India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
488 comments
·May 6, 2025nblgbg
I believe it's mostly overstated. Pakistan is not economically strong enough to participate in a war, and India is not interested either. However, the Modi government wants to project strength. They were unable to locate the terrorists even after two or three weeks and needed a distraction. So, they targeted some areas in Pakistan occupied Kashmir (PoK). In response, Pakistan claimed to have shot down four Indian aircraft and a drone. However, so far, they haven't provided any pictures or locations to support these claims. Both sides will likely exchange fire along the border, and the situation will eventually calm down. Each side will claim victory in its own way.
krisoft
> Pakistan is not economically strong enough to participate in a war
They have nukes. They don't need to be rich to do massive damage. Sure doing so would have terrible consequences, but cooler heads sometimes don't prevail. Or only prevail after much suffering and pain.
Guptos
I hope this is true
th3iedkid
Looks like some of the locations were deep within Pakistan and were targeted precision strikes. They have also released video footage of many of the strikes https://idrw.org/indian-airstrikes-target-terror-infrastruct...
enugu
> They were unable to locate the terrorists even after two or three weeks and needed a distraction.
This does not make sense. When France attacked Daesh in 2015 after the terrorist attacks in Paris or when the US attacked Afghanistan after 9/11, the objective wasn't to target the exact people who carried out the attacks, but the organization behind the attacks. People can always be found as long as the organization remains.
The goal of the attacks would be to make any future terrorist attack an expensive option for the Pakistani military as opposed to something which can be done routinely. There was a sharp drop in the terrorist attacks in Kashmir after the 2019 confrontation.
nindalf
> 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 politicians were asking people to drink less tea so they could conserve foreign currency.
- Covid. Affected everything, but certainly harder to think about waging conflict when such a massive problem is affecting the country.
- Internal political instability, especially when Imran Khan took on the military and lost. The military was actually in danger of losing their primacy for the first time in decades.
- Conflict with the Taliban and Pakistani Taliban. The ISI had nurtured the Taliban to be tame pets and it turned out not to be the case. Crushing these was the highest priority, not least because it made their policy of nurturing terrorists look idiotic.
All of these factors meant Pakistan wasn't and isn't in the best shape to wage war overtly or covertly with India. India's economy has continued to grow, in contrast to Pakistan. The official Indian policy of "benign neglect" towards Pakistan appeared to work well.
I'm sure these attacks will be spun as a success in the future. Safe to say a Bollywood movie dramatising the events is already in the works. But Pakistan's own economic and political problems are far more likely to influence its decisions to engage in this sort of behaviour.
enugu
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 conducting a terrorist attack becomes expensive. Missiles and jets consume much more money in comparison to training recruits via an intermediary organization like LeT and sending them across the border to carry out attacks.
A regime in which a terror attack leads to a high pressure, expensive situation for the Pakistani military is completely different from regularly scheduled, train and deploy terror attacks from militants which used to happen earlier.
In that situation, the military has to respond to economic pressure, pressure from allies and pressure from its own people.
null
lazide
1) Pakistan is a lot less stable right now than 2019 (as is the world).
2) The putative organization is in Pakistan, and likely supported by the military.
The biggest threat India is doing (IMO) is threatening the water supply. That is getting everyone in Pakistan’s attention.
These strikes are more about managing the local political situation in India, which requires some degree of obvious violent retribution.
enugu
The incentives of the Pakistani generals to permit organizations like LeT to commit further terrorist attacks is a different domain from whatever the local political situation is like in India. There has been a past regime where Pakistani generals were able to train and send militants regularly to conduct terror attacks in India. Without an effective response from India putting pressure on these generals, that can easily become the new normal again.
arjun1296
[dead]
bluefirebrand
People said the same sorts of things when Germany suddenly invaded Poland, which rather famously spiraled into World War 2
JumpCrisscross
> People said the same sorts of things when Germany suddenly invaded Poland
Hell, look at HN on the eve of Russia's invasion of Ukraine. One of the top comments was essentially a dismissal from Kherson edited to an "oh shit."
hshdhdhj4444
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 how Putin operated or was willfully misleading.
India has shown no such imperial intentions that Putin has demonstrated and spoken about multiple times both before and since his attempt to take over Ukraine.
krainboltgreene
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 going to have to deal with the insane SS brigade he's fostered eventually. Also while Putin and others thought that Ukraine would fall like Afghanistan (quickly), zero people think that Pakistan is going anywhere within this eon. While it's not the graveyard of empires, it's definitely the hospice.
IAmGraydon
You can only edit for a maximum of 2 hours on HN, so not sure how that happened.
HideousKojima
That's because we'd seen "Russian invasion imminent" every year since the annexation of Crimea. It got to be very boy who cried wolf.
mcmoor
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.
JeremyNT
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.
HPsquared
It's an artifact of education. Everyone is taught about a handful of big famous wars, but it doesn't really give an understanding of international relations. It's actually a bit dangerous.
nonethewiser
>People said the same sorts of things when Germany suddenly invaded Poland, which rather famously spiraled into World War 2
The analogy isnt a great fit.
Germany hadn't previously invaded Poland (and vice-versa) many times leading up to that point.
A missile strike and an invasion are on completely different levels.
aucisson_masque
That's different, Germany used fake death of German soldier to justify an invasion of Poland.
India is bombing Pakistan, Pakistan is shelling India, but so far no army invaded another country.
Beside both Germany and Poland didn't have the atomic weapon.
HPsquared
It's worrying that the world is progressing to "nuclear states attacking each other". Like two cowboys who both have revolvers, getting into a bar fight.
nblgbg
"I understand your skepticism, but realistically, I don't see the case. Pakistan is in a very bad situation. The U.S. has cut off a lot of funding over the past decate. They were on the verge of bankruptcy a couple of years ago, and China bailed them out.
BLKNSLVR
New proxy war between US-aligned India and China-supported Pakistan?
My understanding is that China and India don't tend to get along politically.
rayiner
War is universal in human history and most of them don’t turn into World War II. centuries of unique circumstances went into World War II.
HPsquared
That war involved external parties though. Who are the external parties here who would want to get involved?
SpicyLemonZest
And if it turns out next month that India has a secret plan to conquer Pakistan and split it with Iran, that will be similarly concerning. I’m extremely confident that’s not the case.
conradfr
Yet people died.
aprilthird2021
I think you're mostly correct. This does mirror the 2019 flare up, and yeah ultimately neither side wants their populace to figure out they're not as strong or prepared as they claim. For Pakistan after squashing the democratically popular leader, they can't afford to appear weak (the only thing they can lean on is strength to explain to the populace why they are better than a democratically elected leader). For India, also, the BJP has been waning in popularity after almost a decade of incumbency, this could be the straw that loses them their major support.
null
dang
MichaelMoser123
The bad news: there is some real potential for escalation due to the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/indias-water...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Waters_Treaty
Wasn't there something in the intro of "Mad Max fury road" about water wars?
niemandhier
This is probably the only real dangerous point at the moment.
Neither side gains to win much from a conflict, but should India really tamper with the water supply I hope they consult their economists first. Otherwise Pakistan has little choice but instantly commit to a full war.
The reason:
A significant amount of the food produced in Pakistan directly depends on the water from the river Indus. Even a moderate water supply reduction would lead to a loss of around 10% of the harvest.
That does not sound like much, BUT economically food is a commodity with low 'elasticity', meaning demand does not really go down with reduced supply. The result would therefore be a doubling of food prices.
In a country where people have little dispensable income, that means wide spread famine.
By all measures India is the more powerful state, but as Ukraine demonstrates: Desperation can make up for a lot of disadvantage.
Tade0
Ukraine was desperate in 2014, when the Green Men arrived. In 2022 they were already anticipating an invasion, just didn't know when exactly it would occur.
By 2020 they already had Bayraktars and Javelins:
https://www.dailysabah.com/business/defense/ukraine-to-buy-5...
JumpCrisscross
> there is some real potential for escalation due to the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty
Neither side wants peace. But neither side wants to commit military manoeuvre that secures strategic aims. So we get this defence sale wet dream of a forever war instead.
screye
India wants peace. A peaceful India threatens Pakistan's entire existence as a military state. Therefore, Pakistan keeps instigating with outrageously cruel terrorist attacks.
There are no strategic goals here. Either side may recover some vantage points high up in the Himalayas. But that's about it.
hayst4ck
Israel and Russia also want peace. China wants peace with Taiwan. The US wants peace with Greenland and Canada.
You have to be careful with that word, peace, because all wars are defensive.
rfrey
Every country wants peace, as long as it's on their terms.
JumpCrisscross
> India wants peace
Not really. There are options for a negotiated peace that involves swapping land, specifically, ceding Muslim-dominant territory to Pakistan and setting borders along rivers. That's anathema in India because there is broad-based antipathy towards Islamabad, historically, and Muslims, recently.
alephnerd
> A peaceful India threatens Pakistan's entire existence as a military state
Pakistani Military leadership has attempted to negotiate normalized relations as well. The issue is someone in their lower ranks or on the political front tries to take advantage of normalization attempts to overthrow the previous leader. I documented a number of cases that happened this past decade below.
alephnerd
Pretty much. It isn't worth it for either India or Pakistan at the macro level, and intra-elite factionalism would strike well before anyone could commit to a sustained conflict.
And partners like KSA and UAE would come down hard if this became an extended conflict.
spaceman_2020
The difference this time around is that leadership in both countries is more religiously hardline than the last serious war like situation we had (after Nov 26 2011).
Asif Munir is the son of an imam and an avowed Islamist. India’s ruling party is openly pro-Hindu. Modi is also under pressure from the hardline religious wing of his party for the recent focus on caste instead of religion
JumpCrisscross
> It isn't worth it for either India or Pakistan at the macro level, and intra-elite factionalism would strike well before anyone could commit to a sustained conflict
Yup. But those same forces conspire against a sustained peace.
> partners like KSA and UAE would come down hard if this became an extended conflict
Zero chance. The problem is China.
cute_boi
I don't know about India, but Pakistan definitely don't want peace. They are nurturing terrorist eg. Osama. I guess whole world should stand against Pakistan.
kumarvvr
> Neither side wants peace
Really? How do you know. Most Indians don't care about what happens to Pakistan or its people.
The moment Pakistan's military stops its terror funding and support activities, India will not care whether it Pakistan lives or dies.
JumpCrisscross
> The moment Pakistan's military stops its terror funding and support activities, India will not care whether it Pakistan lives or dies
I'll entertain this is possible. But it's not only unlikely but irrational so long as Pakistan deepens its ties with China. It's made almost certain by the attitude you're presenting: countries that do "not care whether" their neighbours live or die generally aren't on peaceful terms with them.
manishsharan
[flagged]
alephnerd
Overstated. There isn't any long term locking capabilities on most rivers under the IWT.
The only one India is messing with is the Chenab, and only because it messes up Pakistan's Rice and Sugar exports (major forex provider for Pakistan, and the supply chain is heavily owned by Pakistan's MilBus). Kharif sowing season ends in a couple weeks so messing with the Chenab for 3-4 weeks is enough to destroy the rice harvest in Northeast Punjab.
I recommend reading Ayesha Siddiqui's "Military Inc" to understand the Pakistani army (she was forced into exile because of the book), and "Army and Nation" by Steven Wilkinson to understand India's army.
MichaelMoser123
I hope you are right, however:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Waters_Treaty#Suspension
Following the suspension of the treaty, India significantly reduced the flow of water through the Chenab River, which crosses into Pakistan. Pakistani authorities claimed a 90% drop in water supply and accused India of choking the river’s flow. India also initiated new hydroelectric projects and began constructing dams on the western rivers, actions previously constrained under the treaty.[125][126][127]
Pakistan has reportedly warned that any attempt by India to disrupt the flow of water from shared rivers could be considered an act of war, and would attack India with nuclear weapons.[128]
dmix
Just sounds like a good deterrence for Pakistan to not go to war to me. It really is in their hands right now.
India just wants to save face over the terror attacks, a very easy game to play diplomatically. This missile strike was even smaller and more symbolic than even the Israeli Iranian ones. And those two are much more inclined (and far more prepared) to do something stupid.
mayama
> Overstated. There isn't any long term locking capabilities on most rivers under the IWT.
India could build water channel, in style of China's South North water transfer project in less than half decade. Huge dams aren't really needed for just diversion, if India is really serious about it.
alganet
Fury Road could be seen as a reverse adaptation sequel of "Lolita" though.
The end of Lolita (old guy on a road, frustrated, goes off path) fits with the Furiosa taking a detour.
The roles are reversed. The young girl leaves in triumph (opposed to: the old guy leaves in frustration) and the old guy goes after her (opposed to: the young girl doesn't care about him leaving).
It could be just the skeleton of the story though.
Water is unobtanium of their scenic universe. In that movie perspective, it's related to healthy reproduction (healthy babies!), most likely cultural and not genetic.
As any work of art, it is subject to many interpretations. Not everything is a cue. But some cues exist in fact. Contrary to the meme swarm, you can't turn those ideas so quickly into what you want, otherwise it fails to connect to a sense of cultural continuity.
null
alganet
If you saw the cultural continuity, you can them jump to "Man On The High Castle" where the former Minister of Culture of Japan travels universes temporarily, revealing a drawer with banned books. Amongst them, Lolita.
The old Minister represents an aged cultural interpretation of a nation (not exactly Japan, but what is perceived to be the form of Imperial Japan if it has won WWII).
After seeing it, the character is called out by his son, before quickly returning back to the war universe.
cake-rusk
India said no military targets were hit. If Pakistan downed Indian jets you can bet military targets would have been hit.
diggan
According to the submission, this is what India said:
> India said it struck nine "terrorist infrastructure" sites, some of them linked to an attack by Islamist militants on Hindu tourists that killed 26 people in Indian Kashmir last month. Four of the sites were in Punjab and five in Pakistani Kashmir, it said.
Since you're saying this is a lie, maybe link to some source for this, since the source we currently have available, says the opposite.
cake-rusk
Pak terrorist infrastructure is not a military target even though they are hand in gloves with the Pak army.
Reubachi
You must have misread, OP is saying that IN did not confirm/mentioned downed Aircraft.
They of course did confirm downing military targets, that is...the title of the submission we are discussing.
chvid
There is a lot of Indian English-language media on YouTube and Twitter. There the war drums have been sounding strongly for the past weeks.
They seem to draw a parallel between India/Kashmir/Pakistan and Israel/Gaza/Iran - seeing India as the superior and morally just super power against a weak corrupt dysfunctional terrorist-sponsoring Pakistan.
So in that thinking right now there is an opportunity to get a final solution on Kashmir and throw a punch against Pakistan so strong that it will fall apart for good.
nashashmi
India has been notoriously hostile to its minorities and it seeks displacement of the “majority” population of Kashmir because they have been seeking secession from India. Typically when a country has acted harmfully, world leaders of the west have intervened especially in the case of India and Pakistan because it is a great disruption to trade and profit. It seems this time the West is overwhelmed with several issues including the backlash against Israel from its own people, that they are exhausted.
throwaway642012
India, where minorities become Bollywood superstars, beloved musicians, richest men in Asia, and even presidents, has been notoriously hostile to minorities? I don’t think any other country in Asia has a track record like India when it comes to minorities. Let’s not get rhetoric and false propaganda into our way of critical thinking. India has flaws but it is steadily proving to be a responsible power in that geography.
If you look at the facts: The only exodus happened in India was in Kashmir.
chvid
Yes. Right now the thinking in the west seems to be that India has a bigger role to play in terms of geopolitics as a replacement of / balance against China. And India seems to have picked up on this and sees a greater opportunity to act in areas where it otherwise would have been constrained by the west.
aurareturn
This is a good take. India is definitely aware and is playing the west for advantages as an alternative to China.
ngc248
Just because you harp over the same thing again and again about "India has been notoriously hostile to its minorities" does not make it true. Infact, the minorities in India have been notoriously hostile to the nation and care more about their ummah.
arp242
Haven't there also been conflicts with the Sikhs for decades? I don't think you can completely blame this on just the Muslims.
cheema33
"..there is an opportunity to get a final solution on Kashmir and throw a punch against Pakistan so strong that it will fall apart for good."
So let's escalate and see if one side decides to push the nuclear button?
I hope there are saner people than you, making the decisions.
chvid
Just to be clear - I don't support this and I think India is dangerously overestimating its advantages.
I am just describing what I have seen in Indian media.
ptek
How does this war affect US companies moving their manufacturing from China to India? Will they stay in China to carry on manufacturing? Will Apple extend manufacturing in China?
sanmon3186
Almost none. Even if this situation prolongs, it will only affect the bordering areas in the north. India cannot afford a war if it wants to grow as it projects itself on the international stage as an alternative to China. Pakistan cannot afford it financially.
digitalPhonix
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?
ranger207
There won't be corroborating reports for months if not years. The public transparency of the Ukrainian battlefield is an anomaly; typically (as in past India-Pakistan incidents) both sides will claim more successes than actually happened and it'll take unbiased parties to figure out what actually happened after both sides release their records. This isn't typically due to malice; it's simply difficult in most cases to verify exactly what damage you've dealt. The wide prevalence of public videos in Ukraine puts a lower bound on claims by both sides, but that's historically very unusual.
empiko
I think that level of transparency is the new norm. Everybody has mobile phones and you can have a new satelite imaginery every few hours. It's pretty difficult to hide a jet loss, unless it happens at sea.
jajko
Satellite imagery doesn't go to (or is paid by via some crowdsourcing) public. Maybe 90% of the videos ie on r/CombatFootage are from drones, maybe even basic DJI ones but operated by military.
Its a voluntary decision of those in command to share these, from both sides, nothing less and nothing more, to continuous amazement of both civilian and military communities watching those (some stuff I saw I'd never say is possible or would happen, no need to go to details some of it is beyond brutal).
You are maybe mixing Syria war footage - there are tons of them from around 2016, done as you say via phones or maybe some cheap gopros or consumer cameras of that time. That's not a typical Ukraine war footage.
breadwinner
No credible photos have surfaced so far—if the claim were true, some likely would have. It’s possible the Pakistan army is making this statement for domestic audiences, perhaps to deflect pressure to respond.
sbmthakur
Their claim went from 2 to 3 to 6 to 5. So, I will be careful about such news.
OJFord
Also from 'we have captured some Indian soldiers' to 'we have not' (both times the Pakistani defence minister) in an hour or so.
arjun1296
[dead]
aaron695
Planes down confirmed - https://x.com/Doha104p3/status/1919922881892430275
5 planes not yet, but it seems more than one. Indian and Pakistan TV are saying 3. Indian planes crashed in India.
breadwinner
That post is not from any credible source.
alephnerd
Hasn't been confirmed. The Indian government says all pilots are accounted for.
It's the fog of war, and OSINT/couch generalling in the manner that people did with Israel or Ukraine won't work with India and Pakistan.
India has been leveraging the DPDP and national security laws really heavily to remove leaks on social media over the past couple weeks. All major social media platforms have a representative the Indian government coordinates with on information takedowns.
Major reason Musk backed off on his stance about X takedowns with India unlike with Brazil.
And on Pakistan's side, while there have been leaks on social media of troop movements, Pakistan has been implementing China's Great Firewall domestically for the past couple years now. If it was truly deemed critical, Pakistan would most likely lock down their domestic Internet.
curiosity42
Most likely Drop Tanks getting confused as downed aircrafts.
unstuck3958
I live in Kashmir. Can verify the two have been shot down at least.
ferguess_k
I hope this cools down into a propagation war after the initial bombing and shooting. Nationalism served, and every one gets what they want, well, except the dead ones...
kumarvvr
> every one gets what they want
India wants Pakistan to end cross-border terrorism. Everyone did not get what they want.
mrtksn
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 these bombings.
kumarvvr
It was not India that harboured Osama Bin Laden for a decade.
sbmthakur
India is likely to authorize more such strikes if terror attacks continue on its territory.
arjun1296
[dead]
ganarajpr
[flagged]
alephnerd
Depends on internal politics in Pakistan.
The army isn't completely united, and the current COAS of Pakistan (Asim Munir) is much more ideological than the former one (Qamar Javed Bajwa), who he pushed out after Bajwa and Imran Khan demoted Munir from the ISI to a (relatively) lowly Corp Commander.
Bajwa was working on normalizing relations with India, but himself got undermined by Imran Khan and separately by Asim Munir.
mayama
It's result of supporting fundamentalist terrorism and supporting infrastructure nationwide. After sufficient growth, the extremist support base started being recruited into lower levels of army and the support grew from there. Going forward, fundamentalist support in Army will continue to grow even in upper levels.
markus_zhang
I heard the ISI is also quasi independent, too.
brcmthrowaway
Who instigated the attack on India?
alephnerd
LeT, backed by Pakistan.
Yet the Pakistani Army is not uniform either. Bajwa literally attempted to normalize relations with India before he was undermined by Munir.
COASes don't last as long as they used to, and there absolutely is consternation to being pulled into the old days.
devsda
[flagged]
dang
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar like this. We want curious conversation here, and that requires a certain level of relaxation.
devsda
I'm going to sit this one out going forward.
mardifoufs
Are you implying that Indian nationalism has nothing to do with 1) its conflicts with Pakistan 2) the entire Kashmiri situation ?
Especially with India's current government? Not that Pakistan is any less nationalist, just that claiming that one side is just fighting terror here is a bit crazy. It's ironic since it's a very colonial/British type of rationalization
"My side is peaceful and is just fighting terror while the other side is full of fanatical nationalists" is always a very convenient propaganda tool though so I won't blame you for using it
null
devsda
[flagged]
justin66
[flagged]
SanjayMehta
[flagged]
dang
Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar. These are fraught issues and we need to be flexible with each other.
null
skc
Let me go re read "Midnight's Children" for the umpteenth time
amai
Are their any natural resources in Kashmir worth fighting for? Oil? Gas? Lithium? Rare earth metals?
newusertoday
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.
gps372
My compliments to whoever chose the mission name 'Sindoor'. It is very apt for what it implies and signifies in the wake of terror attack at Pahalgam!
saagarjha
India is newlywed?
suprjami
Congratulating war is disgusting.
What's your next post? Fawning over how cool "Final Solution" sounds?
LordGrignard
It ain't war. After killing 26 innocent civilians that too based on religion this is the LEAST response that should be given by India. since you absolutely didn't take the time to Google what sindoor means, let me enlighten you. sindoor symbolizes the marital status, and here it represents the revenge and giving peace to the souls of the women who were widowed due to the terrorist attack.
PS and if you knew and are still making this comment I would personally like to kick you off into Pakistan and then see you suffer
gps372
Apparently, some folks have either been blissfully unaware of reality or are just desperate to parade their performative wokeness.
The terrorists made sure to ask the religion of the Sindoor before symbolically erasing it—because apparently, even brutality comes with selective targeting.
And in a poetic twist, the government and the Army honored those very women—while unapologetically ramming that same religion right back down the throats of the terror industry’s headquarters.
Animats
So far, military action is confined to Kashmir. If it gets out of that disputed area, this becomes a major war.
Jtsummers
Not just Kashmir.
> The Indian government said its forces had struck nine sites in Pakistan and on Pakistan’s side of the disputed Kashmir region. Pakistani military officials said that five places had been hit, in Punjab Province and its part of Kashmir.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/06/world/asia/india-pakistan...
Karrot_Kream
India calls this a targeted strike so for now at least they don't seem to be messaging a strong stance on expanding the strike.
KennyBlanken
"Targeted strike" is meaningless PR-speak and the concern wouldn't be India expanding the strike, it would be Pakistan retaliating and then India retaliating to the retaliation and so on until someone's finger is hovering over a big red "LAUNCH" button and the rest of us have to take a keen interest in how much iodine we're consuming.
I and a lot of other people have been calling "India and Pakistan get into it again" ever since Russia started blowing up Ukranian maternity wards, supermarkets and apartment buildings.
Ukraine is bleeding Europe and the US dry in both money and military supplies.
The US just emptied even more munitions at the Houthis (largely accomplishing nothing) to the point that people in the Pentagon have been concerned enough to approach press. The regime also moved carrier groups closer to Yemen to support said operation, so of course now that mom and dad are looking away, the two children are fighting. Meanwhile Hegseth has been hard at work causing complete chaos with an endless stream of junior-manager "get tough" policies, mixed in with some policies furthering his white christian supremacist views.
Russia has basically run out of everything but has made enough seedy friends who will eventually ask for favors
China is fixated on Taiwan but really wouldn't say no to any territorial expansion, if anybody offered, or um, didn't happen to have much in the way of allies who were paying attention.
Our SecState is a little boy cosplaying as a diplomat, nobody with more than a handful of braincells is present in the white house, and the republican party is more intersted in what some trans person did at a swim meet or volleyball tournament, than they are what's going on in the world geopolitically...
Basically, everyone's busy looking at something else, so Pakistan and India shrugged and said "After all, why shouldn't we...have a war?"
nothercastle
I don’t think Pakistan will escalate. They are at a severe disadvantage unless china gives them the green light.
AnimalMuppet
Can you explain? What does China's green light give to Pakistan? Are they not able to attack full strength without China's permission? And if so, why?
ivape
Russia will give the green light on one of these countries, do not doubt that.
ivape
Pakistan shot down five jets. This just went beyond Kashmir.
breadwinner
That's a claim made by Pakistan, not confirmed by photos or videos from credible sources.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/06/world/asia/india-pakistan-attacks.html (https://archive.ph/Bph7S)
https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/06/asia/india-pakistan-kashmir-conflict-hnk-intl
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/live-blog/2025-05-06/india-strikes-pakistan-after-kashmir-attack (https://archive.ph/eypzA)
https://www.bbc.com/news/live/cwyneele13qt