From every aspect, this is a confession of defeat, nothing else. Why would an intelligent opponent not completely defeat his enemy. Why?
Who stopped India from occupying Pakistan completely?
As the above highlighted statement quoting their minister......IF WANTED, WE COULD HAVE......my question is always, WHY DID NOT INDIA WANT TO COMPLETELY OCCUPY Pakistan?
Why India wanted for Pakistan to STAY IN BEING, get compact, become a nuclear power, FORCE INDIA AGAIN TO STATION bulk of its armed forces towards Pakistan, force India in lethal COIN ops in Kashmir.....all these things would not have been there simply IF INDIA WOULD HAVE OCCUPIED Pakistan.
I mean, were they in their senses? They let Pakistan live? It means there were some serious pseudo strategists at the top of indian orgs who allowed this grave mistake to happen.
Thats why indian claims of victories are illogical. Do you call it a victory in which you let your enemy live, let your enemy develop and prosper again and again (mazay lenay ka shoq tau nahin hai inhain??), let your enemy become a nuclear power, let your enemy send freedom fighters into your land, let your enemy pinch again and again (Kargil Balakot, LOC)....
My answer to the indian minister.....
View attachment 803395
View attachment 803396