US strike options on TSP

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
AnantD
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 04 Mar 2001 12:31
Location: Aurora, Illinois, USA

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by AnantD »

By Shiv:
What else can we do. Are you too suggesting that India should hand over Kashmir? Aren't we helping the US in every which way? What other ways do you think India can help the US?
Shiv, I'm not convinced the US really wants India to do this long term, it might have been the strategy to convince TSPA to move its India facing troops to N Wazir, which has obviously failed. I get the impression India's WKK's are running the show enjoying all the kissing despite the mumbai kaluchaks.

Re Casmere, please don't tell me US is asking that we give Cashmere to the Jihadis as if AF is not enough. If giving casmere meant creatiung a headache for India and so US would like that, only the craziest left wing freaks here would think that it would work that way. Not after the taste of AF/TSP perfidy in the last 10 years. TSP argument that this will solve all problems, not even the stupidest person in GOTUS believes that, leave alone the USmil. Why do you think the Cashmere conference and its ISI stooges and Senators on the take were busted here.
ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5355
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by ShauryaT »

^^Some insight into what RD is talking about.
Top Secret America
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4226
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by Rudradev »

Shaurya, that's a great book... I highly recommend it to all those interested in how the real war on terror is fought.

And yes, THAT is the Real War. If you doubt it... consider the current US Secretary of Defense, and his predecessor. Which organization did both of them head before?

These are the guys who have been picked to take supreme charge of America's war. Not some ordinance polishing shock-n-awe jerkwad like Tommy Franks.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 59860
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by ramana »

RD, Have you read the theory that before D-Day, Rommel's deputy became an asset and sent him off on wild goose chase in the crucial 48 hours after Normandy landings. The guy later became a NATO commander.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by shiv »

AnantD wrote:By Shiv:
What else can we do. Are you too suggesting that India should hand over Kashmir? Aren't we helping the US in every which way? What other ways do you think India can help the US?
Shiv, I'm not convinced the US really wants India to do this long term, it might have been the strategy to convince TSPA to move its India facing troops to N Wazir, which has obviously failed.
Anant unless one chooses to be blind or is deliberately being disingenuous, this American "strategy to convince TSPA to move is India facing troops" included supplying F-16s and AMRAAMs to Pakistan. So the carrot was for TSPA and the stick was towards India.

How then are you able to blandly suggest that India should do "anything" we can to help the US. To me that sounds like a suggestion that India must deliberately lose a war with Pakistan.

May I, in addition, point out that you have actually initiated a discussion about "What India should do" in a thread about "What the US should do". That could be a Freudian slip. It tells me that unless India helps the US the US can't do anything much on its own about Pakistan. Is that what you meant when you suggested that India should do "any thing" to help the US?
rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by rajanb »

Fabulous posts Rudradevji.

We have only weeks and not months (as Clinton said) before we see what the next step the US takes. If the militants, which includes the Pakis, do not respond.

I do believe the the Paki response will be devious and full of duplicity (as it has been over decades) and that ratcheting up by the Nato forces is a foregone conclusion.
AnantD
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 04 Mar 2001 12:31
Location: Aurora, Illinois, USA

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by AnantD »

Shiv:

You are right that this thread is what US should do and not what India should (definitely a freudean slip), however I think our cooperation with the US should go beyond just "training and mutual good feeling". Almost every candidate for POTUS in the 2012 election here is advocating a stronger military relationship with India, but I get the feeling that is going nowhere with too much cynicism (and past baggage) in India. Some of the cynicism is healthy, since it does not allow unwarranted moves and exploitation of India, but countries like Dragon and TSP gain more time and benefit from it. I can't also understand why India can't gear up to defend itself with indigenous industry and still support the US here.

About Losing a war to TSP to appease TSP/USA, that is really funny! I remember an IAF chief saying 10 years ago: "give me 6 SU-30's" and I can take on the entire Fizzleya. What happens with 150+!!

Re the F16's, AMRAAMs, Onions etc, it was all calculated so as to not give TSP the upper hand, but to appease them and gain cooperation in WOT, piracy etc, which has now openly backfired on the US (Osama and Hackanies). We at BR knew that was inevitable the day Colon P smiled at Mushy on that week after 911. We joked about OBL being in Mushy's guest bedroom etc, but it was really came true.

The F 16s are non non-nuke capable and are downgraded so penetrating a highly defended airspace is not possible (read India). I think there are some remote kill switches and God knows what else in case they turn hostile on the US or its allies. Similar to the Exocet defeat codes the French finally gave to the British at the tail end of the Falklands war.

We keep forgetting that the US has always backed India when we got attacked , by the Dragon in 62 and recently in Kargil, treaties or no treaty, and even while the 7th fleet incident in the Bdesh war was the lowest of the low points, but would never have meant an actual attack by the US on India or its forces. Moving a carrier to a trouble spot in the world is SOP for any POTUS, to calm things down, but we read it as an act of pure agression.

I'm not even saying signing those interorpeability agreements was absolutely necessary, but sitting by and watching when the US and Pakistan are trying to dare each other, will not help the situation.

In a way, I'm happy India didn't retaliate in a hot war after Mumbai(s), it would not have brought the US to this realization of TSPA/ISI back-stabbing as they would have been too busy trying to get India to back off. But it is going to be a much more active role that India must play, just as the Dragon is now, since the US is slowly decreasing AF forces. When it becomes "crunch" time for the US wrt TSPA, India must support the US to really punish the TSPA/ISI, so the outcome is favorable for peace in the near to mid term in the entire region.

The US is best at defeating a conventional army, but to really defeat TSP, support from India will be critical. The Paki's, like it or not, are actually related to us ethnically. We understand them better than anyone else. We can't be like Iran, sitting and watching when the US was pounding Saddam in the Gulf wars. This lack of "real" support will actually delay or even convince the US to just leave the situation as is. I'm pretty convinced of this, IMHO.

If we are prepared for more terrorism in India for the next decade, then fine.

Long post for me, sorry for the late response, was traveling.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by RajeshA »

AnantD wrote:Shiv:

You are right that this thread is what US should do and not what India should (definitely a freudean slip), however I think our cooperation with the US should go beyond just "training and mutual good feeling". Almost every candidate for POTUS in the 2012 election here is advocating a stronger military relationship with India, but I get the feeling that is going nowhere with too much cynicism (and past baggage) in India. Some of the cynicism is healthy, since it does not allow unwarranted moves and exploitation of India, but countries like Dragon and TSP gain more time and benefit from it. I can't also understand why India can't gear up to defend itself with indigenous industry and still support the US here.
India is more like a mountain. We stand there. We are ourselves. Others can see us and from our heights we can see others. For others we are don't move and we have no apparent direction. Our shadows may fall on others, but we have no intention of crushing others, except may be with some rare avalanche where some neighbor gets smothered, like it happened in '71. When others see us, they only see a mountain that needs to be climbed and mastered. With our politics of non-interference and respect for sovereignty, we too don't want to give any other impression.

As a mountain we are not really playing any game.

We have to start playing the game - all entities - geographic, ideological or manipulative, which are against us need to be crushed or otherwise neutralized.

It is only if India has some new design for the world, that we can convince others or even force others to support them. We say India's and American strategic interests overlap. Does that include anything more than defensive interests for India? Let's say one of India's strategic interests is to break Pakistan, and USA sees some good in that, so may be USA and India could do things together. But is India's interest to really break up Pakistan? Has it ever been suggested by any other party other than us jingos here on BRF? So if it is not our interest, then it is useless to hope that America would look after our unstated interests!

It is not about India following American lead, but rather India laying down the lead and getting America to jump on to the wagon!

We sometimes make it an issue of independence of Indian Foreign Policy vs dependence on others. It is in fact a question of building some inter-dependence with others. What we need is clarity in what we want and how to mold the environment accordingly, and then see if other powers can help or not, and to build inter-dependencies accordingly.

We have to play our game - break-up Pakistan; get China out of Tibet; integrate Asia into India culturally, economically and to some extent politically; and to dictate the World Political and Financial Order!

And we work to "create" the American constituencies which see Pakistan as one big bulls eye, but as a support to our own game!
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14379
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by Aditya_V »

Can we close this Thread. US is never going to attack Pak. Its all drama bazzi.
Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by Altair »

Aditya_V wrote:Can we close this Thread. US is never going to attack Pak. Its all drama bazzi.
May be the title should have been "TSP strike options on US". We can explore that angle. It is exactly what has been going on for the past 10 years at least.
AnantD
BRFite
Posts: 194
Joined: 04 Mar 2001 12:31
Location: Aurora, Illinois, USA

Re: US strike options on TSP

Post by AnantD »

Posted by Aditya_V;
Can we close this Thread. US is never going to attack Pak. Its all drama bazzi.
No, the strike options for the US against TSP are going on as we speak. Over a 100 last year and over 60 this year. The latest is the killing of Mulla Nazir's brother in S Waz, a week ago was a Hackani higher up.

I think what we are concluding is that a conventional hot war is not on the cards. As Rudradev's posts showed, the bulk of the US effort is covert because the war is a covert war. The ISAF is just a "holding" force, no conventional military thrust into TSP is expected from it, or elsewhere for that matter.

I wonder how the options would change if the PLA was allowed by Kiyanahi to set up a base near NWFP. Personally, I really wish they do, since this will guarantee a fallout between TSP and Dragon down in a few years. Dragon won't be able to do his human wave attacks there.
Post Reply