Indian Army: News and Discussions 15 Apr 2012

[SaiK]

Is it that difficult to catch 10 of their heads?

[chaanakya]

A Barking Dog does not bite.

[rohitvats]

<SNIP>I am happy that FirstPost is calling him a dove. Even if he is not, this sort of media pressure is exactly what's needed.

Please, it is time we put such school boy thinking to rest. What were you expecting the IA Chief to do in a press conference? Behave like Sunny Deol and shout obscenities at PA/TSP to prove his credentials and make the jingoes on the board feel better?

And where is this fancy thinking coming from about media pressure forcing IA to do something? Was it media pressure which 'focred' IA to retaliate in the past against such acts by PA? Well, I don't think so.

There are two broad issues here - the stance by the GOI in terms of dealing with Pakistan and actual dealing on the ground/LOC by IA . IA is governed by its tactical and strategic doctrine in these matters. Whether media had picked up these reports or not, IA would have done what was required to be done - whether to avenge the murder of these soldiers or for securing tactical gains. Just read the Kargil book by General VP Malik on India 'taking measures' to 'correct' the LOC alignment for tactical gains.

And yes, Bikram Singh did take the sting out of Browne's statement, which was uncalled for. Even if there is some inter-services rivalry, this was not the time or place to air it. One suspects GOI's hand in this. Its clear Browne's statement didn't have UPA's blessing

Nope, I don't think it is inter-services rivalry. This is MOD written large over it. That statement by NAK Browne would have rattled bones across the border and WKK brigade on both sides would have asked for 'toning' down the message.

[rohitvats]

A Barking Dog does not bite.

Please, you have no business calling an Army Chief such derogatory terms. And that too w/o any rhyme or reason.

[chaanakya]

A Barking Dog does not bite.

Please, you have no business calling an Army Chief such derogatory terms. And that too w/o any rhyme or reason.

And why do you assume that. Its pretty common saying. Could be rephrased as Thundering cloud does not rain.

And its true of who ever makes empty rhetoric. Be it he or she.

[RamaY]

Why is the army even involving the likes of MEA, MHA, PMO etc for small border skirmishes?

Why didnt army respond as per it SOP and let the ball rolling? Or the SOP for border skirmishes include getting a NOC from PMO in triplicate twice signed by MEA and MHA?

Just curious.

[chaanakya]

BTW, an army chief , who fires from mouth, counts for nothing among his peers m friends and enemies.
And where was he when this incident happened. Has his blood gone cold? Whay did he speak only after Charlie ( COS) spoke .

[rohitvats]

<SNIP>And why do you assume that. Its pretty common saying. Could be rephrased as Thundering cloud does not rain. And its true of who ever makes empty rhetoric. Be it he or she.

Empty rhetoric?

What do you want the Army Chief to do? Make a video film of IA retaliation across the border and paste it on BRF to get the approval of people like you?

[rohitvats]

Why is the army even involving the likes of MEA, MHA, PMO etc for small border skirmishes?

And what makes you think the IA is involving these actors? Do these people need the permission from the Services to comment on these issue?

Why didnt army respond as per it SOP and let the ball rolling? Or the SOP for border skirmishes include getting a NOC from PMO in triplicate twice signed by MEA and MHA?

Again, how does anyone on this forum know what the IA has done and not done? And mind you, if the GOI makes SOP for such actions as requiring taking permission in triplicate from power-that-be, what do you expect the Army/Services to do? Neglect the same and bash on regardless?

Just curious.

[rohitvats]

BTW, an army chief , who fires from mouth, counts for nothing among his peers m friends and enemies.
And where was he when this incident happened. Has his blood gone cold? Whay did he speak only after Charlie ( COS) spoke .

Oh! yes...only the blood of internet warriors on this forum has the right mixture of patriotism while everyone else who does not meet their exalted standards, is a coward...

[Vipul]

<SNIP>And why do you assume that. Its pretty common saying. Could be rephrased as Thundering cloud does not rain. And its true of who ever makes empty rhetoric. Be it he or she.

Empty rhetoric?

What do you want the Army Chief to do? Make a video film of IA retaliation across the border and paste it on BRF to get the approval of people like you?

Unfortunately RV, the attitude of the present duffers in the North and South Block is what makes the Indian public so sceptical of what the army chief says.
It is through newspapers reports now that we have come to know of how Indian Army shamefully played down and even went all out to prevent news of a similar "incident" and "unwholesome event" last year of killings of 2 other Jawans.
An Army Chief who waits for 4 days to comment on a situation and deliver a "supposedly tough message" when all the ministers and bureaucrats have already made comments of how india is commited to the peace process has has much value as a tissue paper that one uses to wipe his ass off.

[chaanakya]

<SNIP>And why do you assume that. Its pretty common saying. Could be rephrased as Thundering cloud does not rain. And its true of who ever makes empty rhetoric. Be it he or she.

Empty rhetoric?

What do you want the Army Chief to do? Make a video film of IA retaliation across the border and paste it on BRF to get the approval of people like you?

Well I expected him to comment briefly that " Army will do what it needs to do" and not to launch into long rhetoric. The he should have gone about doing it in a professional manner that is expected of him. We would have known when over from Paki statement. Do you think that issuing orders or revealing orders to his commanders in press conference is a professional thing to do. And yes I know of one officer who made a film on terrorist encounter and he was disgraced later. Do you think I would trust him if he does that? Let him prove that he is not a coward that many may call him.

And if it is not empty how do you propose to prove it? by more rhetoric. Worse than a Nukkad Ka ...

[chaanakya]

Oh! yes...only the blood of internet warriors on this forum has the right mixture of patriotism

lookee lookee who is talking

[rohitvats]

<SNIP>

Unfortunately RV, the attitude of the present duffers in the North and South Block is what makes the Indian public so skeptical of what the army chief says.

Well, if the 'public' does not know to differentiate between IA Chief and the sh*t heads sitting in MHA/MOD/MEA, then the problem is theirs. And somehow if they feel that in their angst against the UPA-2, they feel it all right to besmirch the COAS, well, they can go fly the kite.

It is through newspapers reports now that we have come to know of how Indian Army shamefully played down and even went all out to prevent news of a similar "incident" and "unwholesome event" last year of killings of 2 other Jawans.

Shamefully played down? WTF, Man...Did the Army release the information about current incident to the Press?When was the last time you remember IA calling press conferences about incidents on the border? And who said IA tried to 'play down' the earlier events? Some d*ck head journo passing flatulence on behalf of GOI? Come on, you can do better.

Some of reports also said that IA inflicted heavy pain on PA for those incidents as well - it will do this time as well. It did not require internet warriors and media to tell them what to do then nor does it require the same now.



An Army Chief who waits for 4 days to comment on a situation and deliver a "supposedly tough message" when all the ministers and bureaucrats have already made comments of how india is commited to the peace process has has much value as a tissue paper that one uses to wipe his ass off.

Point One - IA Chief or any other Chief does not hold press conference WITHOUT clearance from the MOD. NAK Browne commented on the issue on the sidelines of an event. And COAS did not hold the press conference today to comment on the this issue specifically - the Press Conference was on the eve of Army Day which falls on 15th January.

[rohitvats]

Oh! yes...only the blood of internet warriors on this forum has the right mixture of patriotism

lookee lookee who is talking

At least I don't this privilege to talk nonsense and pass my jaundiced views as some high sounding opinion....

[RamaY]

Why is the army even involving the likes of MEA, MHA, PMO etc for small border skirmishes?

And what makes you think the IA is involving these actors? Do these people need the permission from the Services to comment on these issue?

Why didnt army respond as per it SOP and let the ball rolling? Or the SOP for border skirmishes include getting a NOC from PMO in triplicate twice signed by MEA and MHA?

Again, how does anyone on this forum know what the IA has done and not done? And mind you, if the GOI makes SOP for such actions as requiring taking permission in triplicate from power-that-be, what do you expect the Army/Services to do? Neglect the same and bash on regardless?

Just curious.

I was asking only sir. If IA did what it is supposed to do, then we wouldn't have been in this situation IMHO. The reality would have been
- USA, China, UK and KSA would call for piss and status-quo at the nuclear flash point onlee
- GoI firing a couple of brigadiers or corps commanders
- Media telling the citizenry that IA went rogue and didnt take permission from civilian masters
and so on..

Thus I know IA didn't do what it is supposed to do.

Coming to SOP, if the IA agrees to take NOC from PMO for even minute cross-border skirmishes then isn't it better for Chief of Army staff and Chiefs of Staff to stay quite instead of making public statements?

[SaiK]

I think RamaY's question needs some answers. If one goes by how this gov works, then it is a political question indeed, and may not be separated as such and valid.

Now that is not a bad question you asked RamaY! We have some serious issues here.

[rohitvats]

<SNIP>

Well I expected him to comment briefly that " Army will do what it needs to do" and not to launch into long rhetoric. The he should have gone about doing it in a professional manner that is expected of him.

In case you did not notice in your eagerness to pass judgement, the Army Chief was in a middle of annual Army Day eve press conference. And you think just because he did not conduct himself as per 'your expectation', he has failed in his job? Pretty rich, actually...

We would have known when over from Paki statement.

As if they are going to oblige you with the same...

Do you think that issuing orders or revealing orders to his commanders in press conference is a professional thing to do.

Revealing orders? Seriously....

Let him prove that he is not a coward that many may call him.

Oh! yes....while you're at it, please do pass your address while you're at it...IA HQ will need the same to pass to you the proof of their actions in the form as you deem fit.

<SNIP>

[Karan M]

I am sorry RV, but your statements are not convincing. You are trying to reduce this issue of lack of leadership, which exists across all levels, to spineless civvies versus brave Army etc.

"Well, if the 'public' does not know to differentiate between IA Chief and the sh*t heads sitting in MHA/MOD/M" whereas the reality as far as everyone knows, is that many of these IA Chiefs can also be sh*t heads who also play political roles, to use your evocative terms.

What about Deepak Kapoor? What about the other military gentlemen involved in the Adarsh case or the Tehelka scam? There are now dime a dozen cases to indicate that the rot of politicized, selfish officialdom which plagues the rest of India, also exists in the services. And you quote VP Malik as an example of what he did? That man was arguably one of the worst service chiefs we have had, given his lackluster leadership during Kargil (something about which I heard first hand from many irate YOs who were incensed at the manner in which actions were initially undertaken during the event).

Why the patronizing put downs against Prem Kumar (schoolboy talk etc) when he has been nothing but civilized throughout? To any commentator, Bikram Singh was clearly being very political when he sought to explain away what NAK Browne said. He could have as well said, Mr Browne can explain what he said. Or simply, no comments.

And what is the too clever by half insertion of the phrase "if it recurs" about taking action?

Bikram Singh came into office with a cloud hanging over his selection thanks to the manner in which VK Singh was forced out, and skepticism is warranted.

We are all civilians here (including you), so please go easy on the civilian versus military rhetoric. Having (unfortunately) seen many of our Army's harebrained decisions in the past, I don't buy into the infallibility of their senior leadership. Its a rare type like Paddy or VKS who bucks the system and comes to the top, otherwise to be a COAS in todays India, is to be political person. Its the way things are.

I don't grudge Bikram Singh for being that, but to insist, as you are doing, that we shouldnt even criticize his too little, too late statements, couched as they appear to be, in caveats, is a bit much.

[rohitvats]

I was asking only sir. If IA did what it is supposed to do, then we wouldn't have been in this situation IMHO.

You can keep this stupid sermons about what is best to yourself. And I'm deliberately using this word because that is what it is...Passing high sounding mumbo - jumbo as somehow the last word on what is best for this country


The reality would have been
- USA, China, UK and KSA would call for piss and status-quo at the nuclear flash point onlee
- GoI firing a couple of brigadiers or corps commanders
- Media telling the citizenry that IA went rogue and didnt take permission from civilian masters
and so on..

Thus I know IA didn't do what it is supposed to do.

Again - I think this country can do without such idiotic assumptions and people who hold such assumptions. I am glad we have an army - always have had such an army - which does not conduct itself with above idiotic norms

Coming to SOP, if the IA agrees to take NOC from PMO for even minute cross-border skirmishes then isn't it better for Chief of Army staff and Chiefs of Staff to stay quite instead of making public statements?

More ignorance passing off as smart alec comments? If you have time, please think through the implications of the statement above - that is an army which goes against the GOI order in its entirety

[putnanja]

I was asking only sir. If IA did what it is supposed to do, then we wouldn't have been in this situation IMHO. The reality would have been
- USA, China, UK and KSA would call for piss and status-quo at the nuclear flash point onlee
- GoI firing a couple of brigadiers or corps commanders
- Media telling the citizenry that IA went rogue and didnt take permission from civilian masters
and so on..

Thus I know IA didn't do what it is supposed to do.

Coming to SOP, if the IA agrees to take NOC from PMO for even minute cross-border skirmishes then isn't it better for Chief of Army staff and Chiefs of Staff to stay quite instead of making public statements?

One needs to look at the sequence of events. In this particular situation, if the pakis had not cried wolf and blamed IA for cross-border raid (which never took place, which the COAS denied in press conf too), then India wouldn't have probably publicized the beheading, and IA would have dealt with it at local level (read one more paki post smashed). However, pakis raised hell, and it was picked up by all major international news agencies. And then they went ahead and beheaded two soldiers. So the Indian version of the story too came out, and the rest as they say is history.

[Ankit Desai]

Just to clarify so called Army chief's speech is not the speech to clarify army's stand for ongoing LoC incident.

It was annual IA conference/PR exercise/interaction with media/public which something Army does every year on 14th Jan.

Army Chief was replying to question asked by journalist, he was not giving any speech as example people do on independent day or chiefs' do on other army related days. So, as we know answers are depends on the way question asked.

As far as incident about Garhwal rifle's soldiers beheading goes , it was widely discussed on BRF. The only difference between that and current incident as far as general public and media concern, is media didn't get hint about it at that time while they got it this time around.

Mind it guys I am neither defending nor accusing Army chief.

-Ankit

[Karan M]

Shamefully played down? WTF, Man...Did the Army release the information about current incident to the Press?When was the last time you remember IA calling press conferences about incidents on the border? And who said IA tried to 'play down' the earlier events? Some d*ck head journo passing flatulence on behalf of GOI? Come on, you can do better.

Some of reports also said that IA inflicted heavy pain on PA for those incidents as well - it will do this time as well. It did not require internet warriors and media to tell them what to do then nor does it require the same now.

[/quote]

If the Army had indeed inflicted heavy pain, versus a limited tit for tat, then we would not be having these incidents today. Like it or not, they have not been able to deter the Pakistanis.

Blaming the media is all very well, but its a point of fact, that its the media, which despite all the control the current GOI exerts on it, which has forced the issue to national awareness, and given a voice to the anguish of the soldiers and their family.

Also, given the belated response the Army Chief took towards addressing this issue, it does seem that even the IA senior folks did not want too much pressure on themselves to act.

It does not point to an encouraging picture. These people who were beheaded were not just soldiers, they were fellow Indians and hence the Army, and the GOI are both accountable to the Indian public to explain just what they will do to prevent such incidents from recurring in the future.

Its a different matter altogether, that given the dysfunctional state India is, the GOI doesn't care, the media is rarely if ever involved beyond a point, and the Army just responds in a limited fashion, which really does not deter Pakistan.

In which case, I do hope the pressure from this one case keeps building up, till both the GOI and Army figure out a way to respond, effectively.

[Karan M]

I was asking only sir. If IA did what it is supposed to do, then we wouldn't have been in this situation IMHO. The reality would have been
- USA, China, UK and KSA would call for piss and status-quo at the nuclear flash point onlee
- GoI firing a couple of brigadiers or corps commanders
- Media telling the citizenry that IA went rogue and didnt take permission from civilian masters
and so on..

Thus I know IA didn't do what it is supposed to do.

Coming to SOP, if the IA agrees to take NOC from PMO for even minute cross-border skirmishes then isn't it better for Chief of Army staff and Chiefs of Staff to stay quite instead of making public statements?

One needs to look at the sequence of events. In this particular situation, if the pakis had not cried wolf and blamed IA for cross-border raid (which never took place, which the COAS denied in press conf too), then India wouldn't have probably publicized the beheading, and IA would have dealt with it at local level (read one more paki post smashed). However, pakis raised hell, and it was picked up by all major international news agencies. And then they went ahead and beheaded two soldiers. So the Indian version of the story too came out, and the rest as they say is history.

Which really points to the larger issue that these tit for tat beheadings don't inflict any pain on Pakistan military to change their behaviour.

Its a well known fact that the average Pakistani commander does not give a fig for his soldiers. The case of the NLI during Kargil bears ample witness to this fact.

So, the issue is how will the Army deter this sort of behavior.

The last time the Pakistanis went over the top with their usual barbarity, was Kaluchak, such incidents have not recurred, and clearly, this cannot be attributed to better security alone. Clearly, the Pakistanis got the message, that they had crossed a line which they shouldn't have.

Question is what did the IA do (fire assaults were quoted at the time) which taught the Pakistanis a lesson? This should be the lesson learnt.

Keeping an artificial peace, with soldiers killed in this manner, is toxic. Both for the country and the Army itself.

[rohitvats]

I am sorry RV, but your statements are not convincing. You are trying to reduce this issue of lack of leadership, which exists across all levels, to spineless civvies versus brave Army etc

This is not about spineless civvies and brave army - but about passing judgments based on jaundiced views derived from assumptions which cannot be tested for their validity. The crux of matter is that civvies outside of the government want IA to go all guns blazing into Kashmir and avenge this slight...well, sorry not going to happen. Why? Because irrespective of a Paddy or VKS or BKS at the helm of affair, IA (or Services) does not go out of the orbit of the GOI. It will do in this matter what it has always done.

"Well, if the 'public' does not know to differentiate between IA Chief and the sh*t heads sitting in MHA/MOD/M" whereas the reality as far as everyone knows, is that many of these IA Chiefs can also be sh*t heads who also play political roles, to use your evocative terms.

IA chiefs playing political roles is not same as Service chiefs compromising on operational matters

What about Deepak Kapoor? What about the other military gentlemen involved in the Adarsh case or the Tehelka scam? There are now dime a dozen cases to indicate that the rot of politicized, selfish officialdom which plagues the rest of India, also exists in the services. And you quote VP Malik as an example of what he did? That man was arguably one of the worst service chiefs we have had, given his lackluster leadership during Kargil (something about which I heard first hand from many irate YOs who were incensed at the manner in which actions were initially undertaken during the event).

Did the presence of any of these Service Chiefs compromise on the operational matters? Do you have (or anyone for that matter of fact) any proof against any Service Chief for sabotaging the operational stance of Army? Bringing in corruption charges and extrapolating that to current situation is flight of imagination which does not hold.

As for VP Malik and 1999 - India achieved its objective under him and the bungling in the initial days was about fog of war.



Why the patronizing put downs against Prem Kumar (schoolboy talk etc) when he has been nothing but civilized throughout?

Well, if you use a polite tone to abuse someone based on purely on "I-think-so", that does not make it a civilized argument.

To any commentator, Bikram Singh was clearly being very political when he sought to explain away what NAK Browne said. He could have as well said, Mr Browne can explain what he said. Or simply, no comments.

That is how you choose to see it...for me, it was pretty much straight forward and simple talk.

Bikram Singh came into office with a cloud hanging over his selection thanks to the manner in which VK Singh was forced out, and skepticism is warranted.

Skepticism does not mean you pass judgement without waiting to think for a moment or trying to get facts

We are all civilians here (including you), so please go easy on the civilian versus military rhetoric.

You can spare the sermon - this is not civilian versus military - because whether we like it not, the civilians are in charge.

Having (unfortunately) seen many of our Army's harebrained decisions in the past, I don't buy into the infallibility of their senior leadership. Its a rare type like Paddy or VKS who bucks the system and comes to the top, otherwise to be a COAS in todays India, is to be political person. Its the way things are.

And yet, w/o any evidence or proof, you consider it all right to pass comments.

I don't grudge Bikram Singh for being that, but to insist, as you are doing, that we shouldnt even criticize his too little, too late statements, couched as they appear to be, in caveats, is a bit much.

Too little, too late ? - Again, what should have he done? His constituency is the IA and the men he commands. He does not need to give press conference to deal with the same.

[rohitvats]

If the Army had indeed inflicted heavy pain, versus a limited tit for tat, then we would not be having these incidents today. Like it or not, they have not been able to deter the Pakistanis.

Deter the Pakistanis? How many such cross border raids have you heard about? And you do forget that IA operates under the ambit of the GOI. If the GOI has imposed a ceasefire since 2003 and does not allow for any large scale and disproportionate response, what do you propose IA should do? In this attempt to somehow put the blame on the IA, every one is forgetting that IA does best in the context of laid down policy.

Forget the recent border incident - when was the last time Indian superiority was allowed to prevail? Talking of disproportionate response - how about moving an artillery brigade upfront and pulverizing the entire post/area from where the PA troops came? Can be done, right. But then you do realize that PA will retaliate at its place of choosing - and we will respond to that. Will the GOI of the day allow such escalation when it is drunk on cool-aid of 'Aman ki Asha' BS?

You cannot think of such events in isolation w/o catering for escalation and willing to climb up the ladder - come what may.



Blaming the media is all very well, but its a point of fact, that its the media, which despite all the control the current GOI exerts on it, which has forced the issue to national awareness, and given a voice to the anguish of the soldiers and their family.

Death is part of soldiering - pure and simple. Soldiers have died earlier on LOC and will continue to do in the future. That is how the dice rolls and men in OG know this.

The media pressure is on GOI to not sip tea and have kebabs with those who kill and mutilate your soldiers. IA does not do it. Given the reference point by the GOI, it does its best

Also, given the belated response the Army Chief took towards addressing this issue, it does seem that even the IA senior folks did not want too much pressure on themselves to act.

Again - as I have said earlier, the press conference was about Army Day and not this incident in particular.

It does not point to an encouraging picture. These people who were beheaded were not just soldiers, they were fellow Indians and hence the Army, and the GOI are both accountable to the Indian public to explain just what they will do to prevent such incidents from recurring in the future.

IA is accountable to people through GOI and not media circus - which BTW is not questioning the IA. IA could have sorted out TSPA in 2002 but for the GOI of the day. It is for GOI to explain what is it doing to prevent occurrence of such events by giving free hand to its army. <SNIP>

[RamaY]

One needs to look at the sequence of events. In this particular situation, if the pakis had not cried wolf and blamed IA for cross-border raid (which never took place, which the COAS denied in press conf too), then India wouldn't have probably publicized the beheading, and IA would have dealt with it at local level (read one more paki post smashed). However, pakis raised hell, and it was picked up by all major international news agencies. And then they went ahead and beheaded two soldiers. So the Indian version of the story too came out, and the rest as they say is history.

I am sorry... can you pls explain the sequence of events?

Jan 6: The Pakistani Army had claimed that one of its soldiers had died after Indian troops crossed the border and attacked a post This is covered in the international media on the same day. India denied this, when?

Jan 8: In Poonch's Mendhar region Pakistan Army regulars target Indian Army patrol and kill two soldiers beheading and carrying the head with them.

And India went public with Jan8th event, ONLY because Pakis cried wolf and otherwise it wouldnt have been made public?

And somehow the IA's retaliation was not done because the story that they leaked into media is public and they cannot be enraged by calls of billion fanatics.

And the REAL beheading of Indian soldiers is allowed to be == FAKE indian cross-border ride? (someone in TIRP thread claimed that this FAKE incident infact happened after that REAL beheading)

And somehow we should not know or cannot be told what IA really does in the borders, because we are internet warriors? Then why did IA leak the story to begin with? Were they afraid that Pakis will release this news anyway and get the mileage?

Why didnt IA avenge the REAL beheadings before going public to counter the FAKE cross-border raid?

Since when IA taking directions from international news stories and NGOs? Or does the new SOP includes the new chain of command where

/ PMO - US News Agencies - DOS - POTUS
IA <- MHA - Sonia Gandi - Vatican?
\ MEA - SG - Vatican?

Please educate us, so we know whom to gaali for our fate.

[nachiket]

In July 2011, an infiltrator and cross-border source of the Pakistan army was killed in Keran sector of Kashmir by the Indian army. The Pakistan army’s reply was swift as two troopers of 20 Kumaon regiment — Jaipal Singh Adhikari and Devender Singh — were beheaded. The Indian army apparently kept quiet and waited for an opportune moment. Three months later, heads of three Pakistani soldiers went missing with Islamabad lodging a protest with New Delhi on the alleged killing. In August, 2003, Pakistani troops ambushed an Indian patrol in Nowshera sector and killed four troops of the Jat regiment. The intruders beheaded one soldier and took his light machine gun. A month later, nine Pakistani soldiers were killed in the same sector with heads of two missing.

Like this stuff. And am sure that the TSPA-ians will get their just desserts when the dust settles here too.

Well, even if this is true, it appears that these responses don't seem to be having the desired effect in terms of preventing more such incidents. The paki commanders keep these losses secret or simply don't mind losing some of their own soldiers to satisfy their own jihadi tendencies.

[RamaY]

RamaY is stupid, ignorant and makes idiotic assumptions

There is nothing IA did that speaks for itself. IA failed to do its task and I have a right to say it!

What action IA took after Jan8th attack?

Please note I am blaming PMO/MHA/MoD for leaking the beheading story to media.

Why didn't IA act on Jan8th itself? Is it waiting for PMOs approval on Cold Start?

Who are you trying to fool or intimidate?

[Karan M]

This is not about spineless civvies and brave army - but about passing judgments based on jaundiced views derived from assumptions which cannot be tested for their validity. The crux of matter is that civvies outside of the government want IA to go all guns blazing into Kashmir and avenge this slight...well, sorry not going to happen. Why? Because irrespective of a Paddy or VKS or BKS at the helm of affair, IA (or Services) does not go out of the orbit of the GOI. It will do in this matter what it has always done.

So if this is the case, then how exactly does that justify your comment that the COAS is different from the sh*theads in the rest of the GOI? Either they all are sh*theads, playing to the same script (no slight to be avenged), or they are at loggerheads with each other. Your statement now points out that the IA or Services does not go out of the orbit of the GOI. Thats pretty much the same thing Prem Kumar & the rest of us are saying. One way or the other, its a failure of the system. Playing it as sh*theads in GOI versus the COAS does not come off as accurate.

IA chiefs playing political roles is not same as Service chiefs compromising on operational matters

So is a IA Chief, an accused in a scam, not going to compromise on operational matters? Where does this certainty spring from? A corrupt individual or one likely to enrich himself unethically, will do so anyhow. Service chiefs have gone ahead and booked themselves flats in something meant for widows/victims. Other senior brass have been found culpable in scams where they have been busy tailoring specifications to suit specific vendors - thats a direct operational matter issue.

Wasnt another IA chief's wife running some business employing soldiers? Isnt that a misuse of operational resources?

Point is, current evidence suggests that the GOI meddling & trends in Indian societal evolution (regressive) do have an impact on IA leadership, and common sense would suggest that political generals are more concerned about political benefit, not operational benefit.

A bit of light on any leadership & their actions is welcome and will keep them honest. Whether it be GOI, senior bureaucrats or Army leadership.

Did the presence of any of these Service Chiefs compromise on the operational matters? Do you have (or anyone for that matter of fact) any proof against any Service Chief for sabotaging the operational stance of Army? Bringing in corruption charges and extrapolating that to current situation is flight of imagination which does not hold.

This business of differentiating between operational effectiveness and corruption is not tenable. A corrupt person will be corrupt, will remain unethical and will be found wanting operationally as well, given his tendency to game the system and not improve it. As regards failing in operational terms, the state of the Army under Deepak Kapoor and JJSingh (both generals under clouds for various reasons), is by now well known. Whether it be wheeler dealers selling Tatras (which VKS put an end to, and which may have cost him his job) or the parlous state of inventory (again something which VKS raised). Political generals will not rock the boat and will sit tight. What price operational effectiveness? I am surprised you cannot see the obvious correlation.
Coming to VP Malik and his operational effectiveness, well he may not have been corrupt, but the initial suicidal attacks at Kargil, leading to the loss of many lives happened under VP Maliks watch. His record is certainly not ideal. Did he face censure for those? He should have, judging by the opinions of many IA personnel whom I recall speaking to in those days.

As for VP Malik and 1999 - India achieved its objective under him and the bungling in the initial days was about fog of war.

Fog of war to explain away the flawed decision making that cost many men their lives? These are justifications you are providing, but which do not necessarily translate into a convincing argument.

Fact of life is Kargil campaign from the services had a lot of mistakes made, and a lot of lives were lost and only the later stages of the campaign showed the sort of methodical, approach that was required to take these daunting objectives. The campaign may have achieved its objectives, but at what cost? Per your dismissal of all criticism, one would think the Generals are beyond reproach and sh*theads only exist in the civilian side of society. Sorry, I would disagree.

Well, if you use a polite tone to abuse someone based on purely on "I-think-so", that does not make it a civilized argument.

He has every right to politely disagree with the Army Chief's actions. Where did he abuse him? Please point out.

By all means defend Bikram Singh, but calling folks names, calling civilian administrators sh*theads, when far less has been said about Bikram Singh, where do you draw the line?

That is how you choose to see it...for me, it was pretty much straight forward and simple talk.

Exactly, to you its straight forward talk, to others it came across as a political statement. Perceptions differ.

] Skepticism does not mean you pass judgement without waiting to think for a moment or trying to get facts

What facts are those? Does anyone here have facts on their side? Nobody has facts in this case, unless Bikram Singh himself appears & tells things exactly as they are, upon which, we have to take him at his word, hoping that he is not being PC.

What everyone here has provided so far, are perceptions. Which btw are the source of debate. They are not facts.

You can spare the sermon - this is not civilian versus military - because whether we like it not, the civilians are in charge.

No sermon here, if you would cool down. The GOI bureaucrats whom i bear no love for, are called sh*theads whereas the COAS, who per your own admission is part of the same structure, and is playing to the same script, is defended with vehemence - whats the point? They are all part of the same system.

And yet, w/o any evidence or proof, you consider it all right to pass comments.

What evidence or proof should one provide? The myriad list of procurement actions that the Army has goofed up, the actions in which Army officers have been caught out for being corrupt or with their hands in the till? Do you seriously wish me to rake that up? To what end.

BTW, I have every right to pass comments. So does Prem Kumar, so does RamaY. Everyone here has a right to speak as do you, to correct us if need be, as long as we all keep it cool.

Too little, too late ? - Again, what should have he done? His constituency is the IA and the men he commands. He does not need to give press conference to deal with the same.[/color]

This incident occurred several days back. No word from the IA COAS till now. NAK Browne speaks up first & meanwhile Hemraj's family are incensed and demanding justice. The COAS did not intervene or seek to assuage their anger per public records. In the meanwhile, several reports of the unit attacked, and its soldiers being incensed & other Army units venting their ire at commanders for not being allowed to respond.

Calling the media names is all very well - we all know that they deserve each & everyone of the names you gave them (and some more) but there is clearly a lot of resentment about the state of affairs, and the COAS has so far not been able to settle that issue.

It may be unfair to expect him to settle such a topic quickly, or it may be his calculated gambit to put pressure on GOI to give him operational freedom, who knows... but given how VK Singh left, and how he came in, this is indeed his first major challenge, and hence a bit of skepticism is warranted.

[Karan M]

Deter the Pakistanis? How many such cross border raids have you heard about? And you do forget that IA operates under the ambit of the GOI. If the GOI has imposed a ceasefire since 2003 and does not allow for any large scale and disproportionate response, what do you propose IA should do? In this attempt to somehow put the blame on the IA, every one is forgetting that IA does best in the context of laid down policy.

Exactly my point regarding the ceasefire limiting options, read the last line of my post about a toxic, fake peace - why are you so defensive and worried about everyone blaming the IA?

The point is that the message has to change, about somehow getting the Pakistanis to back off. As to how many raids have occurred - 4 per media reports (2 of theirs, and 2 of ours), though there may have been several more that didn't make it to public news, like the event during Paddy's time.

The wider issue is, that the Pakistanis are clearly seeing this as some sort of thing they can continue, again & again, and our limited head taking in return is not deterring them.

Its the IA's job to find a way to stop them (for their own & the nation's sake), if they cannot thanks to the antics of the GOI, a way has to be found to put pressure on the GOI to change its policy.

Forget the recent border incident - when was the last time Indian superiority was allowed to prevail? Talking of disproportionate response - how about moving an artillery brigade upfront and pulverizing the entire post/area from where the PA troops came? Can be done, right. But then you do realize that PA will retaliate at its place of choosing - and we will respond to that. Will the GOI of the day allow such escalation when it is drunk on cool-aid of 'Aman ki Asha' BS?

Exactly. Which is why I brought up the fire assault stuff. Was that the reason the Pakistanis stopped their Kaluchak style antics and their fidayeen attacks which were rising to the level of targeting army non combatants?

If that is the only method to stop these crazed idiots, then its what needs to be done, no ifs and buts. I find it shameful that the rest of India sits easily on the basis of an artificial peace whereas the Army suffers such acts and cannot even respond equally.

You cannot think of such events in isolation w/o catering for escalation and willing to climb up the ladder - come what may.

Agreed

Death is part of soldiering - pure and simple. Soldiers have died earlier on LOC and will continue to do in the future. That is how the dice rolls and men in OG know this.

The issue is not of death, which is where the soldiers are clearly incensed, judging by their impassioned responses to the current incident. Its about this sort of wanton barbarity and inflicting death in a humiliating manner, without an ability to deter the Pakistanis, imposed by some sort of artificial constraints.

The media pressure is on GOI to not sip tea and have kebabs with those who kill and mutilate your soldiers. IA does not do it. Given the reference point by the GOI, it does its best

Then the Army should do it. Look, a lot of young officers have the belief, justified or not, that as folks rise the ranks, they become more and more political and more worried about their kursi, than speaking truth to power.

Somewhere, someone will have to.

If not the current Army chief, then "leaks" to select media folks. Perhaps a whistleblower act like in the US, protecting those who speak out.

Again - as I have said earlier, the press conference was about Army Day and not this incident in particular.

I am referring to this incident and why the COAS should have been proactive in addressing perception. We are living in a media driven society. If the COAS does not take charge of the message, the media will drive its own message. And even morale could be affected to all those who derive their news from the media.

IA is accountable to people through GOI and not media circus - which BTW is not questioning the IA. IA could have sorted out TSPA in 2002 but for the GOI of the day. It is for GOI to explain what is it doing to prevent occurrence of such events by giving free hand to its army.[/color] <SNIP>

The Army is accountable to the public at all levels, and so is the GOI, the earlier era of "proper lines of communication" is not going to hold true today, or tomorrow. The messages to the public come from multiple levels and they have their own gravitas.

[putnanja]

One needs to look at the sequence of events. In this particular situation, if the pakis had not cried wolf and blamed IA for cross-border raid (which never took place, which the COAS denied in press conf too), then India wouldn't have probably publicized the beheading, and IA would have dealt with it at local level (read one more paki post smashed). However, pakis raised hell, and it was picked up by all major international news agencies. And then they went ahead and beheaded two soldiers. So the Indian version of the story too came out, and the rest as they say is history.

I am sorry... can you pls explain the sequence of events?

Jan 6: The Pakistani Army had claimed that one of its soldiers had died after Indian troops crossed the border and attacked a post This is covered in the international media on the same day. India denied this, when?

Jan 8: In Poonch's Mendhar region Pakistan Army regulars target Indian Army patrol and kill two soldiers beheading and carrying the head with them.

And India went public with Jan8th event, ONLY because Pakis cried wolf and otherwise it wouldnt have been made public?

And somehow the IA's retaliation was not done because the story that they leaked into media is public and they cannot be enraged by calls of billion fanatics.

And the REAL beheading of Indian soldiers is allowed to be == FAKE indian cross-border ride? (someone in TIRP thread claimed that this FAKE incident infact happened after that REAL beheading)

And somehow we should not know or cannot be told what IA really does in the borders, because we are internet warriors? Then why did IA leak the story to begin with? Were they afraid that Pakis will release this news anyway and get the mileage?

Why didnt IA avenge the REAL beheadings before going public to counter the FAKE cross-border raid?

Since when IA taking directions from international news stories and NGOs? Or does the new SOP includes the new chain of command where

/ PMO - US News Agencies - DOS - POTUS
IA <- MHA - Sonia Gandi - Vatican?
\ MEA - SG - Vatican?

Please educate us, so we know whom to gaali for our fate.

I am sorry if you think that one can retaliate within a few minutes of the incident happening. An operation like that has to be planned carefully. The pakis beheaded our soldiers and ran back to their side of the border and they were now pretty alert and watchful. Even the pakis operation itself was planned at least 8-10 days in advance as per COAS Bikram singh.

And you seem to be arguing for arguing sake. If you read about the previous incidents too, the retaliation was done 1-3 months after the incident.

If you read my post carefully, I had mentioned that even if the issue was not revealed, IA would have done what it needs to do. And it will do so even now, just that there is a good chance it will not become public for another 1-2 years.

And who talked about IA taking orders from news agencies etc? Dude, you seem to be imagining things a little too much.

[RamaY]

Fair enough! So IA is going to take action in next 1-2 years. We will wait.

I will also believe that IA didn't become alert and watchful after the fake Jan6 news item. They don't read news papers like I do.

[putnanja]

...
...
The Army is accountable to the public at all levels, and so is the GOI, the earlier era of "proper lines of communication" is not going to hold true today, or tomorrow. The messages to the public come from multiple levels and they have their own gravitas.

Like it or not, military is subservient to civil authority in a democratic setup. Otherwise, every flareup on LoC will lead to full fledged war. Now, I am not saying that is a bad thing. But whether to escalate or stand down is ordered by political leadership and not by IA. It is the same in any democratic country.

If the IA is asked not to escalate by New Delhi, that is what IA will do. It will keep the conflict localized. That is what our military did in Kargil war when they didn't cross IB or LoC.

No use blaming army here. They have taken care of similar situations earlier, and they will do so in this case and in future too.

[putnanja]

Fair enough! So IA is going to take action in next 1-2 years. We will wait.

I will also believe that IA didn't become alert and watchful after the fake Jan6 news item. They don't read news papers like I do.

Show how well you read the posts??

[rohitvats]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueavia ... 506565905/

Question to BRF jirga.....pldase to explain significance of the above pic.

[Karan M]

Like it or not, military is subservient to civil authority in a democratic setup. Otherwise, every flareup on LoC will lead to full fledged war. Now, I am not saying that is a bad thing. But whether to escalate or stand down is ordered by political leadership and not by IA. It is the same in any democratic country.

If the IA is asked not to escalate by New Delhi, that is what IA will do. It will keep the conflict localized. That is what our military did in Kargil war when they didn't cross IB or LoC.

No use blaming army here. They have taken care of similar situations earlier, and they will do so in this case and in future too.

Read what was written please, not provide your own interpretation. The issue is not of Army going off half cocked & attacking without GOI permission, but in this specific case, of managing public perception better. The case being made so far by Rohitvats (to whose post I replied) is that Bikram Singh has done everything by the book & the interaction with the media at the traditional conference was a sideshow.

In which case, given public sentiment over this issue, he should have handled it/addressed it before this particular event. If GOI rules don't allow such a senior person to do even this, or talk openly on such a matter, then its high time, GOI rules are changed. The Army are not guard dogs to be displayed on Republic Day, but should be treated as part of the ruling structure, not someone to just order around.

[RamaY]

Putnanja garu, i am giving more time for IA onlee.. I know it took a while for them to take care of "Iliyas Kashmiri" guy, so dont want to press them more.

Secondly no one answered my question. Does IA really take permission from PMO to respond to a cross-border ride? Can't it put PMO in a situation where PMO is forced to act?

Don't tell me IA always takes orders from their civilian masters. They didn't do so in all those scams.

[Vipul]

Well, if the 'public' does not know to differentiate between IA Chief and the sh*t heads sitting in MHA/MOD/MEA, then the problem is theirs. And somehow if they feel that in their angst against the UPA-2, they feel it all right to besmirch the COAS, well, they can go fly the kite.

Well the public will be Skeptical if this chief has been brought in under dubious circumstances and through machinations of the MHA/MOD/MEA controlling PM.

Shamefully played down? WTF, Man...Did the Army release the information about current incident to the Press?When was the last time you remember IA calling press conferences about incidents on the border? And who said IA tried to 'play down' the earlier events? Some d*ck head journo passing flatulence on behalf of GOI? Come on, you can do better.

Then how come that event did not get publicised at all? Newspaper hounds are normally on the look-out for scoops and sensational news, there is no way this information would not have come out unless the Army had kept a very firm lid on it.

Some of reports also said that IA inflicted heavy pain on PA for those incidents as well - it will do this time as well. It did not require internet warriors and media to tell them what to do then nor does it require the same now.

There is no way out but to seek retaliatory revenge or the army risks being taken for granted or worse being wilfully taken liberty of.

Point One - IA Chief or any other Chief does not hold press conference WITHOUT clearance from the MOD. NAK Browne commented on the issue on the sidelines of an event. And COAS did not hold the press conference today to comment on the this issue specifically - the Press Conference was on the eve of Army Day which falls on 15th January.

Precisely my point, NAK Browne did not wait for his Master's OK before giving a strong statement. This Chief has so far acted like someone who owes an obligation to someone (we all know who) for appointing him as the chief.

[RamaY]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/torqueavia ... 506565905/

Question to BRF jirga.....pldase to explain significance of the above pic.

Escalation of war. Killing of civilians. Triggering nuclear flash point. End of civilization.