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

441–450 of 714 posts

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

#441

Post by incomingpain »

Lets hope for a short quiet war. Some thoughts as an outside observer with no dog in the race.

ISI no doubt kicking themselves for getting caught orchestrating the pahalgam attack.

Pakistan cant afford to be in this war, but India has been increasing their military for over 10 years. Doubled the spending is enabling broo-ha-ha.

But neither side can ever corner the other side; and spending millions of USD equivalent to blow up mudhuts and never really achieve anything.

I do expect they can say goodbye to the Karakoram highway. India wants that destroyed asap. India will likely focus heavily on Jammu/Kashmir. Ladakh will happen only if China invades India again.

Punjab is likely an open target for Pakistan; but pakistan likely not interested in targeting them.

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

#442

Post by arp242 »

jajko wrote: post #428
arp242 wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't there also been conflicts with the Sikhs for decades? I don't think you can completely blame this on just the Muslims.

Its a country almost 3x bigger than Europe, 4x bigger than US, and brutally diverse. Thousands of languages and tribes. People from west are very different to east, north and south is same. People who haven't experienced it first hand (or at least grokked the numbers properly) can't fathom how huge it is not just geographically but culturally. There is a reason why India is often referred to as subcontinent and peopl…

> Sikh conflict you may be referring to are events from 1984 IIRC.

The 70s and 80s were the most intense, but it's far from isolated to just that period. There was a major row with Canada just last year because, according to Canada, the Indian government has been killing Sikh separatists in Canada.[1] Since there is no historical adversity between Canada and India, Canada has nothing to gain by seeking conflict and generally doesn't seek conflicts, I am inclined to believe the Canadian claims.

[1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2024/10/14/canada-modi-...

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

#443

Post by __s »

navane wrote: post #337
hshdhdhj4444 wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The competition to Putin entering Ukraine is obviously ridiculous. Putin had already attacked multiple countries before. Georgia, Chechnya, and leads a vast network of para militaries that are fighting all over Africa as well. Heck, Putin had literally attacked and conquered a whole area of Ukraine itself not even a decade ago. Anyone who was saying Putin would not attack Ukraine either had no knowledge at all about…

I agree with you now, but I also remember everyone, all kinds of experts, saying Putin is just postering. I think it's important to remember that. It is important to note when things are not normal. Putin actually invading Ukraine was a very unexpected move. Unfortunately, we as people are very good at rationalizing after the fact "oh of course this was coming", shrugging our shoulders and just moving on as if nothin…

Indeed. I took it as a serious threat after seeing prediction markets in February move up to 30% odds of it happening

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

#444

Post by nindalf »

enugu wrote: post #420
nindalf wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There was a sharp drop in the terrorist attacks in Kashmir after the 2019 confrontation. There were fewer terrorist attacks, certainly. I'm sure the Indian government would like to believe that the 2019 strike had an effect, but far more likely causes are - Money. Pakistan's economy has stagnated and the country has lurched from one IMF bailout to the next (2019, 2023, 2024). It got so bad at one point that politic…

If you are actually arguing that a country targeted by a terrorist attack does not gain deterrence with a counterstrike relative to letting things go on, then how uniform do you consider this prescription? Should the terror attacks in the US or France not have had a military response? What happens to the incentives of terror groups in response to such a policy? --- The role of money only becomes an issue when conduct…

The Pakistani military cares about itself, above all. It wants to maintain its role as the primary protector of the Pakistani people, answerable to no one but themselves. As long as the threat of India looms large, their primacy is guaranteed. As a reward generals are allowed to grow filthy rich.

Support for the Pakistani military was at its nadir during the era of benign neglect because there wasn't an Indian boogeyman to justify their interference in politics and economic exploitation. But now that India has attacked Pakistani targets this will quiet any internal criticism of the Pakistani Army.

In other words, the military absolutely loves it when India engages in so-called deterrence. No Pakistani army soldier died (according to both sides). Pakistani people support the Pakistani Army more strongly than ever. It's absolutely perfect for the Army. I fully expect that they'll fund more terrorists, leading to a constant cycle of violence.

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

#445

Post by nelblu »

jajko wrote: post #428
arp242 wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haven't there also been conflicts with the Sikhs for decades? I don't think you can completely blame this on just the Muslims.

Its a country almost 3x bigger than Europe, 4x bigger than US, and brutally diverse. Thousands of languages and tribes. People from west are very different to east, north and south is same. People who haven't experienced it first hand (or at least grokked the numbers properly) can't fathom how huge it is not just geographically but culturally. There is a reason why India is often referred to as subcontinent and peopl…

> can't fathom how huge it is not just geographically

I grew up in India but I don't agree that people in the west can't fathom how huge it is geographically. Geographically speaking India is the 7th largest country, and every country larger than India (Australia, Brazil, US, China, Canada and Russia) is at least 2 times to up to more than 5 times larger than India. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_and_dependen...

That said, I do agree a lot of westerners might not be able to relate to the cultural diversity of India.

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

#446

Post by JeremyNT »

mcmoor wrote: post #282
bluefirebrand wrote: post #84

[flagged]

History isn't only WW2. There's a lot of situations with high tension that doesn't explode into war. One big proof is Cold War not ending in human annihilation. Also 19th century Concert of Europe is entirely built on diplomatic finesse to prevent greater conflict.

It's the exception that proves the rule. Things look stable until they aren't.

There are enough "tense diplomatic situations" happening all the time, and given a long enough timeline eventually some will fail and end in disaster.

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

#447

Post by ahoka »

codedokode wrote: post #412
WillPostForFood wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

4.6% growth, 10% inflation, and interest rates at 21% is not great.

The stores have food on the shelves and nobody is dying from hunger. As for GDP, Russian GDP year-to-year growth is 4.6% and USA GDP growth was 2.8%.

Broken window fallacy.

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

#448

Post by lmm »

owebmaster wrote: post #394
vesinisa wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ukraine was not and still is not economically strong enough for war. It just suffered an unprovoked invasion by its neighbor and had no option but to either capitulate or fight. I hope I am not biased but it really does not seem comparable to the border situation in Kashmir where both sides are showing aggression towards each other and weighing the costs of going to an all out war.

> It just suffered an unprovoked invasion It was such a great coincidence they had a huge army trained and armed by the west at the same time.

How suspicious and provocative of Ukraine to increase their military training after Russia's first unprovoked annexation of part of their country. How fiendish of the West to assist them in preparing to defend themselves.

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

#449

Post by [deleted] »

saagarjha wrote: post #408
unmole wrote: post #390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Fascism is the actions you take Losing a majority after a decade in power seems like the opposite of what a fascist regime would do.

Again, fascism can take a lot of forms. Just because you're not hitting every single manifestation doesn't mean it's not fascism. I mean, here in the US Trump lost the 2020 election, then picked up a majority again and is currently doing some pretty fascist stuff.

[deleted]

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

#450

Post by matheusmoreira »

sofixa wrote: post #219
krainboltgreene wrote: post #135

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. Even German ambassadors in Ukraine were caught off guard having to leave that night. Modi is a different type of beast, he's a long term political power that doesn't need a wartime economy, and is still establishing his internal power. He's goin…

> 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…

I thought he invaded because of historical and not at all unfounded fears of western encirclement. Ukraine was getting pretty close to NATO, after all. I don't doubt that there were imperialist intentions, I'm just saying there is also a certain strategy and logic to the invasion.

Hopefully this will finally teach the nations of the world they can't rely on the likes of the US for their protection. If they want to survive and keep their sovereignity, they should really start developing missile technology and stockpiling nukes. If they don't, they will simply get steamrolled by nuclear armed opponents while the US does pretty much nothing about it despite promising to because they're not actually willing to risk global thermonuclear war with Russia over some eastern european country.

Post reply on HN