Baibers_1260
Trusted Member
@SoulSpokesman @veeru @harpy1 @Vox Non Dei @Vikramaditya1Modi agreed because he had achieved adequate narrative buildup after striking bases across entire Paksiatn. Any more delay could have resulted in escalation which wouldn’t have added anything new to it.
So when India was winning why is escalation to be "avoided "
Would the destruction of the Pakistan Air Force been a welcome "addition " ?
Why stop when you are winning?
So Pakistan's counter-strike did not go well. All the more reason not to accept a ceasefire, which by the way in the semantics that India indulges in is not a "ceasefire " at all but a "pause".At the same time, India had realised that the counter strike against India wasn’t going very well with nothing of significance hit at all.
The word "pause" is even more hilarious in this context because no country fighting a war pauses an operation to give the enemy time to recoup. A "pause" is usually done under international supervision, for humanitarian reasons to allow evacuation of civilians, delivery of food and medicines to affected civilians, and exchange of prisoners of war.
So Indian acceptance of a "pause" when none of the criteria apply, is baffling.




