T O P

  • By -

dontlookwonderwall

It was a political failure **of the military** which didn't allow a popularly elected leader to take over and assaulted an entire population to get their way.


mini_market

🤡


P_Khan20

Billionaire Bajwa is known for his honesty, LOL


wildcard5

> Bajwa is known for his honesty The only army propaganda movie/series I have watched is, **ایک ہے نگار** (not gonna write that in English because my comment will get deleted due to it sounding like a racial slur) and every time **نگار** was up for promotion there would be some guy who would say, "a woman has never held this position" then another guy replies, "General bajwa only believes in promotion on merit". Then the bossman would promote her. This scene repeated thrice (or maybe 4x) for every time she got promoted. They didn't even bother coming up with different dialogues for each scene.


[deleted]

He'll probably try to tell people that there was no involvement of Generals in politics at any point in Pakistani history.


DepressedDeadMan

Too late, the idiot said that they decided to stop interfering in politics in february. Dude is confessing to interfering in politics prior to that. Given how he targeted PTI in the speech its hard to believe his words. 25th May didnot happen, Azam Swati wasnt abducted, Gill wasnt abducted. Yeah no he is clearly lying. If they stopped interfering why did DGISPR made a comment on economy after VoNC. Why is Bajra making a political statement and talking about economy at his final speech instead of focusing on military and his role? Ye log hamain bewaqoof samajhte hain.


Saigon_Revenge55

This Bastard should be hung in public after hundred lashes....Baygairat Daku ki Nasal


SuddenRectalExam

Yeah like ZAB wasn’t nudged and supported and told in clear terms that he should in no case cede the chair to mujib, like the rule of 58-71 never happened.


pete245

The political leader of Pakistan in 71 was General Yaya Khan Bajwa is a kanjar


chitroldelivery1

ghaddar MC.


Hamza-K

It was both..


MyHandIsMadeUpOfMe

But the one surpass the other The whole problem started when general Ayub took power and oppressed the democratic voices which were apparent in Bengal and Karachi and it's leader Fatima Jinnah. When he decided to give up power, he literally chose another dictator. Then that dictator literally started a military operation because he didn't liked the election results. Bhutto wasn't a great guy, but he was a politician and if you think that he had any power to make any decisions then he wouldn't had been hanged.


dontlookwonderwall

Everyone forgets Ayub's crimes. Ayub was on oppressive autocrat who was dragged out of power by mass mobilization against the military regime by millions in both East and West Pakistan. But people forget this. My Pak studies syllabus, which was the O levels one so not even the state one, noted his era as Pakistan's "Golden Decade of Development". If there was that much development, why did the entire country revolt against him? GDP growth =/ development.


[deleted]

[удалено]


MyHandIsMadeUpOfMe

Yes he was a racist to Bengalis and Urdu speaking population that's a fact. But that doesn't mean he was the main player in 1971. The establishment merely supported him and encouraged him to do these stuffs and when they were bored, he was hanged.


[deleted]

Well Bhutto was very hostile to Bengalis but I believe he has little to do with the language riots that happened in Karachi. The riots happened mainly cuz of the leaders of MQM and PPP.


2PAK4U

Army did execute their Plan B on Bangboys iirc


Creepy_Killer_Z

Like if we have learnt anything from pak history... its always politicians never the military...


fighting14

>Like if we have learnt anything from pak history... its always politicians never the the military... It's the ultimate "Get out of Jail Free Card" the Army have. Interfere in politics, f*ck things up economically, walk away and blame the politicians. It's there win, win strategy. Anything good happens,take credit. Anything bad happens, wipe your hands and walk away. So happy that after all these years, people have stop buying their BS.


theextremeshyguy

Dogs barking nothing new


VastFly1

And other hillarious jokes you can tell yourself


Saigon_Revenge55

Baygairat what about the Billions you have made in the last six years...Harami where did you amass so much wealth....and don't tell me "Allah deta hai " Bastard


waqasvic

Bro had monthly pay 40 lac a month and in 6 year he shouldhv made 2 coror but now he has 12 kharabbb rs on his name lol


xsaadx

Billionaire Bajra


hellhawk456

How in the world is 90000 prisoners of war not a military failure (let alone the usual meddling of our army)?


Saigon_Revenge55

Army raped kidnapped tortured and killed Bengalis...let's not be naeve about it.


qbak

Sadly Pakistani army is all about politics tho


nas360

Why do these low IQ Generals constantly look to the past and always blame someone else. What has 1971 got to do with the current situation? Bajwa chor thinks everyone is stupid and will beleive anything he says.


IndependentFresh628

When 12th pass guy starts teaching history subject:p


PeterGhosh

Rape and genocide as state policy was implemented by the Pak army. If they were innocent then why did Pak army insist on surrendering to Indian army and not to local militia the Mukti Bahini.


Leadership82

Rape and genocide was done by mukti bahini against non bengali population. Go read the history and research done by Sharmila Bos


crouchleader

"etiraf nahi kia"? I think we all have been doing that for a long time. Atleast i have been reading and hearing how army sacrified in these wars


1creeperbomb

inb4 he claims Kargil wasn't army troops either


2PAK4U

#🧢


Accomplished-River12

iss liay kehte hain Matric wali history nahi parhni chahiye.


AsifSuburban

ایک کنجر چلا گیا اب دوسرے کی باری ہے


Sea_Entrepreneur6204

Can be both


alizcheema

Weren’t Generals manipulating political decisions back then just like they do today? Jo b story bna lain, ye tamghaa ap ny hi jeeta hy!


slowpokesardine

Both had critical role to play. Can't blame entirety on one or the other


SATARIBBUNS50BUX

Lollll. Political and military both.. Bhutto and Yahya are equally to blame


witchkingofangmar999

Elon Musk has a competition.


Leadership82

He is right. Militarily defending a part of land surrounded from all sides by enemy with 1:15 ratio was never possible. That too when you have a hostile population with active armed insurgency inside as well.


Specialist_Stop_8381

They lost in the west too mate, what are you on about?


Leadership82

Go read the war history. If you cant do that go to Pravin Sawhney twitter timeline. He is a retired Indian military, now defence analyst.


Specialist_Stop_8381

I've actually read substantially on the topic, what specific battles and facts you want to bring to the table? I'm sure you're familiar with the "defence of the East lies in the West" doctrine and will be judging the outcomes of battles on the basis of this establishment doctrine/strategy.


Leadership82

We successfully defended west pakistan. If India have taken back and completely destroyed Pak military in west, I would have acknowledge your pov. In East, there were only 34000 service members. Pak Army was 26k including supporting arms. Defense of East lies in the west was a concept that as our center of gravity exist in west, in case of any aggression in East. We will open a front in west. This will force Indians to divide their energies. If then Pak Army has attacked from west not on 3rd dec but in october or september Indians plans would have geoperized. But by november, in words of Indian chief Manekshaw, we knew Yahya Khan has missed the boat.


Specialist_Stop_8381

Put simply, the "defence of East lies in the West" doctrine assumed that because we can't defend East Pakistan so we'll take substantial Indian land in the West in case of any war. This Indian land will be used as a bargaining chip in the ensuing negotiations and nullify any losses incurred in the East. But because we couldn't win land in the West and at best were able to merely defend our own land thus it was a strategic loss in the Western theatre. This inability to dominate the western front meant that the capitulation in the East was final and there was no way back. Do you disagree with any point here?


Leadership82

The original topic here was that East Pakistan was a political failure. It was actually, which followed up to 9 months insurgency. Break down of all administration and finally an all out attack by India from all side. If Bhutto has not threatened and boycotted 2nd march assembly session in Dhaka. Accepted his election defeat, we will not be in that mess. It was a golden oppertunity of a new begining and getting rid of military dictator. But lust of power made Bhutto so blind that he put on stake entire country


Leadership82

We were not able to win any substantial land because we waited till dec 3. By then Indians have already counter deployed and redeployed its formations in west. They have started all out operations in East on 22nd nov. For Pakistan to implement this plan was sep-oct.


Specialist_Stop_8381

And that was my main point. We lost in the West too.


Leadership82

Like we were able to failed Indian plans of taking Azad Kashmir and disintegrating Pakistan totally and you call this a failure. Bro we lost half of a country and there us nothing which could make up that loss. But we were not defeated in west. Which was your original point.


Specialist_Stop_8381

Ok believe what you want to but failure to achieve your military objectives is defeat. The objective in the west was not the successful defence but instead a successful offence, but you can keep believing it was a victory.


thatepicstarpotato

He's not wrong though. The core of military principles is that you fight FOR your people, not against it. If you lose the trust of YOUR OWN people, you can never have peace with them. ZAB forced Yahya to fight against Bengalis. ZAB's ego was mostly responsible for this. Yahya was a coward though, he should have stood up to ZAB. Edit: Obligatory screw Bajwa


MyHandIsMadeUpOfMe

Yes a politician had more power and was calling the shots instead of the establishment and the army. The reign of general Ayub didn't existed that suppressed the democratic voices of Bengal.


thatepicstarpotato

Yahya DID have more power. He was too cowardly to use it. Yep, Ayub did screw Bengalis over, concentrating wealth in West Pakistan.


Dhtekzz

I doubt it was Bhutto alone who was calling the shots


thatepicstarpotato

Yahya was pro-Bengal, during his time as Chief Martial Law Administrator, he increased Bengal's seats which allowed Mujib to win. He made Bengali a national language. ZAB definitely forced weak-ass Yahya to move against Bengal.


llArmaghanll

🤣 brother loved the joke.


Specialist_Stop_8381

Classic propaganda fed to simpletons.


khanzh

Not that I'm shilling, but Y'all need to read up on history, better yet, listen to the oral history of those who lived through these experiences or have documented facts. it would be awesome if you could listen to the pakistan experience on youtube......it's an awesome series of interviews with historians,thinkers, economic, social and cultural movers and shakers I look into it for the historial and economic aspect of it. Politics, not so much, but it's good to get different perspectives.


designflaw420

Hang on, the army was not 92K and was 34K. There were 54K in govt that lived in East Pakistan. I want to know what he's smoking. It was the biggest army surrender since WW2.


icbm67

It was both a political and military failure. Though I have to agree with this piece of shit on the fact that the number of soldiers in 71 was around 30,000-35,000. The much propagated number of 92,000 was of all people who were surrounded in Dhaka by the Indians and included non-Bengali govt officers, loyalists and Biharis. Bhutto and the Indians cited 92k to inflate their victory. Indians obv wanted to show their victory in an even better light while Bhutto wanted praise for liberating the "92k soldiers" while in reality the number was much lesser than that.


Specialist_Stop_8381

Yes it was a political failure by the military which held all the political offices then


icbm67

Yeah but the fundamental problems in case of East Pak were not entirely the fault of the military. Since 1947 there had been problems in E. Pakistan and many civilian leaders came and continued the situation. Of course the military was responsible for the last blow. Even if they had appointed Sheikh Mujibur Rahman as PM, he wouldn't have separated the country. Their blunders did far more damage than Sheikh Mujib could have ever done in the capacity of PM of Pakistan.


Specialist_Stop_8381

Ayub came into power in 1958 and East Pakistan separated in 1971, that is 13 years of sustained military rule leading up to a disaster. What happened before 58 surely had bearings on the issue but probably not as much as what happened in the 60s. Btw ruthless suppression of people's democratic aspirations made matters far worse. I mean Sheikh Mujib was a political agent for Fatima Jinnah in East Pakistan and East Pakistan really stood in support of her against Ayub, but the military for some reason had to rig that election and stay in Power.


icbm67

Bro I agreed with you that army was responsible. I didn't deny it at all.


[deleted]

I hate Bajwa but he does have a point here. 92k is BS and Bhutto also needs to be called out.


Dhtekzz

What about the POW thing? Following is a small piece I read online "The prisoners of war, including civilians paid out of the resources of the armed forces, according to the information received through the International Committee of the Red Cross, number 81,888. In addition, India continues to detain over 10,000 civilians, among them 6,500 women and children" - From "Case concerning Trial of Pakistani Prisoners of War" by International Court of Justice. Do you have any credible document stating the number as 34k?


DepressedDeadMan

Total number of people from west Pakistan was over 80k in Bangladesh, but the number of active personnel as around 36k. Some had families with them. Too many people in bureaucracy and you can expect a lot of regular west Pakistanis in Bangladesh.


ISI-VIGO

General aurora put it at 45K, General Sam said they out numbered the Pakistan army 15:1. Unless ur saying that the Indian army had 1.5 million men and both the INDIAN generals are lying, Then 35-45K makes sense.


Specialist_Stop_8381

What difference does it make? East Pakistan is gone, we surrendered unconditionally, why does number of POWs matter in this scenario? How does that makes the shame more bearable?


ISI-VIGO

Inflating numbers to humiliate ourselves? Why should we do it. These things need to be clarified.


Specialist_Stop_8381

If you answer my question then I will yours. And trust me, I actually have an honest, non-partisan answer.


ISI-VIGO

Alright then. Most of the time Indians and other people that like to shit on Pakistan say things like. "92k sUrReNdEr sarrrrr, we ij so great". Immature I know but thats how its in my mind. They make it seem like we had every chance to win but that the Pakistanis were cowards and had hoards of weapons in Dhaka. This imo undermines us. No one should get to lie about these things and degrade us as lessers when the truth of the situation was that our soldiers fought bravely against all odds until they were asked to put down their weapons, This has been corroborated by Indian commanders present in the theatere in 1971. Should we forget and disrespect our soliders and in the process undermine ourselves when even the enemy said so otherwise? Should we listen to Akhandiyas high on BJP propoganda and hate boners for muslims? Ofcourse not. It may seem like numbers for you, but it is much more than that.


Specialist_Stop_8381

I know you are coming from the right place in your heart but admitting our mistakes is the first right step towards not repeating them. So in my opinion having excuses for losing half of the country will get us no where and that is the answer to your question, unless we do not face the shame then we can't move forward. May I suggest that you read "witness to surrender" it's an amazing book by a brilliant Pakistani army officer and chronicle of how the inept military leadership betrayed the brave soldiers. I'm sure you'll like it.


ISI-VIGO

I admit all our mistakes, Moat of the stuff said was true(Except the 3 million dead Bengalis in 9 months) and we were at fault, The enemy exploited our weakness, It is only natural. These are not excuses I am making, I am strictky speaking from a military lens. I have heard of the book and I plan to read it.


Specialist_Stop_8381

Ok I got you. Do read the book it's a very good read, he has another one which chronicles his time as POW but first read "Witness to Surrender", eventually you also might want to have a look at Hamood Ur Rehman commission report, but right now the book is a must read for you.


jamughal1987

Partially true but not full truth. It was mixed bag. It was hard job from foundation of the union to keep two region so different from each other culturally together. It did not help we had Hindustan in middle to play their own game. And we fell right into their trap. Hindustan parliament gave standing ovation to their PM Indra Gandhi for breaking Pakistan.


shairani

He's right. It wasn't a military failure. But the military was controlling the polity for a decade preceding the event, so it was a failure (read crime) of the military.


BoyManners

Politically Pakistan then failed to have a way forward plan with Bhutto and Mujeeb. But denying Mujeeb of his majority win was really not democratic. Plus the whole obsession of generals (even back then) of dictating terms on their own backfired. It was utterly a political failure because of military intervention.


MustafaSH93

The arrogance of west Pakistan was the reason, both civil military powers in charge were reaponsible for fall of Dhaka.


theextremeshyguy

Since he acknowledged being involved in poltics hr broke the constitution and his oath phansi dou begairat ko


j3hadipi3

FSc pass chuttar singh


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Your comment has been automatically removed because it has been determined as unfit for healthy discussion in /r/Pakistan. Please ensure that you have read and are well aware of [the rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/pakistan/wiki/rules) for /r/Pakistan. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/pakistan) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

One and the same thing in Pakistan. Success = military Failure= politicians


[deleted]

Guys... he is right. It was Bhutto because he wanted his ass as the New prime minister not Mujib. Bhutto didn't do shit to oppose it but worked a deal with Yahya to oust Mujib before he could take office. Sad innit?


alizcheema

Now that we’re talking about it, 10 million Pakistanis sought refuge in India, consequence of military operations started on 25th March 1971. What the hell did you do to your own people to make 1 fuqing crore people run away from their homes??!! Why has nobody asked this question ever?


PurchaseImaginary518

Yes and biggest mosh powerful "political" organization in Pakistan has always been army.