Pakistan-India Conflict 2025: News Updates and Discussion

[Master Chief]

India agree to ceasefire because India had stated from the day one that India targeting terrorist training centre and not the Pakistani military installation.

Once pakistan said they are ready to ceasefire and India agreed to it with a clear warning that further terror attacks in India would see similar strikes inside Pakistan as done in Ops Sindoor.

But Pakistan, at the very least, decimated your air force strike package and imposed substantial costs upon the Indian state as a result of this.

So what you're saying is that no matter how much Pakistan's military slapped you, you had achieved your objectives?

Moreover, the same "new normal" was supposedly already "imposed" on Pakistan after Balakot. Did the "terror attacks in India" stop after that?

How is it in India's interests to cease firing now in view of the above? Assuming it was not in India's interests, is it safe to assume that a ceasefire was either: imposed on India by, or requested by India from, a third party?

 

[Meengla]

Totally enjoyed reading this article

Rafale failed in Sindoor! Rethink this French option for MFA

[A grounded Tejas vs a flying Rafale!] The usual, unsatisfactory, inconclusive end to Sindoor. And that too inside of three days of start of military operations! What is equally surprising is how q…

bharatkarnad.com

Good read! Thanks for sharing.

Ever seen an elected chief minister of a "democratic " country climb a wall and trespass then get arrested by his own police?

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

@SoulSpokesman @Vkdindian1 @Vox Non Dei @Assault Rifle @Vikramaditya1 @Meengla @PK781 @TAC @Raj-Hindustani @vasanthm @Surya2023
@suriya

A very sad spectacle. Especially sad considering the Abdullah's the perennial Quislings of Kashmir for almost a century.
Indian Occupied Kashmir is lost to India, at least as of now. And they can't blame Pakistan for that: Between 1965 and 1989, Pakistan had largely left the Kashmir issue alone because there was the anarchy in Pakistan starting after the 1965 war, then the 1971 defeat to India, then the rebuilding of the remaining Pakistan, then the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. But in the 1980s, Indian imperialist policies in Kashmir revived the simmering desire for independence; Pakistan can't be blamed for that. But, of course, Pakistan saw an opportunity starting 1989 as the Soviet threat from Afghanistan retreated and Kashmir was boiling and Pakistan did what Pakistan had to do: Take advantage of India's disadvantages in Kashmir.

 

[Baibers_1260]

India agree to ceasefire because India had stated from the day one that India targeting terrorist training centre and not the Pakistani military installation.

Once pakistan said they are ready to ceasefire and India agreed to it with a clear warning that further terror attacks in India would see similar strikes inside Pakistan as done in Ops Sindoor.

@onlinpunit @vasanthm @suriya @Raj-Hindustani
Could you comment on the post below please?
Post in thread 'Pakistan - India Conflict 2025 so far . Part lll'
https://defencepk.com/forums/threads/pakistan-india-conflict-2025-so-far-part-lll.23490/post-827541

 

[Master Chief]

Then dont claim !! I have never denied aerial loses.
But if some is claiming damages to indian bases then onus is on them to prove it.

India claims Shivangi is alive. Prove it.

Not for me or for Pakistan's sake, but for the sake of her parents who expect their warrior daughter to receive admiration for her martyrdom, not silent humiliation.

 

[vasanthm]

-----------------------------

We are much better. We hang our ex-Prime Minister when convicted and sentenced for murder, and imprison a sitting Prime Minister for refusing to step down after loosing the vote of confidence over corruption.
We haven't elected an accused terrorist from jail into Parliament yet,:

https://www.reuters.com/article/world/terror-accused-hindu-hardliner-pragya-thakurwins-parliamentary-seat-in-bhopal-idUSKCN1ST1I6/

In a nutshell, the people’s mandate is supreme in India, and that includes the right to elect idiots, loudmouths, and even accused individuals. The key difference? If convicted, they’re disqualified. It’s messy, but it’s still democracy.

 

[falcon34]

India agree to ceasefire because India had stated from the day one that India targeting terrorist training centre and not the Pakistani military installation.

Once pakistan said they are ready to ceasefire and India agreed to it with a clear warning that further terror attacks in India would see similar strikes inside Pakistan as done in Ops Sindoor.

Do you believe that, mean like you have an opportunity to destroy war fighting capabilities and you would just back off, go fool a kid with that, the cope among you lot is insane.
Your literally the dumbest person in the world if you believe that. Or you've consuming too much cow dung. Either keep coping, it's good for us, see ya in round 3, there will be only one hegemon in SA and it will be Pakistan, because of ur know dumb fkery.

 

[Baibers_1260]

@onlinpunit @vasanthm @suriya @Raj-Hindustani
Could you comment on the post below please?

Post in thread 'Pakistan - India Conflict 2025 so far . Part lll'
https://defencepk.com/forums/threads/pakistan-india-conflict-2025-so-far-part-lll.23490/post-824255

 

[Master Chief]

In a nutshell, the people’s mandate is supreme in India, and that includes the right to elect idiots, loudmouths, and even accused individuals. The key difference? If convicted, they’re disqualified. It’s messy, but it’s still democracy.

www.business-standard.com/amp/elections/lok-sabha-election/251-of-newly-elected-lok-sabha-mps-face-criminal-cases-27-convicted-adr-124060600414_1.html

251 of newly elected Lok Sabha MPs face criminal cases, 27 convicted: ADR

 

[Master Chief]

In a nutshell, the people’s mandate is supreme in India, and that includes the right to elect idiots, loudmouths, and even accused individuals. The key difference? If convicted, they’re disqualified. It’s messy, but it’s still democracy.

From the same Business Standard article:

"The chances of winning for a candidate with declared criminal cases in the 2024 Lok Sabha elections stood at 15.3 per cent, compared to just 4.4 per cent for candidates with a clean background, the analysis found."

Being accused of crime improves chances of election by over 10% in India because of supreme people's mandate.

Do you yourself have a preference for those accused of criminality?

 

[vasanthm]

Hilarious:
Guess you never heard of Pappu Yadav or Phoolan Devi

https://news.northeastern.edu/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Pappu-Yadav_1400.jpg

In India, criminal politicians increase crime, including crime against women, Northeastern researcher finds

The more serious charges a politician faces, like murder or kidnapping, the more crime increases, a Northeastern researcher found.

news.northeastern.edu

www.business-standard.com/amp/elections/lok-sabha-election/251-of-newly-elected-lok-sabha-mps-face-criminal-cases-27-convicted-adr-124060600414_1.html

251 of newly elected Lok Sabha MPs face criminal cases, 27 convicted: ADR

Yes, we’ve had shady politicians, but Indian law bars anyone convicted with a 2+ year sentence from holding office. Some stick around due to delayed appeals, but once conviction is upheld, they’re out. It’s messy, but still driven by voters, not generals or judges.

 

[I*R*A]

you had achieved your objectives?

Please do not ask them that. Andh Bakhts are not this intelligent.

 

[Master Chief]

Yes, we’ve had shady politicians, but Indian law bars anyone convicted with a 2+ year sentence from holding office. Some stick around due to delayed appeals, but once conviction is upheld, they’re out. It’s messy, but still driven by voters, not generals or judges.

But if your voters are 10% more likely to elect someone with a criminal case against them, does that not compromise your electorate's ability to make informed decisions regarding their government?

By the way, rather than "democracy" per se, the issue here is "rule of law". India does not seem to follow through functionally with regards to rule of law. Some politicians and candidates seem to be "above the law" for various reason, and worse, the electorate either doesn't know or doesn't care. The Indian electorate is not capable of implementing democracy as a form of governance due to simple ignorance and/or apprehension in implementing rule of law.

If "rule by convicts" rather than "rule of law" is what you are happy with then carry on.

 

[ARMalik]

Xi is shaking hand of a person who has killed countless soldiers and civilians of Pakistan.

I AM DISGUSTED INDEED !!

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

 

[vasanthm]

Phoolan Devi was charged with the murders of 20 Thakur men in the Behmai massacre in 1981, which she allegedly ordered, according to Wikipedia. She surrendered to authorities two years later and spent eleven years in prison while awaiting trial
YET got elected to Parliament.
@vasanthm @onlinpunit

Strange democracy.

https://resize.indiatvnews.com/en/resize/newbucket/1200_-/2024/05/phoolan-devi-1716204262.webp

@vasanthm said:
<<Yes, we’ve had shady politicians, but Indian law bars anyone convicted with a 2+ year sentence from holding office>>

First Conviction In Massacre By Bandit Phoolan Devi's Gang After 43 Years

Forty-three years after bandit Phoolan Devi and her gang perpetrated the Behmai massacre in which 20 people, mostly from the Thakur community, were shot dead to "avenge" her rape, a court here on Wednesday gave a life sentence to one.

www.ndtv.com

Exactly, she wasn’t convicted when elected. She spent 11 years in jail under trial, but without a conviction, the law didn’t bar her. That’s how due process works. It’s not perfect, but if you start banning the accused from contesting, it’ll be misused in no time. Voters may be foolish, but it’s still their mandate

 

[Yasser76]

None of them claim pakistan had air superiority over Indian skies.
And most of them are quoting what pakistan said giving Pakistani as source and not any independent information.

Also qouting non Pakistani experts, you do know the rest of us can read right?