comment: >
  
  Some geniuses in Pakistan had earlier wanted to have a a war of thousand cuts with India. 
  I'd not be surprised if there are hardline ideologues in the Indian establishment who want to give Pakistan precisely that.
context: Never trust blindly after 3 betrayals as they have many internal supporters... >
  
  It doesn't matter what Pakistan's PM says , he virtually has no power. Most power lies with the military generals. For a fact : "In the whole history of Pakistan till date , no PM has competed its tenure , either assassinated , taken over by military dictator or by opposition party" Until and unless the Military higher ups of Pak talk about peace , India will never trust their words after numerous betrayals and terrorist attacks India has faced in past. >
  
  A military establishment talking about peace. That would be a first in human history. >
  
  Not really. There’s a common misconception on Reddit that the military drives conflicts and the politicians are usually the lesser party. In the vast majority of states (Russia is a great example) it is political objectives that drive military policy, not the other way around. Pakistan is really the extreme outlier here. 
  A great example of this is Italy under Benito Mussolini in the 1930’s. You’d think a hyper nationalist facist state would have a strong military advocating for imperialist military policy right?
  But in fact the military was one of the strongest advocates of Italy staying neutral in World War II. They knew their military was a disaster and was totally unprepared for any conflict. But Mussolini’s political objectives for a Mare Nostrum overruled any of their concerns.
  You can literally take this exact same scenario and apply it to Russia today. The vast majority of Russia’s upper echelon military establishment did not support this war, which is why they weren’t told by Putin until it was impossible for them to alter course. >
  
  Turns out the people who do the actualy dying, are less big fans of the whole idea.