In retaliation to the recent attack on innocent tourists in Pahalgam, in India by a group of terrorists who killed innocent people based on their names and religion, India have struck back. However, considering non-harm to innocent human lives, India attacked targeted, terrorists abode. What are your thoughts on this?
-
Welcome to ROFLMAO.com—the ultimate destination for unfiltered discussions and endless entertainment! Whether it’s movies, TV, music, games, or whatever’s on your mind, this is your space to connect and share. Be funny. Be serious. Be You. Don’t just watch the conversation—join it now and be heard!
discuss India just attacked the terrosists abode in Pakistan
- Thread starter Dr. A
- Start date
This thread covers all aspects of ideologies, including beliefs, principles, traditions, policies, and their influence on society and culture.
ActionAce
Major Mayhem
I love how the Indians stood up to defend themselves and avoid harm to innocent lives. That was a proactive measure . Each and every individual should learn from this.
You have to keep in mind that both are nuclear capable nations that hate each other, with China possibly siding with Pakistan due to the new India-US tariffs, and each proactive measure from either side can lead to a catastrophe not seen since WWII, with a much greater yield.
Deescalation is the answer. But which side will be the bigger man and cease fire?
I wish President Trump would try to intervene and form a truce between the two nations.
They're both nuclear nations. That's not a good thing. Attacks back and forth could lead to bad moves that will have major impacts on this world not just India and Pakistan.
Maybe it should be called even now, an eye for an eye had occurred, right?
That is a pipe dream for the Middle East.
An eye for an eye can quickly turn into an arm for an arm, and then a life for a life, and then a city for a city. It's a slippery slope...
The news today said that India was able to pulverize 9 camps of the Pakistani terrorists. It was a retaliation from India. Their water and current were cut off by the Indian government.
Now, that's the escalation problem. I believe they have a treaty not to do that. Whether they do or don't, that water is critical to civilians, so I would expect more attacks from Pakistan, and possibly severe ones, as they are harming more than just militants.
Just like Isreal and Palestine issues, India Pakistan issues go deeper than the partition of the two countries in 1947. Unless one nation accept the existence of another nation, the conflict will continue. Both are nuclear states and I think India will exercise restrain as it is a democracy but Pakistan is ruled by Army (defacto) and the Pakistani Army is war monger.
I figured they accepted there are two nations (really three counting Bangladesh). What's the problem?
Myself, I don't understand how people can want a united Indian subcontinent when obviously the two religious groups cannot co-exist. They are even sworn enemies.
I think it's more about the land than wanting to co-exist with the people that currently inhabit the land. Meaning, they would have to accept the defeat and stay, which would cause clashes, or be expelled from the land into the smaller Pakistan, if the lines were redrawn.
I could be wrong, though, as I'm still learning about the dispute and why they would want to be at each other's throats.
Just like Israel originally being Jewish land, the land where India, Pakistan and Bangladesh exist is the land of Hindu. And just like Palestine settling in Jewish land for hundreds of years, Muslims are living there for hundreds of years. The root of India Pakistan conflict lies in the centuries old religious conflict.
It's stupid to fight over land, that's probably a desert wasteland anyway. Especially, it's dumb to fight when it could lead to nuclear holocaust and nuclear winter for the whole world.
I've read where the US have reminded Pakistan that their F-16s cannot be used for this conflict. They agreed to terms that the jets are only to be used for counterterrorism operations when they acquired them. It'll be interesting to see if Pakistan complies with that. As the country that probably knew they were hiding Bin Laden, I'm interested in whether or not they actually comply or note.
Pakistan has maintained an interesting balance. They have been the United States' strategic partner for years and yet have maintained a friendly relationship with China as well. Recently, a Pakistani minister admitted that they have been doing "dirty work" for the US and UK for decades.
I wouldn't say that it's stupid to fight over land. Look what is underneath Pakistan, for example.
Also, there are vast oil fields in the desert wasteland, too, a vital component that is essential to keep any modern-day military and economy moving.
I would be wary of them. Where did we find Osama bin Laden again?
If they can hide that from us for so long, what else are they hiding from the US?
Since India was more inclined towards Russia, the US always sided with Pakistan. They invested in Pakistan to counter India as well as China and Afghanistan. Interestingly, China also heavily invested in Pakistan to tackle growing India. Now, there is a danger of nuclear war.I wouldn't say that it's stupid to fight over land. Look what is underneath Pakistan, for example.
Also, there are vast oil fields in the desert wasteland, too, a vital component that is essential to keep any modern-day military and economy moving.
I would be wary of them. Where did we find Osama bin Laden again?
If they can hide that from us for so long, what else are they hiding from the US?
It seems like the US is in a rock/hard place right now.
India entered into good trade terms with the US and is also using its military tools. So, when India fires off anything, it's essentially pumping money into our economy, as well as intel, as they can 'test' our weaponry to see what's more effective.
On the other hand, India is also receiving Russian equipment and has good trade deals with them.
Pakistan is using China's military equipment. In addition to that, China has pumped billions of dollars worth of investment into Pakistan.
So, if it came down to it, I think that the US would side with India, but I really think they want nothing to do with it because both are nuclear-armed nations, so it won't just be some artillery and drone warfare if it escalates too much, as you alluded to.
The United States under Trump would rather support India even when they have strong affiliation with Russia. If it was a Democrat federal government, the case would have likely been different. Pakistan has no respite here. India would destroy them.
Everything is fair in war situations. There must be civilian casualties. India didn't start attacking the Pakistanis unprovoked. I am all out for a retaliation at a higher scale by India. To every action, there is a reaction to expect. Those civilians might surprisingly be cheerleaders of the terrorists.
It's only when nukes are involved when I get wary.
They can use a low yield. Then what's the escalation? A higher yield?
Then that opens the proverbial nuclear can of worms. If Pakistan uses them, albeit small and tactical, then India follows up with twice the strikes as a counter measure, that not only tells each other they're "fine" escalating the number of attacks or size of the attacks, but also tells the world that the nuclear option is on the table as a first measure. It'd no longer be "the last use was to end WWII", rather an option that any nuclear nation can use them. Once that can is open, there's no closing the lid for any current or future conflict.
It is still a case of who is stupid enough to take the most disastrous path. Knowing India as a a nation, it would only be their last resort. But if after Pakistan started this, they first of all deploy nuclear weapons, they should expect a double response from India. What India has been doing do far is just responding to the moves of the Pakistani. The burden of responsibility is on the Pakistanis to refrain or they get double dose of whatever they give out. Nuclear or non nuclear.
Would the ceasefire even last? Between the Pakistanis and India, who has a better military strength? I expected India to have it and do what Israel is doing in Gaza to the Pakistanis. I don't have any tolerance and sympathy for terrorists and pro terrorists nations.
Looks like the first one lasted about 3 hours, so I don't know where it's headed now.
With the recent strikes back from India taking out about 20% of Pakistan's air force, I would say that India is in a stronger position now.
I read in some quarters that the two countries are evenly matched in military strength. That would be a huge disappointment to me being that India is expected to be superior for times like this. A country like India shouldn't have been sleeping on military development when it has neighbours like Pakistan.
