Indian false flag and current Indo-Pak stand-off updates

[suriya]

India is preparing for a powerful and well calibrated response as well as proper control of the escalation matrix to prevent all out war.

 

[Liquidator]

They are not de-silting the river, they are de-silting the dam to increase the storage capacity of the dams.

It is something which is regularly done every few years at all dams.

It is not expensive, it involves opening the lower sluice gates of the Dam while keeping the upper sluice gates closed to let the silt which has accumulated at the bottom the damn to flow out.

OK....a topic worthy of discussion on this thread. All Dams are temporary.

- Dams loose storage capacity due to sedimentation. Due to topography and soil type, I surmise sedimentation rates in the himalayas to be high....correct me if I am wrong. Build up of sediment is ongoing and if not managed the dam will loose capacity. No solution is easy. Dams have downstream effects on river ecosystem...building several dams will have consequences on habitat, soil fertility etc IN INDIA. Some solutions to sedimentation:

- dredging. Arduous and costly. Benefit is 1:1 i.e to gain x cubic capacity you must remove x amount of sediment. The whole point of a dam to begin with is to use topography to yield a storage capacity several magnitudes higher than the material costs to build.

- Most sediment settles far away from the dam....it is difficult to flush. And, even if you do flush you tend to create a narrow channel. I believe this is what you are referring to? How will you cope with high sedimentation rates?

If india is planning to use dams as a weapon of war, there are several problems FOR INDIA:

- high maintenance / costs - described above. Some are talking of dozens of dams required.

- inherently temporary structures, nature is working against you 24/7.
- ecological costs in India- described above.
-you are in breach of a binding Treaty. Pakistan has every right to attack.
- they are sitting ducks....they provide a good target for Pakistan to aim at. Once destroyed all your hard work will disappear overnight.

Further info:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mobius]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mobius]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Areesh]

India is preparing for a powerful and well calibrated response as well as proper control of the escalation matrix to prevent all out war.

Meanwhile IAF after learning about this well calibrated response preparation

 

[Mobius]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Mobius]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[r3alist]

India is preparing for a powerful and well calibrated response as well as proper control of the escalation matrix to prevent all out war.

Powerful but within the escalation matrix.....

Sugar rush of rage has worn off I see

Now it's genocide by administrative actions over 20 years

 

[Mobius]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[hydrabadi_arab]

OK....a topic worthy of discussion on this thread. All Dams are temporary.

- Dams loose storage capacity due to sedimentation. Due to topography and soil type, I surmise sedimentation rates in the himalayas to be high....correct me if I am wrong. Build up of sediment is ongoing and if not managed the dam will loose capacity. No solution is easy. Dams have downstream effects on river ecosystem...building several dams will have consequences on habitat, soil fertility etc IN INDIA. Some solutions to sedimentation:

- dredging. Arduous and costly. Benefit is 1:1 i.e to gain x cubic capacity you must remove x amount of sediment. The whole point of a dam to begin with is to use topography to yield a storage capacity several magnitudes higher than the material costs to build.

- Most sediment settles far away from the dam....it is difficult to flush. And, even if you do flush you tend to create a narrow channel. I believe this is what you are referring to? How will you cope with high sedimentation rates?

If india is planning to use dams as a weapon of war, there are several problems FOR INDIA:

- high maintenance / costs - described above. Some are talking of dozens of dams required.

- inherently temporary structures, nature is working against you 24/7.
- ecological costs in India- described above.
-you are in breach of a binding Treaty. Pakistan has every right to attack.
- they are sitting ducks....they provide a good target for Pakistan to aim at. Once destroyed all your hard work will disappear overnight.

Further info:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Tarbela life expectancy was till 2060, now it will be increased to 2100 because of Dasu dam. They all are slowly losing storage capacity and by 2200 I doubt there will be any dam with storage capacity left in Pakistan or India.

 

[r3alist]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[r3alist]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[gamaji]

Time Has Changed – Dawn of Strategic Realities in South Asia​

Prior to the creation of Pakistan in 1947, Indian Hindu leadership strongly believed that Pakistan would not be able to exist for long before Mr. Jinnah would request for joining back to the Indian union. So, after its creation, Pakistan has been facing existential threats. In fact, even during the process its creation, Pakistan became the victim of unfair treatment when Gurdaspur, despite being a Muslim majority district and entitled to join Pakistan, was included inti the Indian Punjab just to pave the way for Indian access to the state of J&K. Pakistan was denied its due share in the united India’s assets, including treasury reserves, state assets, and military equipment. The newly born state of Pakistan took off gracefully but without the required monetary, industrial, and military resources.

Soon after its creation, Pakistan found itself facing an unfair treatment when it came to the smaller autonomous Indian states opting for joining either Pakistan or India. For example, Indians occupied the state of Hyderabad Deccan, when its ruler announced joining Pakistan, claiming that majority of that state is Hindu and so the ruler had no right to join Pakistan. On the other hand, in case of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, having the Muslim population in majority, its ruler was claimed having signed a document of accession with India (even though that document is widely considered fake) without taking its Muslim population into confidence. As a result, the Muslims of J&K revolted against the ruler bringing Pakistan and India face to face. India took the issue to the UN. After long proceedings and discussions at the UN, it was decided to give the people of J&K a chance through a plebiscite to decide if they want to join India or Pakistan. Resolutions to that effect were passed at the UN and military contingents were deployed on both Indian and Pakistani sides of the J&K. Later, India turned rogue on its commitments given to the world community and bilateral agreements with Pakistan and never allowed that plebiscite to happen till to date while offering lame excuses. The UN mission on Indian side was closed too. So, India is still occupying the state of J&K in a clear and continued violation of UN resolutions, its own commitments, and international agreements. The people of Indian occupied J&K are still enduring the brutal occupation of sub-human Indian soldiers even after losing about a hundred thousand lives and rape of countless number of women and girls. Pakistan, being a party to the dispute, has every right to extend all kinds of support to the oppressed people of Indian occupied J&K. However, Pakistan, due to some unknown reasons, has officially confined itself to merely making periodic statements of extending only moral and diplomatic support, Still the people of Indian occupied J&K have not given up their dream of azadi (i.e. freedom) from Indian occupation and are continuing their freedom fight against the occupation forces.

 

[gamaji]

Time Has Changed – Dawn of Strategic Realities in South Asia​

Prior to the creation of Pakistan in 1947, Indian Hindu leadership strongly believed that Pakistan would not be able to exist for long before Mr. Jinnah would request for joining back to the Indian union. So, after its creation, Pakistan has been facing existential threats. In fact, even during the process its creation, Pakistan became the victim of unfair treatment when Gurdaspur, despite being a Muslim majority district and entitled to join Pakistan, was included inti the Indian Punjab just to pave the way for Indian access to the state of J&K. Pakistan was denied its due share in the united India’s assets, including treasury reserves, state assets, and military equipment. The newly born state of Pakistan took off gracefully but without the required monetary, industrial, and military resources.

Soon after its creation, Pakistan found itself facing an unfair treatment when it came to the smaller autonomous Indian states opting for joining either Pakistan or India. For example, Indians occupied the state of Hyderabad Deccan, when its ruler announced joining Pakistan, claiming that majority of that state is Hindu and so the ruler had no right to join Pakistan. On the other hand, in case of the state of Jammu and Kashmir, having the Muslim population in majority, its ruler was claimed having signed a document of accession with India (even though that document is widely considered fake) without taking its Muslim population into confidence. As a result, the Muslims of J&K revolted against the ruler bringing Pakistan and India face to face. India took the issue to the UN. After long proceedings and discussions at the UN, it was decided to give the people of J&K a chance through a plebiscite to decide if they want to join India or Pakistan. Resolutions to that effect were passed at the UN and military contingents were deployed on both Indian and Pakistani sides of the J&K. Later, India turned rogue on its commitments given to the world community and bilateral agreements with Pakistan and never allowed that plebiscite to happen till to date while offering lame excuses. The UN mission on Indian side was closed too. So, India is still occupying the state of J&K in a clear and continued violation of UN resolutions, its own commitments, and international agreements. The people of Indian occupied J&K are still enduring the brutal occupation of sub-human Indian soldiers even after losing about a hundred thousand lives and rape of countless number of women and girls. Pakistan, being a party to the dispute, has every right to extend all kinds of support to the oppressed people of Indian occupied J&K. However, Pakistan, due to some unknown reasons, has officially confined itself to merely making periodic statements of extending only moral and diplomatic support, Still the people of Indian occupied J&K have not given up their dream of azadi (i.e. freedom) from Indian occupation and are continuing their freedom fight against the occupation forces.

After being unable to eliminate the freedom resistance, Indian keeps blaming Pakistan of cross-border terrorism. An armed struggle for an UN-recognized and legitimate right of self-determination is globally recognized and supported. There is no international law that labels such a struggle as terrorism.

The water dispute also appeared soon after Indians started threatening and blackmailing Pakistan over the flow of rivers originating from the Indian Occupied J&K. In other words, the water dispute, in fact, is directly related to the dispute of J&K between the two countries. After long and painstaking negotiations, Indus Water Treaty (IWT) was brokered and guaranteed by World Bank. Under that treaty, India was allowed to use the water from three rivers (Sutlej, Bias, and Ravi) while Pakistan was given the right over three other rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab). India was also allowed to have some storage capacity on the Pakistani rivers solely for the purpose of electricity generation. That treaty has been working well in general with some hiccups when Indians blocked sharing water flow data and tried to construct dams larger in capacity than allowed by the treaty. Encouraged by its unpunished turning rogue on its international commitments and agreements, India has now announced uniliteral suspension of the IWT after an attack in Indian Occupied J&K allegedly by the Kashmiri freedom fighters (or may be a false flag operation by Indian agencies). This uniliteral Indian action is in clear violation of the treaty clauses that specify how any change in it must be with the written consent of both India and Pakistan. That Indian action has brought the two nuclear powers again on the brink of war. Pakistan, in a rather strong response, has announced to take any diversion of its waters flowing from the Indian occupied J&K as an act of war. Modi wants to use this actual or false flag attack in J&K as a tool to blackmail, yet once more, the international community, put international pressure on Pakistan, and then turn rogue on IWT too. Indians want to divert water from Pakistani rivers.

 

[gamaji]

After being unable to eliminate the freedom resistance, Indian keeps blaming Pakistan of cross-border terrorism. An armed struggle for an UN-recognized and legitimate right of self-determination is globally recognized and supported. There is no international law that labels such a struggle as terrorism.

The water dispute also appeared soon after Indians started threatening and blackmailing Pakistan over the flow of rivers originating from the Indian Occupied J&K. In other words, the water dispute, in fact, is directly related to the dispute of J&K between the two countries. After long and painstaking negotiations, Indus Water Treaty (IWT) was brokered and guaranteed by World Bank. Under that treaty, India was allowed to use the water from three rivers (Sutlej, Bias, and Ravi) while Pakistan was given the right over three other rivers (Indus, Jhelum and Chenab). India was also allowed to have some storage capacity on the Pakistani rivers solely for the purpose of electricity generation. That treaty has been working well in general with some hiccups when Indians blocked sharing water flow data and tried to construct dams larger in capacity than allowed by the treaty. Encouraged by its unpunished turning rogue on its international commitments and agreements, India has now announced uniliteral suspension of the IWT after an attack in Indian Occupied J&K allegedly by the Kashmiri freedom fighters (or may be a false flag operation by Indian agencies). This uniliteral Indian action is in clear violation of the treaty clauses that specify how any change in it must be with the written consent of both India and Pakistan. That Indian action has brought the two nuclear powers again on the brink of war. Pakistan, in a rather strong response, has announced to take any diversion of its waters flowing from the Indian occupied J&K as an act of war. Modi wants to use this actual or false flag attack in J&K as a tool to blackmail, yet once more, the international community, put international pressure on Pakistan, and then turn rogue on IWT too. Indians want to divert water from Pakistani rivers.

Another reality is that India has used every single opportunity to harm Pakistan since 1947. Despite all out Indian efforts to turn Pakistan into a failed state and other existential challenges, Pakistan has been able to function as an independent state. That certainly caused deep disappointment to Indian Hindus who were of the view that the state of Pakistan will not be able or allowed to exist beyond a short life span. Indians then started using terrorism against Pakistan as their state policy and a tool to achieve their strategic goals both within and out of India. For example, many Indians (including Modi, their current and former ministers, and retired military officials) publicly take a pride for creating the infamous Mukti Bahini, a terrorist organization that killed countless number of non-Bangali Pakistanis in the former East Pakistan) and providing it with training, weapons, logistics, and other resources for breaking Pakistan and creating Bangladesh. After the success of that operation, Indian RAW then started creating and supporting terrorist groups in Pakistani Balochistan and KPK provinces while using Iran and Afghanistan as the terrorists launching and controlling pad. These terrorist groups have attacked markets and hotels, train and bus stations, schools and offices, playgrounds, and even mosques to kill tens of thousands of innocent Pakistanis. Indian ministers and officials have publicly and proudly admitted of using terrorism to bleed Pakistan. Some RAW-related Twitter/X accounts used to even pre-announce some big terrorist attacks in Pakistan. Pakistan has caught several Indian terrorist masterminds in Pakistan, such as a serving Indian naval commander Kulbhushan Yadev, and recently an assistant director, Ashok Chikarvadi, while operating whole terrorist networks in Pakistan. Recently Canda and the US have caught terrorist Indian officials red-handed while they were running/using criminal gangs for killing Sikhs leaders.

Despite India continuously and consistently using terrorism as a state policy and tool, Indians are able to successfully set just an opposite narrative, i.e., India being a victim of Pakistani cross-border terrorism. World powers have largely closed their eyes on Indian state-sponsored terrorism for other reasons such as economic interests. One glaring but shameful example of an inhuman, selfish, hypocrite act would be Clinton’s 2000 India visit when Indian agencies killed 36 innocent Sikhs in Indian occupied J&K on the eve of this visit and labeled it as a cross-border terrorist attack by Pak supported terrorists of Lashkar Tayybah. Indians tried to dissuade Clinton from his Pakistan visit of only a few hours. Despite Clinton knowing that the terrorist attack was a handiwork of Indian agencies, he did not say even a single word against this heinous Indian state crime or confronted them for their evil act.