Managing Pakistan's failure

[anupmisra]

anupmisra ji,

apparent naivety, be it from the conservatives or the liberals, is a powerful reason for change, and if change is useful to us, then I at least welcome such naivety.

Naivety is a powerful reason for change? Not sure if I have heard of this one before. Anyway. The pashtuns have never been brought under control (by gun or by reason or by contract) in history and they are not going to change now.

[RamaY]

Anupmisraji,

Small correction. Pasthuns went out of control only in recent history (3-400 years). How powerful they were in pre-islamic history? How did they convert into Islam?

They just need a different set of strategies to be defeated.

I think RajeshAji is talking about a change, that is in indian interest, is welcome irrespective of it comes from someone else's naivety or not.

[Virupaksha]

Anupmisraji,

Small correction. Pasthuns went out of control only in recent history (3-400 years). How powerful they were in pre-islamic history? How did they convert into Islam?

They just need a different set of strategies to be defeated.

I think RajeshAji is talking about a change, that is in indian interest, is welcome irrespective of it comes from someone else's naivety or not.

What out of control? Anybody who wanted to control them kicked their butt throughout history. Their historical role has been the football. It was just that it's main role is/was a gateway to India proper. Once that incentive is gone, nobody cares about them enough to want to control. All every one expected in the last 300-400 years was to make sure no other power controlled them. Their incentive started and ended at that point.

In other words, as long as India has a reasonably strong centre, the myth of "out of control pashtuns" will remain.

[anupmisra]

Pasthuns went out of control only in recent history (3-400 years). I think RajeshAji is talking about a change, that is in indian interest, is welcome irrespective of it comes from someone else's naivety or not.

And I was talking about the liberals in the US. This was a Hufington post, a known liberal bastion, and hence my reaction to that. Just my opinion, thats all.

But, back to the pashtoons. They have been the toughest nuts to crack since time immemorial. Why will they change now, islam or no islam? Pastunwali supercedes every other norm or faith or belief system for them. All my doubts were removed when a local NYC-based pashtun with the same tribalt name as the infamous paki general, recently confirmed the above. Once again, just my opinion.

[RajeshA]

I was talking about the liberals in the US. This was a Hufington post, a known liberal bastion, and hence my reaction to that. Just my opinion, thats all.

Re-carving Pakistan coming from a liberal bastion like Huffington Post, is even more welcome. In some conservative think-tanks it is one thing to read on somebody's cartographic fantasies, but coming from a liberal bastion means it may be being looked at in some earnest.

[ShauryaT]

Gujral, last of the wagah candle-lighters

The means Gujral suggested actually are the very things that can work — having asymmetrical trade and commercial relations with all neighbours including Pakistan will immediately give the states in the near-abroad a stake in India’s wellbeing and future, and vice-versa — as I have argued in all my books. But, vis a vis Pakistan there’s a need to address that country’s insecurity on its terms. This will essentially require denaturing the Indian army’s strike corps element by recomposing it as I have suggested in my writings the armoured and mechanized forces and the three strike corps establishment — and using the manpower and financial component thus freed up to raise, eventually, three offensive strike corps for the mountains against China, and by taking such measures as removing the liquid-fueled Prithvi missiles from their forward-deployed stance (which would neither compromise nor weaken Indian security, because India has the 700km Agni-1 to cover Pakistan). This is the hard kernel of rapprochement with Pakistan. Whether Gujral appreciated this military aspect or not, is unclear to me despite my having talked with him a number of times. It is, however, fair to say as a short-term PM of a ragtag coalition regime he lacked the political punch to implement such a military policy. Hence, his Doctrine was toothless and achieved little, as I rfemember writing at the time.

[ShauryaT]

Imran Khan. Lots of promises, which are bound to run into issues. Nevertheless, it is a trajectory that should be welcome. Some Key question by Gen. V.P. Malik.

The answer is in the future. The past is gone, says Imran Khan on Indo-Pak ties

[Virupaksha]

Imran Khan. Lots of promises, which are bound to run into issues. Nevertheless, it is a trajectory that should be welcome. Some Key question by Gen. V.P. Malik.

The answer is in the future. The past is gone, says Imran Khan on Indo-Pak ties

Does "past is gone" apply only to 26/11, Hafeez Syed, daily insurgent pumping into India, i.e. what India wants from Pakistan or does it also apply for Sir Creek, Kashmir, Siachen etc, what Pakistan wants from India?

[RamaY]

The past that should go away is Islamization of Indian-subcontinent

[harbans]

But, back to the pashtoons. They have been the toughest nuts to crack since time immemorial. Why will they change now, islam or no islam?

Actually the Pashtoons have been the easiest to crack throughout history. Almost everyone has come, conquered them, converted them to whatever they wanted and then left as it was useless retaining that belt. If one really makes a list of truly fcuked up clans, Pashtoons would be very high toppers on that list. True battle and war is about defense of value systems. Pashtoons have abandoned their women, children to the ravages of value systems most abominable. They did not even have the guts to rally behind Khan Abdul Gaffar. A clan that changes colors and ideology for the worse at each stage deserved to get whipped and it has got whipped throughout as history shows. Remember Saragarhi..20 Sikhs versus 10,000 plus pashtoons. Soviets, Americans even Punjabi Muslims have had them on a leash till date. What has the Mard e Pashtoon got to say about his life style, economy, women, children, standards today? Nothing. Zilch. No future, nothing..just a random drone attack that takes them out due maybe to some fellow pashtoon giving away his GPS location. Children roaming like wild beasts with an AK and a RPG in some ramshackle toyota..and a fat arse bearded buffoon whipping one of his shuttlecocks and bombing some girls school..this is what they fight to defend. The cowardly Pashtoon is what the reality is. They have been cowardly enough to embrace every evil ideology there is. They have succumbed, not fought.

[vasu raya]

The past that should go away is Islamization of Indian-subcontinent

we can start by reverting all names to the pre-Mughal times for all places up to Afghanistan and have factual evidence on the location of each historic place or monument. The test is if the South Asian Muslims believe in Indus civilization or their Islamic conquerors. Then we can separate the strains based on our interpretations of the ideologies rather than based on the internal classifications of Islam as available in South Asia.

we had rolled back much of the British colonization, but the centuries old Islamic colonization is still around and its legitimization is causing a lot of friction.

[ShauryaT]

Pakistan on the edge - B G Verghese

In many ways, Pakistan is debating fundamental social issues and values of nation-building that India addressed and steadily overcame 50 years ago. It still has to determine its identity and prise itself out of the morass and, ultimately, loss of direction by defining itself as being no more than ‘the Other’ to India.

Recognition is gradually dawning that Kashmir is not the ‘core issue’ in Indo-Pakistan relations but a territorial fantasy to give notional substance to the ideology of Pakistan or Nazaria-e-Pakistan. A blunt denunciation of this vicious doctrine appeared in a column in the ‘Daily Times’ of December 3 that called it an ‘ill defined and illogical ideological frontier of Pakistan’ which has ‘poisoned the country with hate and bigotry.’

A more recent study on ‘The continuing biases in our textbooks’ by the Jinnah Institute, Islamabad, in April 2012, lamented the continuing ‘curriculum of hatred’ that creates a mind-set of extremism and religious bigotry and inculcates ‘prejudice against non-Muslims who are depicted as enemies of Pakistan. This breeds jihadis. Today’s extremists are yesterday’s children that were raised on a diet of these textbooks.’ The ‘ubiquitous emphasis on Nazariya-i-Pakistan continues to dominate the tone and the texts and no words are minced in attributing all the ills that ever befell Pakistan to ‘Hindus’ (and India).’

General Kayani has said that Pakistan must know that development must go with defence. He realises that the country’s economy is gravely imperilled and that the US and China, though flirtatious for their own reasons will not bail out Pakistan beyond all reason. A senior Pakistan diplomat told me in Islamabad that unless and until Pakistan realises that India is not a permanent enemy and decides to make up with it, the country will self-destruct.

[SSridhar]

Pakistan has been continuously on the edge since c. 1947, but never fell over, even after 1971. What does it prove ? The 3½ won't let that happen.

[dada]

Pak was carved out of india as a result of partition. If Pakistan had simply remained as an isolated entity , We would have sorted it out long back.
in 1947 till early 1950s only its linkage with UK was strong. Its defence pacts with USA made it impossible irreversibly. But the same string of developments of post 1991/2001 india makes it impossible for pk to do the same. They have to swallow their 1971 event & move on.Once a country becomes a part of global strategy it becomes much more different to deal with it.

[vasu raya]

Khandav Dahan:

Lets take the analogy, the snakes in TSP are supported and protected by the Pak society because of perception issues about Islam and India, if we think of these perceptions as the dense forest in which the snakes (read terrorists) find their hiding place, to get rid of these snakes the forest has to be burnt and the fire here is knowledge, of their real roots which is where science (a neutral force) of DNA comes into play. Hopefully the identification of their roots tells them that

WKK Scenario) the no good Caliphate ideology is an adoption and is not necessary anymore for them to be Arab colonies mentally. OK, that's focused work and could be a long drawn process starting with their school books, and can span an entire new generation. And the push back we see today wrt to amending Sharia (relating to birth control, madrassa education, Kufr concept) will be less of an issue at that point.

Realistic Scenario) or it could create new fault lines, it leads to identification of a group with no affinity to Arab genes, group who are really Arabs and then all shades in between. With the current trend of Who's Islam is right based violence, it will add to the Chaos. This Arab racist undercurrent of Wahabism will claim more victims ala Ahmedis. Without Arab genes, can you really be a dominant leader?

[RajeshA]

Terror for Terror

X-Posting from "TIRP" Thread

Retribution must be swift, disproportionate, a lesson-learning experience for TSPA, backed by GoI, and be made public when over. Of course, we will not indulge in barbarity.

SSridhar garu,

In 1989 there was a Hindi film "Elaan-e-jung", starring Dharmendra, etc. It had a song titled "Dosto Se Dosti, Dushmano Se Dushmani". For some reason, I had to think of it.

We have to ask ourselves what is the meaning of "Dushmano Se Dushmani"? It should mean something more than "Main tumse kootti hoon"!

I don't think we should leave barbarity and gruesomeness as the sole preserves of Pakislamists/Taliban. Actually they thrive on this. They show pride in it that they are the most gruesome bunch and nobody can come close to their gruesomeness. They are right in the sense that such gruesomeness does have an enormous psychological effect on their "enemy", on the Munafiqun and the Kufr. Thousands other ideologues across the world harvest this gruesome shown by some Islamist at some place in the world, by embracing this gruesomeness as the material of which they themselves are made, and through this gruesome act exert fear on others, in their localities, on the streets. A show of gruesomeness by a single Islamist anywhere contributes an aura of fearlessness and invincibility in all the Islamists of the Ummah!

If the Kufr simply get nauseated and disgusted by their acts of barbarity and keep on condemning them as a "Standard Operating Procedure" and patting ourselves on the back that we are more "civilized" than them, thus retaining some composure by balancing our "terror" with a sense of "civilizational superiority", then I believe we would be playing on a losing wicket.

Retribution where some people get killed, be they civilians or even from their ranks, does not really mean much to them. They were just collateral damage, fodder for the war with the Kufr. They can be replaced. The Muslim women are working overtime in breeding factories, whose sons would be harvested in the cause of Jihad. So a retribution is hardly any loss, simply another opportunity to call the faithful to arms!

Human lives are not what matter to these people, let alone any morals according to which humans live. I had advocated long time back - "Land for Terror".

I also advocate "Terror for Terror"! We simply cannot let Pakis win the game of GRUESOMENESS. Taliban today evoke some terror among their detractors, not simply because of bombings, of which there are not many these days, but because of the sheer gruesomeness of their acts on humans. The TSPA have to now follow that scale of gruesomeness too! For the faithful, the gruesomeness of the barbarous act has become a sign of level of piety, because the wrath of Allah cannot be a mere slap on the wrist, and so it needs a new scale of measurement and Taliban are providing it.

This war is not being fought for preserving life, or preserving some honor, or even preserving land. The stakes are the fear share in the mind of the enemies - the sheer terror among the enemy. A terrorized enemy loses the heart to fight!

So I would urge, don't let the Pakis have a monopoly on terror and gruesomeness. We can show our civility in how we choose our enemies, but not in what we do to them once we get our hands on them!

I don't expect many to agree with me on this, but just wanted to get my take on the psychological war of terror going on, which is at the moment very one sided.

[SSridhar]

RajeshA ji, the reason why you have to say today that we should return the barbarity in kind to TSPA is because of Indian inaction for countless acts of terror and barbarity let loose on us since 1947 (and by Muslim League before that). Had appropriate action been taken against the barbarians at appropriate times, our dushman will think a few times before doing something like this unspeakable brutality. Even today, I am not sure if GoI has any plans to retaliate at all. I won't be surprised if a Nepali army unit under Maoist/China control does such despicable acts on an Indian column of soldiers on a future date because they would be emboldened by the mute spectatorship of GoI. What GoI has failed to understand in 65 years is that India's attempts to strike peace with Pakistan cannot be at the cost of Indian dignity, especially of its soldiers, leave alone sovereignty et al. GoI cannot allow dignity of Indians to be so brutally violated and yet go unpunished. One wonders if GoI understands the implications of its eunuch attitude (no disrespect to such people).

[RajeshA]

SSridhar garu,

Of course, the Indian inaction leads one to frustration and then one starts making some extreme-sounding policies suggestions.

However if we now acknowledge TSPA to be just another Tanzeem ideology-wise, and through beheadings they act like they are, then we need to look for ways how to counteract them. We need to think up of ways on how to provide a credible deterrent on the sub-conventional war level.

Since at the level of sub-conventional war, the Pakistani Army is often using Jihadis, or their own soldiers who seem like being motivated by a similar junoon, we need to think of ways which deter both Jihadis as well as the Crore Commanders, who send them and who want maximum dividends with minimum expenditure.

It is here that I see a paucity of viable alternatives being proposed. The above post was not simply an question of me giving vent to frustration, but if one is willing to ignore some of the extreme vocabulary, it is also about looking at alternatives.

[RajeshA]

Deterring the Crore Commanders

X-Posting from "Beheading of Indian Soldiers in Aug 2011 and Aman ki Asha" Thread

These are provocations for war.

The Paki calculation is that India won't go for a full war or war escalation because of their chinese maal, but if the tempers are high one could get into a little conflict. That way Pakistani Army would be able to consolidate the country and tanzeems behind it, as India would be the big enemy. There would be lots of propaganda and stuff.

Any little conflict which ends in a draw, is a huge victory for Pakistani Army who can again stake the claim as protectors of Pakistan, can claim that Pakistan is in danger and as the force to have faced India, they are the rightful protectors of Pakistan.

All this can however be short-circuited if what India delivers to the Pakis is not a conflict or a war, but an awesome humiliation, showing the pussies that they are. The clash should be limited. It should not have anything to do with destroying any military stuff or any other goals. When the dust settles, a few hundred Paki soldiers should have been exposed as the sissies that they are. If US, China enter the fray then and call off the match, it is fine and good, and totally realistic. So we have half-a-round, limited time, to deliver the knock-out punch and get out.

How to humiliate the TSPA pigs? The same way the Taliban do it. Capture them and behead them. If the script goes the same way as the Taliban does it, they will have some difficulty in putting their objections to intelligible language. It has to be beheadings and the result of those beheadings of these TSPA Pakis have to be for everybody to see. It has to be a massacre of the pigs in a surprise attack.

When the big bosses of Security Council intervene and ask everybody to cool down, a few hundred heads of Pakis would be on display at LoC, Paki Fauj would again have lost their echandee, especially in the eyes of the Taliban, we would have nipped Paki plans in the bud and have gotten our revenge.

[RajeshA]

Deterring the Crore Commanders

X-Posting from "Beheading of Indian Soldiers in Aug 2011 and Aman ki Asha" Thread

The strategy to give Pakis a mass beheading is to make TSPA give up its strategy of trying to unite the Pakis by provoking India into a war. TSPA should die naturally as the stew cooks.

What TSPA's crore commanders fear most is that their fiefdom would simply disintegrate as their soldiers join other Tanzeems. In order to stop that, what they need is money from their 3½ friends to pay their soldiers and some reason dieter for existence. Their raison d'être is fast fading as the various tanzeems show that they can protect "Islam's Fortress" much better than TSPA crore commanders.

A beheading of an Indian soldier provides the TSPA crore commanders exactly that. They can show their "prowess" vs. India using the same Talibanic ways, thus through the mode of killing implicitly stating that they too are fighting Islam's cause, and they are best suited to do so!

What India should give the TSPA is a reason to pause. Taking such liberties with Indian jawans should have the exact opposite effect to what the TSPA crore commanders want. It should effect their humiliation as Momeen Mards. A few hundred beheadings of Paki soldiers would be such a thhapparh to TSPA, that they would rethink their strategy of winning some echandee in the eyes of the Islamists and Pakistani people. If the net effect of a clash with India is that they lose their echandee, then it doesn't pay to take on India. Then TSPA crore commanders would have to either come up with some new strategy or go down, as they are destined to eventually.

The rest is all long term business, but in the short term we would probably sleep easier with a suitable revenge in the pocket and knowing that they have been taught a lesson.

[RajeshA]

Deterring the Jihadis

X-Posting from "Beheading of Indian Soldiers in Aug 2011 and Aman ki Asha" Thread

RajeshA

I want to ask the jirga, what is really wrong with beheadings. We Hindus have a long tradition of beheadings. Our mythology is full with beheadings. When one imagines the image of Kali Ma, one doesn't see her writing dossiers. Do we see any of our deities with dossiers in hand. When we imagine Vishnu's Sudarshana Chakra, we don't think of it as useful for trimming beards only. What is Sudarshana Chakra used for?

I think we should stop this show of being shocked at the beheading because it was a beheading. We are shocked because it happened to one of our jawans and it was unprovoked.

All the shocking at a beheading is Macaulayite brainwashing to make us "civilized". Our civilization has always been for Dharma, and that means "putting an end to evil", and there is nothing in Pakistan which is less than evil. So if others tell us considering beheadings as okay is wrong and against modern sensibilities, we should simply tell them, we deal with our enemies in our way!

The response to this beheading is really a thousand beheadings of Pakis. And then we should make a mala of those heads and do a Bollywood jiggy, just to be in sync with the times! The rest of the bodies should always be sacrificed to Agni Dev! Let that be SOP!

RajeshA

In fact I all in favor of building an open-air gallery all along the Indo-Pak border and LoC. Charred remains of Paki bodies and a spear to mark the spot with a Paki head dangling on it!

In principle, this should promote tourism. Let's see how many Pakis then come to India on Aman ki Asha!

darshhan

Good Post Rajesh ji. We are whining too much about beheadings. This will only make our lives tough when we have to give the same treatment to pakis. My suggestion for India would be to immediately withdraw from Geneva conventions and International Human rights regime in general.

No quarters given and none asked for when it comes to Pakis and Islamists. Our motto should be Ruthless, Merciless and Remorseless

ravi_g

Beheading is in part a mind game by the PA. Look how nicely now the whole of India is divided between those who are 'outraged' and those who are 'loosing heart'. There is a member who believes this was the last straw for him and has decided that he cannot take it anymore. So he went off to Australia. This in essense (though not scope) is what was the aim to begin with.

While beheading is in the name of the thread. People around here know well that it is about mutilation of the Rakshaks so the mango men are put in doubt.

We have a Mother-Son duo that have no responsibilites elected by the likes of them. Then we have a team in Ottawa or wherever directing this zero-responsibilities duo to do their bidding and then you have a media that is intent on selling out the nation having already sold out themselves. I mean Headlines Today was telecasting a Najam Sethi and Glitterati orgy.

These inbreds have to be show their place.

darshhan

My grouse is that we are relating beheading to Pakistaniyat. We need to promote beheading of the enemies as part of the Dharmic Warrior culture.

darshhan

Here is the image of Maa Kali who we all worship.



She seems to be completely okay when it comes to decapitation. Dharmics have to remember their traditions.

RajeshA

darshhan ji,

in that photo, all of those heads look like Paki heads. Tathaastu! Let there be beheadings! Let those Paki heads be used for irrigation purposes!

krishnan

jay mahakali

johneeG

+108. Wanting to say this, but could not put it across properly, so refrained. You have articulated it very well. Kudos, saar ji.

It is indeed a modern-western-liberal expression to be 'shocked' or 'disgusted' at beheading. And same is the case with labeling it as 'barbaric'. Well, killing itself is barbaric. Beheading is also barbaric. Does not mean, it should be eschewed, especially when the other party is indulging in it.

Beheading was always considered an extreme form of death in Hindu scriptures. This death was given to those who are not civilized enough to understand the general civilized way of things. For example, beheading was not done to Duryodhana or Ravana.

But, it was done to others. Ravana and Duryodhana, despite their general shortcomings, fought fair and square in a war. While, some Asuras like Chanda, Munda or Shumba and Nishumba, ...etc. did not fight fair and square. With such opponents, its 'tit for tat'. Infact, ten tits for one tat. These kind of opponents were beheaded. No dignity was accorded to them, because they did not earn it.

Even in MB, Dushshasana was given a brutal death because of his attempted 'rape'. And in Ramayana, Indrajith(Ravana's son) was beheaded.

If the other side is fair and square, then it is proper(not necessary, though) to be fair and square. But, even when the other side is immoral and indulges in all manner of deceptive and disgusting tricks, then it is wrong to be restrained with such people.

Modern sensibilities are fine, but they should not make one into an impotent. And the irony of the modern sensibilities are that they are only preached when it is convenient, no one really follows them when it comes to their vested interests. Even Indian politicians don't really follow these liberal or modern values in their personal life or political life.

These values are just used to cover up the impotency or imbecility. Otherwise, these same politicians talk of 'blood replacing ink', when it comes to protecting their beloved political positions.

This kind of hypocrisy is bad for the state. A ruler's primary duty is to protect the people from internal and external threats. If need be, a ruler must be ready to give up his life(leave alone sensitivities) to protect the people. But, here is a strange situation, where a politician is willing to do any kind of act to get elected and stay in power, but the same politician talks of 'morals' when it comes to protecting people.

Some people argue that 'barbarism' is not an answer to 'barbarism'. Gandhi felt the same. He said that eye for an eye, make the whole world blind. So, what is 'barbarism'? Are nukes not 'barbaric'? Beheading one person is more barbaric than launching nukes on an entire city?

Even killing one person(infact, killing any creature is barbaric). So, what do you do, when an enemy attacks you? Keep quiet? Show gandhigiri?

No, when an enemy shoots, one's soldiers also shoot. If they don't, then the enemy will run them over and take over the country. Similarly, if the other party is interested in beheadings, so be it.

If killing is ok, whats the big deal with beheadings? Its a western concept that somehow killing is ok, but beheading is not. And there is a background to it. In west(particularly France), as far as I know, public beheading was a popular death punishment. And the event was organized like an exhibition, where common citizen would come and 'enjoy' a 'criminal' being beheaded. It became a kind of sadistic voyeurism.

So, at some point, beheading was replaced with hanging. This happened after the French revolution, I think. So, they look at it from a different perspective.

In India, there is no such history. Indians never celebrated or enjoyed beheadings or hangings.

The problem with Indian state is that it is designed to be harsh towards its people and supplicate towards outsiders. This has to be reversed.

Lastly, some 'macualyte' Hindus have come to a stage where they ask,"Oh, why do Hindu Gods/Goddesses hold weapons? Are they not peaceful?"
The answer is that weapons are made to enforce peace. If right people do not hold weapons and keep order, then wrong people will usurp power and harass people. Its the responsibility of God/Goddess to protect the righteous and punish the wicked. Similarly, it is the responsibility of the state to take up the weapon and protect the citizens and punish the enemies.

Hindu Gods/Goddesses weapons as a promise fearless-ness to their devotees and as a warning to wrong-doers. Even those Gods/Goddesses who hold dossiers, are not averse to using weapons if the dossiers don't do the job. Dossiers are for those who are 'civil' and weapons are for the rest.

Only weapons, or only dossiers will not get the job done. By taking away the option of using force, this Govt. is emboldening the enemies.

saravana

It is okay to look the other way if an Indian soldier beheads our enemies. It is absolutely not okay when the enemy beheads our soldiers.

kenop

It is the specific type of bheading that is the issue. It is meant to instill fear in the kaffirs and not about getting killed per se.

Altair

I personally have no shock in the whole beheading. Pakis created a chance to kill an enemy soldier in a conflict zone and they were successful. Now we(Indians) will have to create a chance OR a chance will present itself in the future to behead some of the Paki soldiers and we WILL have to take it. Its that simple.
I do not see this through a Hindu-Muslim prism. It is a beheading. Period. One side of the conflict did it and the other side will have to avenge it in the near future to maintain balance of terror.

johneeG

Such talk is BS, Pakis have done a war crime. thier Army generals needs to answer for it.

That would mean more dossiers. And it would proceed the same way 26/11 went. I am not against India trying to get paki generals tried for war crimes. But, I think it won't work. Remember, Amirkhan and Chipanda have already come out in support of pakis in this incident.

Anyway, if India could do such things at international level, then india would not have been at this stage. Also, govt. itself is trying to scuttle this issue, so they are not going to do any such thing.

There needs to be deterrent to enemy. The enemy must know that his actions will not go unpunished and that he will be paid back in his own coin. Pakis are being aggressive because they think India will not reply in kind. Once this impression is neutralized, pakis will be pussies.

Whenever such things happen, its a routine refrain that "we should not resort to 'barbarity' like our enemies... thats not our 'culture'..." Such refrains are BS. Answer to barbarity is barbarity. And Indian culture does not prohibit anyone from replying in kind to an enemy. It is a mistake to think that Indian culture is only about non-violence forgetting that there is ample scope in Indian culture for 'martial' reply as well.

It needs to be understood that pakis are not the only ones who can resort to these kind of activities. Even others can do it. In vietnam, both sides did it. In WWII(specially Japan), both sides did it. In fact, beheading is quite mild. Pakis are capable(and have indulged) in much viler activities against Indian POWs. When everyone else is doing it while preaching to others about morals, then there is no need for India to set a different standard for itself.

The worst part is that those who(politicians, media, NGOs..etc) set these standards for India, hardly follow these 'moral' standards in their careers. They cover their impotency or imbecility with these 'moral' pretensions. The same people are ready to resort to any and every trick to further their private lives and careers at the expense of others. In fact, even in this case, they are promoting a false narrative without caring for the loss of lives of the soldiers.

Where are these 'moral' and 'high culture' pretensions, when they have to deal with protests by natives?

venug

Losses in war are to be expected. Losing heads and body parts too are to be expected, and I'm sure our soldiers know better than most of us here. What is appalling is the inhuman way of treating the dead. Playing football with a dead soldier's head that too in peace times. They booby trapped the dead body of one of our soldiers in Kargil war. This is subhuman behavior which makes our blood boil. Even seasoned Raj Rifl regiment soldiers are shaken and are on hunger strike goes to show how much they are affected.

Krishna told Arjuna, a thorn needs another to be taken out, a diamond needs another to cut it. Trying for war crimes is not something that is going to happen. Kalia's perpetrators are not punished, our gov has done nothing. 26/11 master minds are still free and are laughing their guts out issuing statements of further attacks on Indians. We need to learn out lessons fast. The hell with trying war criminals. After committing a genocide in 1971 which resulted in 3 million deaths, TSP didn't even apologize and now we want to try them for war crimes? Will not happen.

Power to our soldiers, blast the pakis, if it means war, so be it, better than living like cowards.

RajeshA

capturing a few hundred men, then executing them in cold blood will be against the culture of the IA
blowing a few hundred enemy soldiers to smithereens in combat however is acceptable napalm if possible

If they are uncomfortable doing this, they could outsource it to someone outside the Army once the few hundred men are captured, though considering what happened there would be voices in the Army to pay the Pakis in kind.

JMHO

RajeshA

that my friend would be a war crime

Let's write the manual anew, according to our perspective!

RamaY

RajeshAji...

In Dharmic system, the focus is on killing irrespective of how it is done. In Asuric system the focus is on how one is killed.

Yes Dharmic system doesn't prohibit one from beheading the opponent, but it would be adharmic to behead a dead soldier who was killed by a sniper rifle. IMHO, that is the major difference between IA and TSPA.

If I were PM of India, I would give a standing instruction to IA to focus on hitting a sound target to smithereens killing at least a hundred or so Paki soldiers, every time a cross-border shelling incident happens anywhere across the 1500 mile border. And there should be at least one or two such incidents every month irrespective of who started it. I will always follow such an incident with the inevitable peace talk and a medical/humanitarian CBM like shipping some fake china medicines.

RajeshA

RamaY ji,

I thought in our mythology we used to lay extra emphasis on how a Rakshasa/Asura is killed. Every one of them was killed in some special way!

The open display of cut-off heads as a garland around the neck of Kali Ma, is proof that we want to terrorize our enemy in not taking us on in the future, in not taking to evil ways. At least that is how I interpret it.

I am not of the view that the difference between Dharmic and Asuric can be defined by the way we kill. The way we kill has an effect on not only the killed but also on all those who should fear to be killed. If the effect were only on the one who is killed, I would agree with you. But the effect on the rest is also a factor.

What is important is that we do not relish the pain of those who are killed or of the ones they leave behind. That I think is one important difference - not to relish the pain.

The other important difference that I see, is whom we kill. Nobody should be killed for simply being of a different opinion or for making use of their deserved individual freedoms. The Asuras to the West do not understand the difference.

Killing is okay for the deserving and Way of Killing can be important for the message.

Beheading an already dead Paki soldier, I think is also okay, simply because what is the body - nothing but clothes for this life. So doing some tailoring is also okay, especially if it sends a clear message and through this clear message more bloodshed can be avoided.

dada

Visham Vishasya Aaushadham ( Poison is the only Antidote to Poison)

johneeG

capturing a few hundred men, then executing them in cold blood will be against the culture of the IA
blowing a few hundred enemy soldiers to smithereens in combat however is acceptable
napalm if possible

Is it really against the culture of IA? If so, can IA change its culture?

RamaY

We are going into yellow zone. All I can say is the "manner" an asura is killed is directly related to how s/he "wished" to be killed based on the boons he asked.

Fair enough if Islam teaches that a Paki has to be halaalled so he can enter the gates of honey and milk filled jennat, then we should do the honor for them.

After all we should not only "tolerate" all religions but also "respect" their traditions.

Perhaps Bji can provide us the right versus that (everything exists in Quran) tells us what rituals to be followed to make a Paki-animal Halaal.

RajeshA

RamaY ji,

furthermore for somebody infused with Islam, it perhaps doesn't matter if he is killed, but what happens to his body later on, somehow is important to them.

So cutting off the head and burning of the rest of the body is my recommendation. Also there is talk of martyr's body smelling of roses, so pig's urine should also be considered as a perfume for the ashes and the hair.

Death just gives martyrdom but beheading, mutilation, burning and drenching them in porcine urine takes away all the fun awaiting in the afterlife.

This all may seem horrible for many of us. But if one thinks from the PoV of what motivates all those Jihadis and what discourages them, then one should consider these "recommendations"!

johneeG

What is important is that we do not relish the pain of those who are killed or of the ones they leave behind. That I think is one important difference - not to relish the pain.

The other important difference that I see, is whom we kill. Nobody should be killed for simply being of a different opinion or for making use of their deserved individual freedoms. The Asuras to the West do not understand the difference.

Killing is okay for the deserving and Way of Killing can be important for the message.

RajeshA ji,
+108. Perfectly put. It is important not to relish pain(which is different from enjoying victory). And that is a very important distinguisher between 'good' and 'evil'. It is not killing or mode of killing, but whether one enjoys the killing(or a particular mode of killing).

If there are two persons:
a) A soldier who kills, but does it as a duty.
b) One who does not kill, but enjoys the act of killing... listening about it, seeing it, thinking about it ...etc.
Of the two, who is better? (a) is better than (b). (b) is a pervert...

This is the crucial distinction apart from fighting, killing and dying for the 'right' cause.

To show the difference:

shyamD, I see the Syrian embroglio leading to a repeat of the Battle of Hattin that ended the Kingdom of Jerusalem but this time it will be Istanbul.

I was reading about this battle and this caught my eye

"Saladin ordered that they should be beheaded, choosing to have them dead rather than in prison. With him was a whole band of scholars and sufis and a certain number of devout men and ascetics, each begged to be allowed to kill one of them, and drew his sword and rolled back his sleeve. Saladin, his face joyful, was sitting on his dais, the unbelievers showed black despair" – Imad ed-Din, Saladin's Secretary

Link

RamaY garu posted it. But he missed highlighting how Saladin is joyful looking at the despair of his opponents. Saladin may or may not have actually shown those emotions. It may be an embellishment of his hagiographers. But, this is the narrative that motivates the jihadis. So, they take pervert pleasure in the travails of their opponents. The more the opponent suffers, the more 'joy' is derived by these people. This is the pervertion.

Such people cannot be changed merely by dossiers or moral lessons or by 'civilized' replies or 'calibrated' responses. What they need is a deterrent. Some thing that they fear. What do they fear? They fear that the opponent will pay them in their own coin...

RajeshA

johneeG ji,

another thing worth reading is

With him was a whole band of scholars and sufis and a certain number of devout men and ascetics, each begged to be allowed to kill one of them

This is totally against what I have proposed earlier. Why would anybody want to be so eager to kill the prisoner. Sure from "our" PoV it needs to be done and a message needs to be sent out, but anybody can do it. Why the eagerness? Why the "competition" to do it? It is as if "causing pain", "beheading", "mutilation" is prescribed and one gets brownie points if one does it.

That should not be our thinking! If a beheading is to be done, it should be done for the message. There should be no joy in it! And if one does it, it does not make one a better warrior! It should be considered as dirty work which one is forced to do by the enemy's behavior, thus making it part of one's duty (i.e. in case it becomes SOP)!

That should always remain the gulf between them and us - for them gruesomeness is encouraged for the sake of it, for us it is forced upon us as "duty" *!

Added later: * i.e. post-capture! Beheading pre-capture should be no weight on a warrior's conscience at all.

lakshmikanth

Beheading post/pre mortem is a must. PBUH used to behead to prevent the "ghost" of the victim to come back and haunt him.

The other thing that is a must is severing of the sexual organ and burning it, alternatively burning the body is also a good idea. Palestenian suicide bombers used to use "junk" pads during their missions so that it is safe to be used on the 72 they would be getting afterlife. For some reason they believed that junk being destroyed means no use for 72.

While this may seem cruel to us Yindoo fundamentalists, these are very legitimate ways to make a Jeehardie worry about his mission.

vasu raya

To put the fear in the Jihaadis and waylaying their Jannat dreams, was suggesting earlier to harvest the organs immediately after killing the Jihadis and use them for medically needing people and due to demographics of India, most of the beneficiaries will be non-believers or Kufrs. we just need medical kits handy along with few medical personnel on Dhruvs for performing in field post-mortems.

RajeshA

vasu raya ji,

I thought about it, but doing that takes us way too much off course in the morality sweepstakes, or more importantly in the warrior cult!

venug

How about scalping like native Americans do?

lakshmikanth

venug,

We need to read up on the Koran and understand how will each action destroy the path to Jannat. Then these actions must be ritualistically carried out on each of the dead, and advertized as a warning.

It maybe brutal and against Geneva convention, but it will cause a blowback on the Jeehardi mullahs, as the Jeehardies would now start turning against their mullahs for answers.

Lalmohan

How about scalping like native Americans do?

they didnt until europeans started scalping them

darshhan

Beheading of Pakis/Islamists is perfectly ok by me for both dead and non dead personnel. Although I personally like scalping more.



But my all time favourite tool of affection for Pakis/islamists would be a power drill.



As far as Geneva conventions/Humane treatment of POWs/Human rights regime wrt enemies/etc are concerned, these were all drafted by white guys who wanted to control our behaviour when they couldn't control us through colonial practice anymore. They played us and we got played.

It is another thing that white guys themselves had limited utility for such benevolent and merciful views which is demonstrated by the following image where an American girl is admiring a Japanese skull sent by her Navy boyfriend in WW2. It was published in Life magazine in 1944.



Look how coy she is.

When it comes to fighting islamists always follow the following adage.Ruthless, Merciless, Remorseless

darshhan

Here is an image of another Dharmic warrior who battled enemies of Dharma in another era. Bhagwan Parshuram



Look at the Pharsa he is carrying. I seriously doubt he was using it for cutting vegetables.

To me the intent and utility of the weapon is amply clear.

darshhan

As long as a Dharmic warrior doesn't lose objectivity and doesn't lose sight of the original goal, Decapitation/Hacking of limbs/Scalping/Extreme torture etc of the enemy is perfectly ok. Especially if he is a Paki.

Altair

Exactly why we should not be too jumpy about beheadings. I have no idea why some people are tad too sensitive about the entire beheadings subject. Pakis scored first, so what! we will finish the game!! I am certain pakis just opened a new can of worms and we will have more and more beheadings in days to come across LOC on both sides.

[RajeshA]

Deterring the Jihadis

In the above posts, the suggestions are focused on ways to deter Jihadis. For that we need to look at

a) their cult of beheading their opponents, as their way of showing their resolve to fight the Kufr.
b) their supposed cult of not caring for their lives when they go to wage Jihad.
c) if the Jihadis do not care about throwing away their lives in Jihad (supposedly), then we need to know what is it this-worldly that do they really care about.

The answer to c, I would say is

1. that their families are looked after by the dawas
2. that their peers, family, and the neighborhood give them more respect for taking to Jihad
3. that even if they lose their lives doing Jihad, their bodies, or at least some parts of it are preserved as undamaged as possible, so that they can be given a proper Islamic burial. The integrity of their bodies is considered important for enjoying the supposed reward that awaits them in afterlife.
4. if somebody knows of other priorities, one can share here.

It is along these lines that we need to think, if we wish to devise ways of providing a credible deterrent against Jihadis, something to which even the uniformed Pakistani Army regulars are taking to.

[RajeshA]

Deterring the Jihadis

X-Posting from "TIRP" Thread

Shiv Aroor ‏@ShivAroor
"The tradition of beheading is not Pakistan's alone. What do you think our Gorkhas use their khukris for?" ~ Maj Gen (Retd) Ashok Mehta

Just in case, one thinks that the Indian Army jawans would not do any beheadings if they are so sanctioned by their officers.

[ramana]

No wonder that fool got out of army in disgrace!

Does he know the difference of war and peace?

Gurkhas behead in war.
Paki terrorists in uniform or out of uniform behead.

[RajeshA]

Control the Oxygen

As it looks like, most probably after US exits, the Taliban would take over Southern Afghanistan. Whether they take over whole of Afghanistan or not, is another question and does not have a any certain answer.

Till 2014, for two years Pakistan's business model is to squeeze USA for everything, and it may get substantial money and weapons from the Americans, and who knows how many weapons USA may leave behind for the Pakis. That is dangerous for us.

Also in order to keep Pakis in good humor, Americans may increase the money that goes into Pakistan.

But ultimately in 2015, Pakistan would have to come up with some business model.

1) It may be based on narco-trafficking. The question would be through which routes would it do. The inter-connectivity between Pakistan and the rest of the world, may also come down as USA would be less dependent on Pakistan. Northern Afghanistan may be strengthened either by India, Iran or Russia in order, and hence may be less permeable to Southern areas and Pakistan. The sea route may see more Indian Navy searching vessels. The border with India may also be hardened as the Jihadis start focusing on India. So it is not a sure thing.

2) The business model may be based on exploiting Afghanistan's mines for China. India may not get any piece of the cake. It is here that I think India should sabotage it. If we can't have it, we shouldn't let anybody else have it either. Pakistan should not get rich on Afghanistan's back. So we need to increase the costs of security for any mining operations by China in Afghanistan after 2014. Because any money Pakistan earns there would be used to bolster its threat to India.

Starting NOW, India's main topic of discussions with USA should be on

- ensuring that Pakistan earns the minimum in the next two years, that Kerry does not open US purse to Pakistan.

- ensuring that USA does not leave any weapon systems in Afghanistan, which could fall in the hands to Taliban or Pakistan

- ensuring that USA does not increase military aid to Pakistan.

- ensuring that India, Russia and Iran, we build up the Northern Afghanistan militias, or the Afghan National Security Forces units where mostly the Northerners are represented.

- ensuring that we have enough influence in Afghanistan to sabotage Chinese mining operations there

- ensuring that post-2014 Pakistan becomes a pariah state again in the world

- ensuring that Pakistan's foreign exchange reserves shrink - no trade, less remittances, no investment, no travel, no exports

- ensuring that LoC is an impenetrable wall. Ideally there should be zero cease-fire on the LoC, and Indians should ensure that within 40 kms of LoC, not a single Pakistan military camp can outlast 3 days. There needs to be incessant high-precision firing from the Indian side.

Depending upon to what extent India controls all this, Pakistan would behave properly with India. The Pakistani Army should be left with no business model.

[ramana]

X-post...

>>X-Post from Afghanistan thread

Wakhan Corridor: Stranded on the Roof of the World

>>End of X-post
The Wakhan Corridor was part of the Old Great Game and it may not get a spanking new road immediately and the Khan's dream might just remain so (in response to the above story). But, just below the Wakhan Corridor, in POK and in GB, China is playing its own part of the New Great Game for all the very same reasons which played out in the creation of the Wakhan Corridor. The only difference I see is that while two parties existed in the last Game, the current Game is scripted by a single party in this region. From the above article,

The two powers {the British and Russian Empires} created it, through a series of treaties between 1873 and 1895, as a buffer zone—a sort of geographical shock absorber—preventing tsarist Russia from touching British India. In previous centuries the area was part of the Silk Road connecting China and points west, the route of armies and explorers and missionaries. Marco Polo passed through in the late 1200s.

China is now creating an equivalent corridor below the Wakhan Corridor. This is the Karakoram Trade Corridor. It is no longer a secret about huge PLA presence in Gilgit-Baltistan and the rest of POK, for good. Our Army has said they have detected PLA even along the LoC as well. China is convinced that India has given up GB and the rest of POK. So, it is making huge investments in these areas and is even deploying its troops there. This area will become a buffer for China because it is reading correctly that jihadi Islamists will take over TSP sooner than later and they want to control the ingress and egress of these elements to and from the bordering and troubled Xinjiang province. It will also help them annexe this area if such a situation arises. China will justify its takeover using the investments it has made. That is why Saltoro and Siachen become very important for us.

[RajeshA]

In continuance of the post on Iran vs. Baluchistan trade-off from Mar 01, 2012

X-Posting from "Iran's Identity Faultlines - Islamic / Aryan" Thread

Carl ji,

The reason for posting the previous post was simply to explore ways in which Iranian-Pakistani rapprochement can be averted.

It is more than clear that Iran would primarily look at its interests through the Pan-Islamism lens rather than try to invest any real capital in the India-Iran relationship. India-Iran relationship is for Iranians highly tactical and business-oriented.

Now that may be so, but what is India's strategic imperatives to hang on to the Theocratic Iran. For long India has thought, that we could exploit some form of rivalry, some divergence of national interest between Iran and Pakistan, and try to stop Pakistan in exerting full control over Central Asia.

Just like our considerable investments in Afghanistan, our investments in Iran are also on the verge of sinking big time.

Even today as we see the rise of Wahhabi/Deobandi Islam in Pakistan, we think that makes it unlikely that Pakistan would align with Iran. As we see Shias being butchered in Pakistan, we think that makes it impossible for Iran to align with Pakistan. That is not going to be decisive.

I don't hear Iran going on a rant about the Shia deaths in Pakistan. That is simply because Iranians are first and foremost interested in Pan-Islamism and Ummah leadership than the lives of individual Shias. Iran knows it cannot save the lives of the Shias in Afghanistan and Pakistan and so it has reconciled with that fact of life, but it doesn't want to jeopardize its relationship with Pakistan by speaking out about it.

(a) It crushes Baluchi aspirations,
(b) it creates an Iran-Pak condominium in Afghanistan

That is why I think it may be in interest of the Saudis to prevent that. If Baluchistan secedes from Pakistan (and/or from Iran), then the strategic calculation of creating an Iranian-Pak duopoly in Central Asia fails.

Even the Americans must know that except for money and visas, it doesn't really have much leverage in Pakistan, and it is dependent on Pak to give it access to Central Asia.

Another question is why does USA need access to Central Asia? One reason is mineral resources, and another is that whosoever controls Central Asia controls the chaos in Russia's southern belly and China's wild West, as well as the pressure points of Iran and Pakistan themselves. The third reason is of course to curtail the specific anti-Western elements that have opened shop there.

So the exchange would be Iran stops Indian "encroachment" and Pakistan stops American "encroachment" in Afghanistan. Considering the trajectory of US-Pakistan relations after 2014, it would seem likely that Pakistan would curtail American access to Afghanistan, and likewise Iran would curtail Indian access to Central Asia as well. Complete stoppage would mean losing global influence, so some access would always be given, but all in all access would be severely curtailed.

So if there is an uptick in terror in the West or in India, and the terror emanates from Central Asia, both West and India would really lack a route into Central Asia to take it down and would be dependent on Iran and Pakistan, which would act as if they are innocent and only provide limited access to Central Asia or only duplicitous services by them to try to control it in-lieu for concessions. In other words, blackmail can and would become again a business model for Pakistan (and Iran).

In short, we need to punch a way through Pakistan (and Iran) into Central Asia through Baluchistan.

USA doesn't want to help because it doesn't want to upset Pakistan, and secondly doesn't want Russia to get a corridor to the southern Indian Ocean. But if USA wants to be able to pinch China in the rear-side, it needs access to Central Asia, and a free Baluchistan would be of much help to it as well. In fact should Iran-Pakistan lose their duopoly over Central Asia, they would be far more willing to cooperate with both West and India. Also Pakistan would be even more beholden to the Gulf countries.

So I feel that if we want to substantially change Iran's outlook, then we have to thwart its strategic calculations of a Iran-Pakistan duopoly in Central Asia giving both strategic depth, and secondly we need to get rid of the theocracy itself giving Iranians a different civilizational option.

[RajeshA]

Deterring the Jihadis (Cont.)

Warning: Don't read if you are faint hearted.

The Jihadis represent a particular class of threat, and even though threat analyses are constantly being undertaken by our security apparatus, and vulnerabilities such as VIP security, infrastructural, communal flare-ups, mass transport, weapons of mass destruction, religious places, etc. are being looked at we are overlooking the psychological vulnerabilities which are the main target of Jihadis.

Secondly our counter-measures are geared more towards a defensive posture, or are more aligned with regular counter-terrorism, counter-insurgency, counter-guerrilla warfare. Our security forces are of course doing a very able job here.

We are however particularly weak in counter-psy war and counter-propaganda. We are allowing Jihadi propaganda to go unchecked. This would have been the job of our government. They have however taken no measures to put a stop to Jihadism propaganda in Pakistan. In fact they have pleaded helplessness in the past as well as having no ideas on this score.

It would seem GoI has abdicated its responsibility completely on this score. GoI does neither effective counter propaganda nor has it accomplished anything through diplomatic means in this regard. The terrorists who attacked Mumbai on 26/11/08 roam free in Pakistan. The Pakistani Army personnel who come over on the Indian side of LoC behead Indian jawans, but Pakistan does not even own up to their guilt.

So basically Indian Government has nothing to offer in the form of counter-propaganda nor are they capable of any psy-war. Indian Government has taken no steps to create a deterrent for Jihadis in Pakistan to attack India.

So the Indian security forces would have to create a psychological deterrent of their own for the Jihadis. The Jihadis need to be terrified to even think of attacking an Indian. So here is a blueprint for that.

A) Once we know which Jihadi has attacked India, we have to ensure that sooner or later, the rest of his family in Pakistan, including parents, wife/wives, children (regardless of age), brothers and sisters and their spouses and children, all shall be killed through our operatives in Pakistan. No mercy can be shown in this regard.

B ) There needs to be a Standard Operating Procedure on how to deal with imprisoned or killed Jihadis. After interrogation, the imprisoned too need to be reclassified as dead. The body of the dead Jihadi should be administered a very special treatment:

1. The Jihadi, dead or alive, should be first stripped naked.
2. All clothes and possessions, except those stating his identity, are to be incinerated.
3. First the head would be severed from the rest of the body.
4. The spinal cord would be removed completely from the body.
5. The spinal cord would be then immersed in acid and dissolved.
6. The solution would be diluted with water and disposed along with human feces.
7. Then the blood in the body should be drained and collected in a vessel.
8. The body is to be cremated in an electric cremator.
9. The dry bone fragment remains are to be pulverized in a cremulator.
10. The 'ash' or cremated remains are to be disposed of without ever divulging the knowledge as to where and how.
11. There should be a blood test done on the drained blood.
12. If the blood is okay, it should be mixed with wine, and be offered to the the group who hunted down the Jihadi for drinking.
13. If the blood is not okay, it should be given to the pigs for drinking.
14. The head has to be immersed in a tub of porcine urine for 24 hours.
15. In the mouth of the head, two cut-off testicles of a pig should be placed.
16. Then the head should be put on a stake.
17. The stake should be put along the fence on the LoC. The head should look West.
18. A sign should be put up before the head, stating the name of the Jihadi, as understood from his documentation.
19. A photo of the cut-off head on a spike should be published online.
20. The head should be left there to rot.

One must take precautions not to cause pain and trauma to the Jihadi as that would be against the Geneva Convention, "human" rights and general sensibilities, though it is not always possible to stop overly eager boys from doing so.

C) In a minority of cases, when the above is not done, another recourse is to spread the rumor in the neighborhood of the Jihadi, that he turned himself over to the Indian forces, and divulged important intelligence against the Jihadi network in Pakistan.

If the Jihadis wish to be treated differently, as PoWs with rights, then their commander, the Pakistani Chief of Army Staff, would have to first officially declare war on India. Until this is the case, they should be treated as suggested.

There is no reason to hate the Jihadis. We should be above hate. They do their work. We should do our work.

Disclaimer: I do not mean to hurt the feelings of Muslims. Terrorists have no religion.

[Altair]

RajeshA

My main concern in the other thread was:
Will dismantling of Pakistan into non-entities Unite India or threaten India from currently non-existent threats?

[RajeshA]

Expected Outcome: There will be no entity called Pakistan post war. ( Eg: East Pakistan does not exist post '71)

Not enough to be called decisive. Borders have no relevance to Jihadis.

Agreed.
But existence of Pakistan itself is single biggest malefic factor (say a Tumor) for us. How do we suppose we treat patient without removing Pakistan(tumor)?

There really isn't a single bullet which can bring down Pakistan, no single solution. There would have to be a coordinated management of its failure, as well as a management of its transformation.

Yes Pakistan is a Tumor for us! But nothing stops us from creating a thousand tumors for the tumor as well. The management strategy I would suggest is to fragment the forces of violence in Pakistan to a level where we can play puppeteer, influence their dynamic, control their resources, etc. all from the shadows.

The size of the fragments and the dynamic should be such that it doesn't allow any consolidation by any one group either through military means (in case the fragments were too small) or through diplomatic means (in case the fragments were too big).

If the fragments are too big, they would escape our influence. If the fragments were too small, they would get digested by others. So one has to manage their sizes correctly.

Their dependence on us must be absolute. We cannot allow any other power to control the fragments in Pakistan. So we will need to be brutal when some other country tries to exert control.

When that phase is over, only then can we hope to start the next phase - the Dharmic Nibbling!

[RajeshA]

RajeshA

My main concern in the other thread was:
Will dismantling of Pakistan into non-entities Unite India or threaten India from currently non-existent threats?

Altair ji,

my answer is unite. But we would have to be careful. Their Plan B could kick in, and what it may be, it may not be so pleasant for us.

[member_22872]

New dangers will always crop up. When Bangladesh was created, it was hoped that it will be atleast minimize the security risks from Eastern flank as far as TSP is concerned. But even though that threat more or less mitigated, new ones cropped up in terms of migration of new wave of muslims into Indian territories, marginalization and even radicalization of some sections of Bangladeshis who are now anti India. The new problems might come up when TSP breaks up too, but how dangerous the situation could arise depends on many factors, one of them being who controls the nukes or what happens to those nukes. If a break up state of TSP controls nukes and keeps threatening India about Kashmir, the breaking up of TSP can be considered as a Pyrrhic victory, because the dangers to Indian union didn't vanish away even after the break up of TSP.

So I feel that, breaking up of TSP even if are triggered by political events, must be followed by militaristic mopping operations, to atleast to do away with remnant threats from displacement of hardcode frothing jihadi zombies and annihilation of WMD, which others wise can still threaten Indian union. And also the complete destruction of terrorist machinery and logistics, this cant happen through diplomatic and political channels. People always lie.

[Altair]

New and unmanageable threats emerging post-Pakistan breakup is the favorite among some strategic gurus(Eg:BK) of India. They believe that managing Pakistan's threat is easy compared to what might come later.

[member_22872]

And then there are wolves and vultures in the form of China and US who would love to have bases in the Northern areas and may be Baluchistan. So one problem shouldn't replace any other and even by a more powerful one to deal with.

[Lalmohan]

New and unmanageable threats emerging post-Pakistan breakup is the favorite among some strategic gurus(Eg:BK) of India. They believe that managing Pakistan's threat is easy compared to what might come later.

ironically, the GOI is largely responsible for holding the PA in place for preserving a 'stable' pakistan... (this is unkil's prescription and mantra)

[Agnimitra]

1. All clothes and possessions, except those stating his identity, are to be incinerated.
2. First the head would be severed from the rest of the body.
3. The spinal cord would be removed completely from the body.

Doesn't a fidayeen suicide bomber's vest accomplish all this anyway? Surely its not something that deters the brainwashed grunt who has been indoctrinated with some theological assurances.

[RajeshA]

Carl ji,

I have very often read and heard, that among the more educated and determined ones, there is an awareness that it all has to happen properly, that the head should be severed in a proper way - perhaps it is simply for recognition later on, or perhaps it has to do with eschatological reasons.

There are however multiple deterrence reasons for my advocating this:
a) Eschatological reasons - there are some grey areas! If there are protests, then one knows one is pressing on the right soft spot.

b) Lessons - there are repercussions to Jihad, and Jihadis must know what to expect. Many would get cold feet, for they too are humans.

c) Balance of Terror - A higher claim to brutality is something one should never concede to the opponent. Of course we should never indulge in arbitrary brutality for then we demean ourselves, but for those who have marked themselves as our enemies and use similar means, we need to outdo them. If not timely countered, fear can bring down the best of civilizations. Conceded that some enlightened souls would have raised themselves above fear regardless of any outcomes, but the common man is a normal human and responds to his environment, and the common man cannot concede ground because his rakshaks have not balanced the terror. He should know the other side fears one just as much.

A Jihadi first and foremost desires to strike terror in the heart of his enemies. That is the reason for his extreme brutality. Only a bigger counter-terror can convince him that his strategy would fail. If he goes forward with any terrorist act, the other side would only take it as an opportunity to do some Jihadi-hunting!

Fear creeps through one's consciousness and grows without one even being really conscious of this development until time comes when he is asked to concede, to appease, to bow, to cower. But then it is too late. This fear should not be allowed to grow! And balance of terror is necessary.

d) It doesn't even matter if this deterrence does not work. It gives us, the victims, the feeling that we are not getting cowered and that we are responding.

Generally speaking I think we should be more civilized than the other 'civilized ones', but we should also be more 'brutal' than the other 'brutal ones'.

Many regimes, many people know/knew in history the merits of terror, but in Islamism they have taken it up with an enduring non-reformable religiously-derived passion. The Jihadis, even ordinary Muslim bullies, are well aware of how fear works in others, and so they push the boundaries all the time. Whereas others can get reformed, this is incurable in this ideology, at least incurable with the normal humane tools of persuasion. So whether there is geographical, demographic expansion of Islam or not, every day the 'civilized' concedes some psy-space to the Jihadi, to fear.

We cannot allow the Jihadi a monopoly over this tool of persuasion - over terror. Because if we allow that, then it is only a matter of time before the gates of civilization are broken open.

[Agnimitra]

RajeshA ji,

I agree that the jihadi terrorist society must be made to understand that at least a significant section of Indians is not queasy about drawing blood. Our general non-violence to man and beast is not due to a projected fear of death, but due to generous compassion and a rational assessment of real needs in any phase of time (rather than psychological needs due to desire). So just as desire is not supposed to interfere with this rational compassion, so neither should fear.

I was only questioning the theological angle. I agree there is a gray area, though I don't know howmuch it can be exploited. Perhaps it may generate some speculation in the public discourse, which can be used to show the arbitrariness of the 'authority' of their theology and fiqh. I do recall that the Philippine Govt was trying to use that against Abu Sayyaf separatist terrorists. They would bury the b@stards with an extra helping of pork, I think. It would be interesting to find data on whether that had any effect on Abu Sayyaf' recruitment stats or modus operandi, or whether it generated any debate in that community.

[RajeshA]

Carl ji,

I think once there are a couple of instances when the Ulema does complain about the treatment of a martyr's body, and there is outrage about it, the discussions around it can set a precedent.

Also there was some outrage, I believe in 2005, when American troops burned the bodies of two Taliban.

As you have explained, according to eschatology, as of now the Islamics have certain beliefs regarding the body of the martyr, that it never decomposes, that it smells of roses rather, etc. Moreover they want to give honor to the martyr, by performing the prescribed funeral rites and bring out a big crowd during the Salat al-Janazah.

Taliban had also demanded the body of Kasab from the India.

So I would say, they are particular about the treatment of a martyr's body. But in the end, we would have to see how this thing plays out!

If the Ulema say, the Salat al-Janazah doesn't matter for a martyr for whatever reason- he reaches Jannat directly and not through the grave, through al-Barzakh, or that a martyr doesn't require Ghusl, the washing of the body because the angels do the necessary, or that the essence of the body, the rooh, does not reside in the coccyx of the spinal cord, then they will be changing a lot of current fiqh.

Then one would start asking what to do with the body of a martyr, which they have in their possession, if all the funeral customs are superfluous in the case of martyrs. And if they are not, shouldn't the martyrs who are not in their possession, also deserve them.

[Lalmohan]

i think the islamists have actually got a good handle on this. if they jehadi's body is disfigured, they have a get out clause. if you target their near and dear ones, they are collateral damage and martyrs for the cause. all things can be explained away. even the core tenants of the faith can be dispensed with if required. for a highly prescriptive system, they have figured out how to create enough wiggle room.

perhaps the way forward is to discredit their leaders and handlers and those who make excuses for them - shake the foundations of their belief in their leadership. and i don't mean their faith