Many dead, including Police SP in Gurdaspur Terror attack

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 30 Jul 2015 22:24

johneeG, that is an excellent diagram. The small analysis that might be done is to answr - why does Pakistan see only one lever to use - namely, "Sponsor terrorism against India"?

I think most of us think we know the answer, if there are any unique perspectives, it would be good to know.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 30 Jul 2015 22:25

I think we should go easy on Harpal....unless we are sure the pachy is out of containment. He does have a good imagination and maybe his theories don't make sense. He does seem Indian to me.

mayo · Post by **mayo** » 30 Jul 2015 22:29

Guddu ji,

He has already taken two more minutes to respond than his average response time. That's a proof that he can't read sanskrit and is hence, a packee.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 30 Jul 2015 22:29

A_Gupta wrote:johneeG, that is an excellent diagram. The small analysis that might be done is to answr - why does Pakistan see only one lever to use - namely, "Sponsor terrorism against India"?

I think most of us think we know the answer, if there are any unique perspectives, it would be good to know.

Pakistan's only offensive capability against Bhaarath: Terrorism.
Pakistan's only defensive capability against Bhaarath: Nuclear Bluff.

Pakistan is already using both these capabilities in ample measure.

Picklu · Post by **Picklu** » 30 Jul 2015 22:30

I have not seen more verbal somersault since S2 left (in a huff).

Sigh! Just when I was about the forget the broken record of "broken arrow" comes grand master and mother and all other m things!!!

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 30 Jul 2015 22:40

Via Shiv, Harpal Bector wrote: "my assessment that Pakistan has come a long way since the tactically brilliant phase of General Musharraf. One is coping with a different Pakistan today than in ages past. "

What is different about the Pakistan of 2015 compared say, to the Pakistan of 2004? I really don't see significant internal changes, the external environment has changed quite a bit. Perhaps the most significant internal change seems to be that the Pakistani Army is apparently more successful in keeping all the jihadis under its control; some had slipped the leash especially after the Lal Masjid incident in 2007. There is no new push to economic development, new policy, etc., etc., etc. It probably has become more illiberal, e.g., in 2004 it might have been possible to publicly discuss the blasphemy law.

The external environment - compare Afghanistan & China 2004 with 2015, for instance, the changes are enormous.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 30 Jul 2015 22:44

johneeG wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:johneeG, that is an excellent diagram. The small analysis that might be done is to answr - why does Pakistan see only one lever to use - namely, "Sponsor terrorism against India"?

I think most of us think we know the answer, if there are any unique perspectives, it would be good to know.
Pakistan's only offensive capability against Bhaarath: Terrorism.
Pakistan's only defensive capability against Bhaarath: Nuclear Bluff.

Pakistan is already using both these capabilities in ample measure.

Ah, but since one catches more flies with honey than vinegar, why is Pakistan using only danda, perhaps trying bheda; but not saam, daam? (for instance, I think the 4 choices are limiting).

E.g., power equations Pakistan might aspire to w.r.t. India, Pakistan:India :: Japan:China or :: Germany:Russia. It is not even attempting any of that.

Harpal Bector · Post by **Harpal Bector** » 30 Jul 2015 23:15

mayo wrote: In all your theories, Pakis are the mards with hunter in their hands, always designing devious experiments against hapless desis. Bharatiyas are the dormant punching bags.

I said Pakistan's national security ideas revolve around being the first movers.

dnivas · Post by **dnivas** » 30 Jul 2015 23:19

Harpal Bector wrote:
@Akshay Kapoor

No.. this Khalid and Karan (http://blogs.rediff.com/kashmirdiary/ca ... mir-diary/) Happy reading as this may have been before your time.

Posted and assimilated here ages ago.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 30 Jul 2015 23:19

Harpal Bector wrote: I don't think they are having any difficulty killing Indians. The border has become porous. The only reason they went to Dinanpur is because they wanted to. If they had chosen they could have derailed the train and attacked that.

Non sequitir, like all your other responses. The point is how much of damage are they causing in reality...more Indians die due to traffic accidents by many orders of magnitude than few hundred (out of a billion+) Indians that the pakis kill on an annual basis, so the real metric is how often can they kill Indians and how many at a time. Regardless of your BS, the stats show that the number has come down pretty drastically since the 90s and is howering low and steady since, which rubbishes you exagerrated claims of pakis becoming smarter and having a new game plan. Any one who follows pakis for a year or two has a better reading of Pakis than what the cr@p you have come up with so far.

Harpal Bector · Post by **Harpal Bector** » 30 Jul 2015 23:20

Arre bhai, as I have told Fanne I am not Pakistani.

If I was - wouldn't the mods ban me? have that much faith at least.

Harpal Bector · Post by **Harpal Bector** » 30 Jul 2015 23:24

Tuvaluan wrote: Non sequitir, like all your other responses.

I have answered your questions as best I can. If that is not satisfactory I am sorry to disappoint you.

The point is how much of damage are they causing in reality...more Indians die due to traffic accidents by many orders of magnitude than few hundred (out of a billion+) Indians that the pakis kill on an annual basis, so the real metric is how often can they kill Indians and how many at a time.

I don't think the MHA normalizes the data in that fashion you seek. The only measure I have seen is an average rate of unsolved murders, but that metric has its limitations.

Regardless of your BS, the stats show that the number has come down pretty drastically since the 90s and is howering low and steady since, which rubbishes you exagerrated claims of pakis becoming smarter and having a new game plan. Any one who follows pakis for a year or two has a better reading of Pakis than what the cr@p you have come up with so far.

Yes the stats show that picture - but the statistical data analysis not the same thing as a predictive model.

If a new threat like this obvious demonstration of the porosity of the IB at Gurdaspur - one has to do a full re-evaluation. All assumptions used to create a model that explained previous data are out.

Harpal Bector · Post by **Harpal Bector** » 30 Jul 2015 23:27

A_Gupta wrote:Via Shiv, Harpal Bector wrote: "my assessment that Pakistan has come a long way since the tactically brilliant phase of General Musharraf. One is coping with a different Pakistan today than in ages past. "

What is different about the Pakistan of 2015 compared say, to the Pakistan of 2004? I really don't see significant internal changes, the external environment has changed quite a bit. Perhaps the most significant internal change seems to be that the Pakistani Army is apparently more successful in keeping all the jihadis under its control; some had slipped the leash especially after the Lal Masjid incident in 2007. There is no new push to economic development, new policy, etc., etc., etc. It probably has become more illiberal, e.g., in 2004 it might have been possible to publicly discuss the blasphemy law.

The external environment - compare Afghanistan & China 2004 with 2015, for instance, the changes are enormous.

Thank you - that is the question I would like to see people here try to get their head around.

A whole generation of officers has come out PMA Kakul in that time. Their way of thinking is different from those before them. They have faced different challenges and seen a very different Pakistan.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 30 Jul 2015 23:32

Harpal Bector wrote: Yes the stats show that picture - but the statistical data analysis not the same thing as a predictive model.

I did not do a statistical analysis, genius. I pointed out that existing data from say satp.org or other sites maintaining stats on number of deaths due to paki terrorism show that you are full of sh!t.

you claim that pakis are killing more Indians than they used to, and that is just wrong.

If a new threat like this obvious demonstration of the porosity of the IB at Gurdaspur - one has to do a full re-evaluation. All assumptions used to create a model that explained previous data are out.

Porosity, my foot. Which part of "there is no such thing as a 100% secure defense" did not penetrate that skull of yours? Each event is an opportunity to know what the other side has learnt and what we have to do better to neutralize their progress in defeating our defenses --- rest is all bombastic bullpoo.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 30 Jul 2015 23:38

Harpal Bector wrote: A whole generation of officers has come out PMA Kakul in that time. Their way of thinking is different from those before them. They have faced different challenges and seen a very different Pakistan.

From India's perspective, does it matter how the paki army scum look at pakistan? What is this american snake oil you are selling here with respect to paki army scum? First they are all grandmasters and now these mofos are very different because they view pakistan very different? WTF is wrong with you?

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 30 Jul 2015 23:40

It is important to capture these terrorists alive, so that they can give information about planning, other groups that may be active.
There would be a common indoctrinator for these guys, who needs to be taken out.
There has to be an ISI handler, which RAW would know about.

The Indian Ordinance factories need to supply some of those assamese red mirchi grenades that they are supplying to police forces, some sedative gas grenades etc to all our swat teams, RR battalions in the valley.

These pakistani terrorists need to be captured alive, interrogated, and then locked up and hanged once they've lost their usefulness in a few years.

I remember the time, when Kasab was singing like canary, he was supposedly very very forthcoming with information.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 30 Jul 2015 23:43

We've killed enough terrorists.
We need to capture more and more of them alive, make examples of them on TV.
Take pictures of them post-servicing by pulis and air drop pamplets into muridke and aabpara.

LET recruits from the small town and kasbas in Punjab.
Maybe a targetted campaign in those areas.
I hear that if a terrorist gets killed in J&K, their family gets a couple of lakhs of rupees in Pakjab. Hmm, that is a big amount for a villager to have all of a sudden in poverty ridden Pakjab.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 30 Jul 2015 23:50

johneeG wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:johneeG, that is an excellent diagram. The small analysis that might be done is to answr - why does Pakistan see only one lever to use - namely, "Sponsor terrorism against India"?

I think most of us think we know the answer, if there are any unique perspectives, it would be good to know.
Pakistan's only offensive capability against Bhaarath: Terrorism.
Pakistan's only defensive capability against Bhaarath: Nuclear Bluff.

Pakistan is already using both these capabilities in ample measure.

A_Gupta wrote:
Ah, but since one catches more flies with honey than vinegar, why is Pakistan using only danda, perhaps trying bheda; but not saam, daam? (for instance, I think the 4 choices are limiting).

E.g., power equations Pakistan might aspire to w.r.t. India, Pakistan:India :: Japan:China or :: Germany:Russia. It is not even attempting any of that.

The right comparison is India:Pakistan::South Korea: North Korea.

German-Russia are two different countries.
Japan-China are two different countries.

But, South Korea and North Korea are a single country partitioned into 2 different regimes/states.

Look at North Korea's strategy against South Korea. It is very similar Pakistan's strategy against Bhaarath. The only thing different is: Terrorism.

The terrorism angle is because of following reasons:
- North Korea is comparable is size to South Korea. North Korean army is comparable to South Korea.
- Pakistan is much smaller than Bhaarath. Pakistani army is much smaller than Bhaarath.
- Pakistan has lost 4 wars against Bhaarath.
- Pakistan's all main cities are too close to IB unlike Bhaarath.
- Hindhu-Muslim angle.
- Bangladhesh seceded from Pakistan in 71 and there are more secessionist movements in Pakistan.

As for Saam, Dhaan, Bhedha and Dhand:
- Saam:
Pakistan keeps talking about talks. It is Bhaarath which cancels talks.
- Dhaan:
Pakistan doesn't have much to give. It tries to make do by selling dreams of MFN and access to central asia or Iran. But, for various reasons Pakistan cannot give these to Bhaarath because of the fear that Bhaarath will hijack Pakistan economically and assimilate it without firing a bullet.
- Bhedha:
Support for various secessionist movements is already being given by Pakistan.
Dhanda:
Offensive capability. Pakistan doesn't have any offensive capability against Bhaarath except terrorism.

The point is that Pakistan has very limited capabilities and it is already using those capabilities to its fullest. It is Bhaarath which refuses to put an end to Pakistan's misery.

My suggestion to Bhaarath's leaders: Occupy Lahore, Islamabad and Rawalipindi for 2 weeks militarily.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 30 Jul 2015 23:50

All the ten attackers in 26/11 were identified.
Open source media reported their names and towns.

How many doubt that in a few weeks-months indian intel would have exact house number of these people?

Even now, the sources in LET, ISI, Pakistan Police, Pakistan Army, other nations intel sources, must be giving a lot of information to India.
The ISI officer (Harpal's Gandu-master) must have been identified. Intel probably has files on all afsars deployed in the field who are on deputation to ISI. So the families and assets of these officers must be already known.

If GOI really really wants, these people can be given a lot of pain.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 30 Jul 2015 23:52

HB, So your core point is TSP has changed its tactics from ealier forays with terrorists.
The rebuttal is nothing has changed. Its the same old tactics.
Evidence/vividence is for legal case.
Who is the audience for this evidence?

In 1993, India sent Mumbai bomb attacks evidence to US. They destroyed it.
In 2008 India sent massive dossiers to TSP after capturing Kasab alive. They just ignored it.
To add insult to injury US arrested DCH and took him into protective custody out of reach of India.

Today after 22 years Yakub Memon was finally hanged.

Afzal Guru and Kasab got hanged also after many years of state hospitality.

So no point in pursuing criminal cases. Just shoot them dead.

Gagan, If possible capture them. But definitely shoot them dead. Don't let them escape.

Harpal Bector · Post by **Harpal Bector** » 30 Jul 2015 23:57

Tuvaluan wrote: I did not do a statistical analysis, genius. I pointed out that existing data from say satp.org or other sites maintaining stats on number of deaths due to paki terrorism show that you are full of sh!t.

Most of the casualties were in J&K and those have dropped over the last decade. That doesn't imply anything about Pakistani ability to kill Indians in unexpected places in 26/11 style attacks.

Porosity, my foot. Which part of "there is no such thing as a 100% secure defense" did not penetrate that skull of yours? Each event is an opportunity to know what the other side has learnt and what we have to do better to neutralize their progress in defeating our defenses --- rest is all bombastic bullpoo.

I think I am more inclined to KPSG's pov that gradual growth in illicit cross border trade has created a hitherto unseen level of porosity in the IB. I don't think we are looking at a mere statistical anomaly here. Criminal infiltration along that border has been increasing steadily.

Dear Ramana,

The Pakistanis will change tactics to increase deniability. If the terrorists can be arrested, a new stream of information will open up. The entire promise made to the fidayeen - of assured martyrdom - will end. Any gain made in this fashion can be exploited in various ways - evidence to decision makers, evidence to media campaigns in known recruiting bases, shore up public confidence in judicial process, etc...

Maybe it is better to ask what would have happened if Ajmal hadn't been captured alive?

Harpal Bector · Post by **Harpal Bector** » 31 Jul 2015 00:06

Tuvaluan wrote: From India's perspective, does it matter how the paki army scum look at pakistan? What is this american snake oil you are selling here with respect to paki army scum? First they are all grandmasters and now these mofos are very different because they view pakistan very different? WTF is wrong with you?

I am simply pointing out times have changed and perceptions of Pakistan should change accordingly. What is your problem with that?

Harpal Bector · Post by **Harpal Bector** » 31 Jul 2015 00:07

Akshay Kapoor wrote:Ramana,

there is no difference between TPSA regulars and terrorists (India focused one HM, Let, HAU etc) any more. Has not been for a while. I think they should just raise a new regt and call it Jehadi Regt. High time our media and public at large get this.

Oh I missed this - Kapoorji - ask your friends - these already exist - they are called Mujahid Battalions.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 31 Jul 2015 00:08

HB, You know those MB are on other side of LOC only.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 31 Jul 2015 00:19

Most of the casualties were in J&K and those have dropped over the last decade. That doesn't imply anything about Pakistani ability to kill Indians in unexpected places in 26/11 style attacks.

Yes, but that is all they can do, since that is all the cretinous brains can think of every time. They spend a lot of money and resources training and sending in people to kill Indians, and India does not respond them in a way that they can politically capitalize on the deaths of Indians caused by their terrorisms. So they take more loans from more countries and organizations to repeat the same violent cr@p they are used to doing. Chinese are now taking over training of their personnel along the IB and where ever, so the chinese are the real and present threat to India right now, not the stupid cretins that run pakistan. They are just a pointless distraction.

All the pakis can do is play spoiler, which is expected given that they are slaves to which ever country is renting them by the hour at any given time.

I think I am more inclined to KPSG's pov that gradual growth in illicit cross border trade has created a hitherto higher level of porosity in the IB.

If this cross border thread is a security problem, the problem is an internal one, and pakistan has nothing to do with it. More attacks are successful along the IB because more attempts are made along the IB -- even if the pakis have a equal or lower success rate than the other border they attempt to infiltrate, it is just a matter of what fraction of these attempts succeed. This also puts an upper upper bound on their total capacity to infiltrate -- they are only capable of training and funding some number X of infiltration attempts, and given that all of these scumbags are readily disposed once they are in India, they incur a steady cost proportional to X in terms of weapons, money, and jihadis. This is expected since they probably have some upper bound on the number of terrorists they can train over a period of time. This also means that they have to spread these X attempts across different borders, and let us say their success rate is 5%, then this 5% will be spread across the different borders in proportion to the number of attempts they make on each of the borders. Unless the actual number of events and the number of people killed per event continue to increase, it does not imply that the pakis have suddenly grown some extra brains and have become less stupid than they usually are.

I don't think we are looking at a mere statistical anomaly here. Criminal infiltration along that border has been increasing steadily.

what is this criminal infiltration? Who is keeping track of this statistics and differentiating between terrorist infiltration and "criminal" infiltration? I mean, if all these people who cross are either killed, then how do we know someone cross is not a criminal but a terrorist or vice versa? Cross border smuggling is obviously an attractive conduit to be exploited by terrorist groups, but the solution to that lies in the state law and order mechanism, if they can work with the army and other interested orgs in pooling resources and targeting suspects.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 31 Jul 2015 00:22

Harpal Bector wrote: I am simply pointing out times have changed and perceptions of Pakistan should change accordingly.

Since you are the one making grand proclamations here, why don't you provide 5 ways in which Pakistan has changed, that would require a different perception of pakistan. We all know they have a freer hand in Afghanisthan than they did in the last decade, thanks to the US scum, so we will leave that aside.

What are five specific ways in which pakistan has changed for it to be viewed differently now? If you cannot answer this, you may just be a Grandmaster of utter bullsh!t.

New generation of people in the pakistani army is not a good answer, for example...all generations have proven themselves to be the same set of criminal minded jihadi scum, so provide examples related to paki society and establishment and military that require such a "review of perception" of pakistan.

Sid · Post by **Sid** » 31 Jul 2015 00:27

Are we still discussing Gurdaspur Terror attack in this thread? Its not even clear what are we discussing? Discussion topic is changing from post to post.

While successfull in lowering our HB, HB succeed in increasing his post count by 100 in this thread alone.

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 31 Jul 2015 01:19

Sid, HB here has stuck to his claim that the pakis are now a bigger threat to India than they used to be, and that Gurdaspur marks a departure from earlier incompetent paki terrorism to some grandmaster type strategeric thinking with deep meaning and implications for India...which is unfortunately, at this time, is hidden under a pile of horse dung that HB has piled on, or so it seems. So he is going to explain to everyone here how the paki army jernails are this new and dangerous animal these days, as opposed to the usual jihadi terrorist scum they have always been.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 31 Jul 2015 01:25

Can someone who is not blocked by C.C. Fair ask her if she thinks there is any difference between Pakistani army officers of 2004 and of 2015? IMO, she is someone who might be close to the data.

From her talks, what I remember is that there are (marginally) more officer recruits from outside Punjab, and they are from communities/regions that have lesser hostility towards India than Pakjabis.

Her paper from 2011:
“The Changing Pakistan Army Officer Corps,” C. Christine Fair and Shuja Nawaz, Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol. 34, No. 1 (February 2011): 63-94.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 31 Jul 2015 01:32

“The Changing Pakistan Army Officer Corps,” C. Christine Fair and Shuja Nawaz, Journal of Strategic Studies, Vol. 34, No. 1 (February 2011): 63-94. is online PDF format.

Since the 1990s, the Army has followed an explicit policy of broadening its recruitment base to draw from provinces other than the Punjab. According to the Pakistan Army’s ten-year recruitment plan launched in 2001, by 2011 the Army hopes to increase Pashtuns from 13.5 percent to 14.5 percent; Sindhis from 15 to 17 percent, and the Baluchis from nearly nil to 4 percent. In addition,
the Army hopes to increase the numbers of persons from Azad Kashmir and Northern Areas from nearly zero to 9 percent of the force. Punjabis would make up the balance of 55.5 percent. Minority recruitment would be increased marginally.

Figures 2 through 5 dramatically demonstrate that the Pakistan Army has been successful in making the Army more geographically representative. As depicted in Figure 2, in 1974 the center of gravity for officer recruitment largely centered on key districts in the Punjab with a few in NWFP. By 1984 (see Figure 3), officer recruitment had expanded throughout the rest of Punjab, large parts of Sindh, NWFP, the Northern Areas and selected districts in Baluchistan. Changes between 1984 and 1994 were less dramatic but illustrate continued expansion of officer recruitment and some continuity as evidenced by comparing Figures 3 and 4. By 2005, as shown in Figure 5, officer recruitment had expanded into many more districts in Baluchistan and indeed into most of the districts in the country.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 31 Jul 2015 01:39

Pakistani Army officer combat experience -- in the last decade, the Pakistani army has been engaged in a lot of Zarb-e-Azb type operations. In this model, they announce months in advance that they are going to clear an area of terrorists, let everyone who wants to move out, do so; and then they carpet-bomb or whatever the depopulated area. Any people left there are assumed to be enemies of the Pakistani army.

a. Is this a fair characterization?
If yes, then,
b. How does this change when/how/with whoom the Pakistani Army sponsors terrorist attacks in India?
c. How does this make them more (or less) combat ready with India?

In the macro-environment, how has this alleged internal fight against jihadis changed the mix of weapons that Pakistan's western military suppliers have been willing to supply?

What are the other significant things we need to know about the Pakistani officer corp?

PS: Oh yes, we should remember that the Pakistani officer corp has had their own offspring killed by their own proxies, as in the Peshawar school massacre. Have they learned from this that terrorism is a bad idea; or merely that they need tighter control of their jihadis?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 31 Jul 2015 01:57

Worth a careful read about Pakistan's counter-insurgency:
http://www.grouph3canada.com/index.php/ ... operations

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 31 Jul 2015 02:33

The most charitable interpretation that I can give to the bulk of the previous discussion is that we have largely been focused on two questions, which are:

1. We know the Pakistanis are behind the Gurdaspur attack. Can we prove it with some high standard of proof?
2. What is India going to do about it?

Perhaps there are other questions that we should be thinking about:

Is there a shift in Pakistani tactics? perhaps driven by decreasing returns in J&K terrorism, and negative returns in ceasefire violations/cross-bordering firing? Is there a generational or experience-driven shift in the Pakistani army officers that is of any significance to India? (e.g., I don't think Pak. counter-insurgeny experience has any significance to sponsoring of terrorism in India.)

What weaknesses in India has the Gurdaspur attack exposed? What does India need to do in terms of equipment, training, inter-agency cooperation, Centre-State cooperation, etc., etc., to plug these gaps? Have the jihadis learned anything significant in the outcomes of this attack that can guide them to a more successful attack?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 31 Jul 2015 02:35

A_Gupta wrote:johneeG, that is an excellent diagram. The small analysis that might be done is to answr - why does Pakistan see only one lever to use - namely, "Sponsor terrorism against India"?

I think most of us think we know the answer, if there are any unique perspectives, it would be good to know.

Possible answers for Paki behavior are:
- Because it can
- Because India can't kill all Pakis
- Because India accepts this

Imagine India stated policy & implementation on the ground is that for every Indian killed by direct/indirect Paki action 1Sq.Mile of Paki territory will be taken by India then

Pakis at most can kill what 1million Indians?

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 31 Jul 2015 03:04

Since Harpal Bector will not go in front of Modi and tell him the attackers came from Pakistan; Rajnath Singh decided to tell Rajya Sabha. Maybe Rajnath lurks BRF and must have gotten a little anxious reading Bector's posts. On second thoughts even Rajnath does not have the courage, like Bector, to go in front of Modi.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/ ... ath-singh/

Home Minister Rajnath Singh told the Rajya Sabha Thursday that the terrorists behind the Gurdaspur attack had “infiltrated from Pakistan”.

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/g ... 482867.ece

Speaking outside the House, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said “overwhelmingly conclusive” evidence proved that the Gurdaspur attackers came from across the border.

Even Jaitley is afraid to go in front of Modi. Everybody is like Bector onlee.

SwamyG · Post by **SwamyG** » 31 Jul 2015 03:11

Arunji, India was like any other civilization that celebrated its heroes and revered them; and in some cases made them gods and goddesses.

What will Modi do? What will GoI do? Itiyadi are valid questions. My questions: "When will media celebrate the heroes?" "When will people openly celebrate their heroes?".

Multatuli · Post by **Multatuli** » 31 Jul 2015 03:13

Harpal Bector wrote:

The default assumption has become that Pakistanis are bunch of stupid inbred idiots who can never do anything this sophisticated. There is so much confidence in India's superiority over Pakistan that people don't get that India's rise over Pakistan's reach is going to make the Pakistanis more aggressive, vicious and cunning in their approach to things with India.

What exactly was so clever/sophisticated about this attack? This kind of attacks have been going on in India's North and East for quite a while. The only thing remarkable with this attack is how much luck we had (explosives discovered before the train reached the bridge) and how resolute the people concerned reacted to the threats.

As for the paki's getting more 'aggressive, vicious and cunning in their approach to things with India' as India rises, well that's why Packeeland was created in the first place, and Packees have been threatening India in this manner for decades now.

Yes Packees will do their utmost to create mayhem in India to tie her down, but there is nothing new about that.

I hope Packees get more 'aggressive, vicious and cunning in their approach to things with India' because that may just force India to do what India should have done to Packeeland in the 1960's.

Tuvaluan wrote:

Pakis lie all the time and say utter cr@p -- any reason why they should be taken at face value, especially if they are "kayani's friends on the internet" just like I am "Madhuri Dixit's old flame" on the internet. It is not just the camera shots that are overblown here from what I can tell.

Folks, I don't think this 'Harpal Bector' should be banned, he is a paki-esque clown. Just ignore him if he irritates you.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 31 Jul 2015 03:37

Q. Was the Gurdaspur attack an attempt to revive a Khalistani insurgency?

A: No
1. The terrorists are established to have been Muslims.
2. A serious attempt would have adorned them with the Sikh 5 Ks and uncircumcised jihadis from FATA (CC Fair swears that such exist) would have been used.
3. The mission would have had a non-zero probability of the terrorists escaping alive (I don't think Khalistanis have the ideology for suicide missions?), while the Gurdaspur attack was clearly a suicide mission.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 31 Jul 2015 03:43

Q: How was the target chosen?

A: Hypothesis: the possible targets were constrained by the available border crossing points and the length of time the jihadis could go undetected. The available crossing points were limited to where rivers cross the border. The jihadis had little to none logistics support inside the border, and that limited how far they could go.

Corollary: there is no way these are domestic terrorists because domestic terrorists could have chosen a more high profile target. { And if they were domestic someone or other would have reported missing young men by now.}

MurthyB · Post by **MurthyB** » 31 Jul 2015 03:44

Harpal Bector wrote:FWIW let me share some of the discussions that took place over potato paratha and chole.

Setting up a SG(F) with specific responsibility to take fidayeen alive.

Harpal Bector wrote: wrote: my assessment that Pakistan has come a long way since the tactically brilliant phase of General Musharraf. One is coping with a different Pakistan today than in ages past.

Deja Vu all over! Could it be 2005 again, with a certain P Iyengar in the house and a "maverick" pleading for Pee-track diplomacy?! 'Cept this time P Iyengar was shaheedized in Gurdaspur!