Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 714 posts

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#301

Post by sbmthakur »

mrtksn wrote: post #194
kumarvvr wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> every one gets what they want India wants Pakistan to end cross-border terrorism. Everyone did not get what they want.

Very recently, there was a terrorist attack in Pakistan too: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025_Jaffar_Express_hijackin... The attackers are allegedly backed by India.(India denies this, just like Pakistan deny involvement with the attacks in India). So probably these bombings won’t solve anything as the issues appear to be a much more complicated. Therefore it is possible that everyone got what they need from thes…

India is likely to authorize more such strikes if terror attacks continue on its territory.

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#302

Post by brabel »

happyopossum wrote: post #147
roenxi wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are actually well charted waters - people are shooting at each other and some fairly high percentage of the time everything calms down but the rest of the time it escalates crazily with both sides losing control. Situation as old as time, long rich history of provocative military action. I observe from time to time that Moscow appears to be under fire from the occasional US-sponsored attack for example. So far,…

> from time to time that Moscow appears to be under fire from the occasional US-sponsored attack for example Ok, you lost me there..

The US is definitely sponsoring Ukraine in the war together with the EU so when Ukraine attacks Moscow, which it is currently doing regularly, it seems like that’s a fair characterization. If Russia were strong enough they would surely be responding to those attacks not only by hitting Ukraine but their “sponsors” too.

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#303

Post by newusertoday »

amai wrote: post #293

Are their any natural resources in Kashmir worth fighting for? Oil? Gas? Lithium? Rare earth metals?

water, look at indus water treaty for more details. As per last report it is in abeyance neither suspended nor terminated. Not sure what it means.

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#304

Post by sbmthakur »

digitalPhonix wrote: post #20

From the article: > Pakistan said India hit three sites with missiles, and a military spokesman told Reuters his country shot down five Indian aircraft, a claim not confirmed by India. That’s a huge loss of aircraft! Are there any corroborating reports or more details about the aircraft/shootdown?

Their claim went from 2 to 3 to 6 to 5. So, I will be careful about such news.

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#305

Post by JumpCrisscross »

aa-jv wrote: post #292
sofixa wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Putin is a particularly deranged type of fascist though, much like Bush, who is okay making the poor calculation of a Ukrainian invasion for the benefit of a wartime economy While Putin is undoubtedly deranged, I think his goals with invading had much more to do with delusions of grandeur and trying to rebuild the Russian/Soviet empire than wanting the "benefit" of a "wartime economy". Russia was drastically unprep…

>delusions of grandeur How do you come to this conclusion - have you been studying Putins' speeches in the last 3 years, or analysed some of the policies that led to this conclusion? Did you see his recent interview on Croatian TV where he discusses this specifically? EDIT: hey downvoters - is it not valid to study world leaders' directly rather than going through a third party .. ?

> have you been studying Putins' speeches in the last 3 years, or analysed some of the policies that led to this conclusion?

Yes. By his ex ante metrics, his war has thoroughly backfired. By the current aims, it's absolutely delusionally revanchist.

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#306

Post by ganarajpr »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #204
dd_xplore wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like US co-ordinated with Paxtan to destroy laden? The laden who was hiding near a military base in Paxtan?

This always seems really disingenuous to me. He was hiding in an extremely concealed manner. Never ever went outside, and it's not as if the Pakistani military can just break into every house nearby and search for him everywhere. How they caught him was crazy in and of itself, and required fake vaccination drives, another thing no military can do to its own people to catch terrorists. I really don't think they are bl…

Lol, whats disingenuous is your arguments, honestly. So, either you have to argue that Pakistan's military is extremely idiotic / naive that it could not even detect a known terrorist living just around the corner or you have to argue that they knowingly kept him in their "shadow". The vast majority of the people believe its the latter - you are free to believe that they were idiots.

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#308

Post by arjun1296 »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #171
kumarvvr wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

There isn't proof that this terrorist attack was directed by Pakistan. The terrorists themselves haven't been caught. India also supports terrorists in Pakistan (like the BLA who took hostages on a train a few months back), allegedly. There's no morally superior actor here, unfortunately. EDIT: There are many other strange things about the parent comment like why are you upset about the word "militant" instead of "te…

[dead]

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#309

Post by arjun1296 »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #188
screye wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ceding Muslim-dominant territory to Pakistan Why would India do that? Why would a unilateral surrender of land be considered valid terms for peace? > swapping land In a fair swap, what land would Pakistan offer in exchange? > Muslims, recently Pakistan doesn't have a stellar reputation for treatment of its Muslim minorities (Ahmediyyas, Ismailis) and non-Punjabi muslims (Balochis, Pasthuns, once-Pakistani-Bengalis)…

> I'm inclined to consider India a safer nation for most muslim denominations. Come on. You can't live in India and think this seriously. Anyways, the Kashmir issue is contentious but Kashmiris never got to say whether they should be part of India or not, unlike most states and people during partition. I am very aware the full history of the region is murky and that the removal of Kashmiri Pandits from the region led…

[dead]

Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir

#310

Post by roenxi »

FullGarden_S wrote: post #270
roenxi wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's linking a source specifically so that other people don't have to do that. If we have to go searching for our own sources there wasn't any point submitting the comment; the idea is to look at what was linked and talk about it.

I see. If you are not satisfied with the shared source or think the video is edited to project a certain kind of perspective with ulterior motive, feel free to look further into it before completely discarding it was what I meant. searching Yalda Hakim, Khawaja Asif full interview might point you in the right direction. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ir8pJbKE37U

And with the benefit of more context it is pretty clear he wasn't admitting to anything - the interview started with him condemning terrorism and the quotes in question was more him pointing out [0] that everyone has been funding terrorist groups in his part of the world and he thinks Pakistan has suffered for it.

Pakistan might be involved in this one, they might not be. I don't know. But that clip isn't evidence either way. He's quite insistent that Pakistan wasn't involved in the topical attacks. And indeed that the attacks may not have happened at all. He can't be admitting responsibility to something that he doesn't believe has happened done by groups he claims don't exist.

[0] Add some allowance for English apparently not being his native language - he was reiterating points from earlier in the interview.

Post reply on HN