Talk:Operation Black Thunder

NPOV on Operation Black Thunder 1
The section seems to be mostly anecdotal and does not represent a neutral point of view as to the reasoning behind the Indian government's desire to conduct the operation. Confuseddesi (talk) 17:43, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Contradiction
I was wondering why the article states that the operations resulted in deaths of innocent youths, if further down it says that people only got wounded?

NPOV?
I think this claim is justified. It did break the back of Sikh seperatist movement. The number of casualities/militant activities post Black Thunder have actually gone down very significantly. I think the NPOV claims are uneccessary and biased and have no numbers/evidence to back them. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.225.151 (talk) 21:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

"Operation Black Thunder ... has been credited with breaking the back of the Sikh separatist terrorist movement."

This is a classical case of a biased point of view. Case in point, the BBC refers to Palestinian attacks in the Gaza strip as the doings of "freedom fighters," whereas American news stations will describe them as "terrorists."

Since "separatists" can be spun in one direction or the other, I've deleted the judgmental adjective: "terrorist." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.74.102.163 (talk) 22:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the change, however do you think that a pov tag is necessary as yet? LegalEagle (talk) 02:32, 24 November 2007 (UTC)