must be

at the Indians and the argumentative tendency amongst us.

The people who are advocating vacating Siachen are the most gullible people in the world IMHO. Even kids who are not able to count their own fingers are not so.

Here we have an army that is completely against the Idea of co-existance with India. Its COAS is on record about not being ready for an accommodation with us. The perpetrators of 26/11, and countless other atrocities against Indians is shielded by that army. This is the army that launched Kargil after a visit by ABV to TSP and his proclamation from Minar E Pakistan that India in not interested in undoing Partition.

Yet Kargil happened. How do I know, if the IA vacates what is Indian land, will TSPA, just sit in place or march and take over Siachen.

The other thing that needs to be kept in mind is that, the PLA is making its presence felt in POK. Do we not allow the TSPA to secure the flank of PLA, if we pull out of Siachen?

People more knowledgeable then me can refute the PLA angle. But I am not in favour of vacating what is undisputed Indian land.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 May 2012 21:08

Sum, I read an updated version of the turn the other cheek strategy.

Its perfectly acceptable to turn the other cheek if one is wrong, but if one is right slap twice.

I understand JLN strategy. He gave up POK as a CBM to TSP to keep them happy that they got one third of Kashmir. Instead it made them even more hungry to think they can grab more.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 22 May 2012 22:12

Bheeshma wrote:We have even put the theory to vote and you lost badly. So cut the crap about acceptable risk.

Please forward a copy of the vote to AHQ and South Block.

The only acceptable risk is partition of pakistan into 4 smaller countries.

That would be a wonderful resolution and I'm sure Shaurya agrees except for some minor unimportant details regarding probability and practicality.

Viv S · Post by **Viv S** » 22 May 2012 22:14

ramana wrote:No there are only one set of facts and two sets of views:ours and theirs(those who want give up Siachen). I dont care for TSP's views.
The discussion is only between Indians.

You do need to examine their views to be able to predict their responses.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 22 May 2012 22:22

You only need to examine their views to disprove them. In this case they are very simple. India claims whole of J&K hence withdrawal is a matter for Porkis from POK. Period.