Bharat Rakshak

That lowest level is Pakistan and not India. That position will also keep control of the escalation ladder in India's control provided it has a survivable second strike capability. A JDAM could be construed by India as a first strike.

Yes, that is how it should be. Only it isn't, because of the other thing KS mentions in his article... the Donnelly Stranglehold. This is an "end run" Pakistan has devised for itself up the escalation ladder to directly blackmail the United States.

KS' reading of the Donnelly paper clearly implies that US' ability to protect itself from an Al-Qaeda JDAM depends 400% on ensuring the survival of Mush's tush, the Pakistan military regime, and its ability to maintain full control over Paki nukes. If India retaliates with nukes against Isloo & co. when a Paki JDAM goes off in an Indian city, that survivability is grossly threatened, and the likelihood that Al-Keedas will sneak off with a Paki nuke in the ensuing chaos magnified enormously.

Hence: the US will do everything in its power to prevent India from retaliating against Pakistan in an existential manner for a JDAM attack against India. Quite likely, upto and including a nuclear strike against India to cripple our retaliatory capacity.

And at present, there is nothing we can do to deter them.

Hmm, this is very waek reasoning. If the survival or destruction of pardigm depend on Indian action, then we have lot more room to manouver to our advanatages.

What is the gurrantee that AQ terrorists wont get BB (big bum) till kingdom come.Pukes are not the onlee source.

2. As such it is far easier for the US to be certain that it has taken out all Pakistani nukes by attacking Pakistan rather than attacking India and risking that 20% of the 1000 Indian nukes are intact.

3. Because if those 200 Indian nukes are intact and and even without the Surya, India determines that the US was responsible, India can cause enough damage to the world including vital US interests such as Middle Eastern oil and its industrialized partners such that the world economic system will collapse.

With all of these imponderables, would it not be simpler to neutralize those 5-20 Pakistani nukes?

6. After launching a strike on India, the US does not have any guarantee that India does not have a few modified PSLV launchers tipped with a 200KT warhead which do not have a 12,000 km range.

>Hence: the US will do everything in its power to prevent India from retaliating against Pakistan in an existential manner for a JDAM attack against India. Quite likely, upto and including a nuclear strike against India to cripple our retaliatory capacity.

And at present, there is nothing we can do to deter them

Rudradev,

Let me understand your thought process:

1. A JDAM goes off in India.

2. To prevent India from nuking Pakistan, the US nukes India.

3. India can do nothing about this because India does not have a Surya.

Let me now point out the flaws in this process:

1. Pakistan has far fewer nukes compared to India.

2. As such it is far easier for the US to be certain that it has taken out all Pakistani nukes by attacking Pakistan rather than attacking India and risking that 20% of the 1000 Indian nukes survive such an attack.

3. Because if those 200 Indian nukes are intact and and even without the Surya, India determines that the US was responsible, India can cause enough damage to the world including vital US interests such as Middle Eastern oil and its industrialized partners such that the world economic system will collapse.

4. On the other hand with active collaboration from India, it will be far easier to takeout the balance of the Pakistani nukes that the US currently does not monitor.

5. If you were making US policy and had these two choices i.e. neutralize 1000 Indian nukes or 5-20 Pakistani nukes which the US does not monitor, what will be easier target to go after?

Here's why.
A nuke going off is simply too HUGE an event for common janta not to get roused.
...
That said, Jehadi nukes are likely to be used in conjunction with a buildup of ISI inspired and aggravated sedition,
...
I'd find it hard to believe that when you "blame islam" as in you're not going to get a cornered-animal response from the more excitable elements among the IMs, with broad support from the rest of the IMs.

Rudradev,
I do not believe that the US will fire off hundreds of missiles at India immediately after a JDAM goes off in India because it is afraid that the resultant Indian response may result in one or two Pakistani warheads walking away.

Shiv: But we are not cornered animals, we are people,

You start shouting about "JDAM is going to happen" and there will be no end of vested interests out to silence you. After it actually happens, those that are left will sing the Shiv-katha to their three eyed, limbless and leukemic offspring. Until then nothing.

Pukes know this and wont do it for the sake of what they hold dear: JDam in India will invite much worst reaction than anywhere in world, except the Old Europe.
Pukes has a choice , JDAM or Islam on earth.

It was from an urgent call from his Indian counterpart Atal Bihari Vajpayee that he first learnt about the invasion of Kargil by Pakistani troops, the then Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif disclosed on Sunday, squarely blaming Gen Pervez Musharraf for the 'misadventure' for which he would like the military ruler to be tried.

"Mr Prime Minister, what is happening" in Kargil, an indignant Vajpayee asked him over telephone in May 1999, according to the 56-year-old Pakistani leader who said that he had got to know about the Kargil operation only then.

Almost all Pakistani Corps Commanders were also unaware of the "ill-conceived, ill-planned and ill-executed misadventure" of Musharraf and "just two or three of his cronies", Sharif, who is living abroad in exile for over six years, said in an interview here days after he and another former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto came together and pledged to topple Musharraf.

Through the Kargil operation Musharraf, the then Chief of the Army Staff, had "sabotaged" the understanding reached by him with Vajpayee at Lahore to resolve all Indo-Pak problems including Kashmir, Sharif said.

The Pakistani leader finds it ironic that India should be talking to Pakistan's military ruler. "You are talking to the same Musharraf (who did Kargil). I fail to understand", he said.

A 36-point Charter of Democracy signed on May 14 by Sharif and Bhutto for restoration of democracy in Pakistan includes a proposal to set up a Commission to fix responsibility for Kargil and identify causes that led to it.

Those involved would have to be brought to book, Sharif asserted, after saying that a high-level Commission, "something higher than a Judicial Commission" would be set up by a democratic government to go into the Kargil episode.

Does that mean that Musharraf could face trial? "It is very clear. The clause (in the Charter) says that the Commission will fix responsibility and then (those found guilty) would conceivably face trial", the former Pakistani Prime Minister said.

Sharif cannot forgive Musharraf for Kargil because that had brought India and Pakistan very close to a war. "The Indians could have done anything at that time because they were attacked without any rhyme or reason", he said.

Recalling his frantic July 4, 1999 meeting with President Bill Clinton in Washington, Sharif said he had sought the US leader's good offices to resolve the matter amicably. But he refused to say whether Musharraf had pleaded with him to rush to Washington as Indians were beating back the Pakistani intruders.

Sharif sees Musharraf as a "very impulsive man, erratic in his behaviour and not a very stable person".

"India should not be doing business with any usurper or a military dictator... India should condemn such (military) takeovers whether in Pakistan or elsewhere", he said.

By inviting Musharraf to the Agra Summit India had conferred legitimacy on the General. "To me it amounted to recognising a military dictator although his rule is still unconstitutional, unlawful and immoral. Why should you talk to a man like that", the Pakistani leader asked.

Nonetheless is he happy with the Indo-Pak peace process? "Well, the foundation of all these were laid when I was the Prime Minister. Mr Vajpayee was very kind to visit Pakistan and the foundation was laid then by us. Things started moving then. But, of course, the Kargil episode came in between", he replied.

A very good opportunity for resolving Indo-Pak issues was thus missed, rues Sharif, describing the Lahore Declaration signed by Vajpayee and him as a "tremendous opportunity" which was sabotaged by Musharraf's Kargil misadventure.

Asked if the General had done so because he did not support the Lahore Declaration, Sharif replied, "No. I think Musharraf and his cronies had some obsession about it (Kargil) for a long time".

Sharif dismisses as "wild ideas" Musharraf's solutions to the Kashmir issue such as demilitarization and joint control. "Solutions are not given in Television interviews. Musharraf does not know what diplomacy means", he said.

Such ideas, he emphasized, are first discussed at proper forums. "You do not give wild ideas in the Press and say that you have given solutions and the other side is not responding", he said, adding that Musharraf was "immature".

Sharif, who claims Kashmiri ancestry, said that while the Indo-Pak Confidence Building Measures (CBMs) were welcome, Kashmir also had to be resolved, to the satisfaction of India, Pakistan and the people of the State.

Benazir Bhutto, Chairperson of the Pakistan Peoples Party (PPP) and Sharif, leader of the Pakistan Muslim League (N), have both announced that they will go to Pakistan to participate in the next year's National Assembly elections to which Musharraf responded by declaring that they would be arrested and tried.

Dismissing these as "empty threats", Sharif said that they were not deterred or worried by what the General had stated. He described Musharraf as a "traitor" who had subverted the Constitution.

Asked about the reports that the General might get himself re-elected as the President by the current National Assembly, Sharif said that he was not eligible to contest because he was still wearing the Army uniform. If he made any such move it would be gross violation of the Constitution and political parties would launch "a very effective movement" against him.

The Pakistani leader finds it ironic that India should be talking to Pakistan's military ruler. "You are talking to the same Musharraf (who did Kargil). I fail to understand", he said.

What I find particularly worthy of strong condemnation in this attitude is the thought that "We must not tell the aam junta because they will argue in such a such a manner and will behave in this fashion"

To me it sounds like you do not yourself seriously believe that a JDAM can ever occur. If that is the case then I have nothing further to discuss.

If you do believe that it can happen - surely people ought to know. What conclusions they reach is a different matter. I may do my best to make them reach a particular conclusion and someone else may do his best towards some other conclusion. But not throwing the info open and broadcasting it to aam junta is either irresponsible - or an indicator that you are not taking it seriously.

Only because of the US and some dimwit think tanks, which he should be very much aware of.

It's hard to believe that the Indian govt. was willing to abandon Siachen if TSP were to recognize actual ground positions, on good faith from the same general who was the mastermind of Kargil!
.

That is hardly a warranted allegation. Not only do I take it seriously, I have actually made efforts to get the message to at least a part of "aam junta" in my own way. Remember the last scene of "Photochor" depicts a JDAM attack.

However, you cannot deny a very fundamental attitude among the Indian public and Indian administrations that is responsible for the way discussions of such things are handled (or rather, not handled)... even in the rarified echelons of government, let alone the public domain. Even Victor Gobarev, in the document linked by KGoan, can see this:
..
There is nothing either elitist, or irresponsible, in my pointing that out.

He practically CONFIRMS --- N^3 -- Nook Nude Theory !!

For several reasons I would not take this seriously.

Even if "Pakistan" as in the "Islamic Republic of Pakistan" is nook nude - there is no guarantee that the jihadis whom Pakistanis generals and establishment assiduously trained and nurtured are also nook nood.

How does the Pakistani establishment escape blame from a JDAM?

Easy. Start saying that thay have no nukes and blame a JDAM on "someone else"

But ever since you guys refused to hand over the Paki share of the revenues, transporatation assets and rolling stock, right after partition, Pakis are convinced that you guys are out to get them. So they had to have the bomb too. (BTW, This is the money that Mulayam Singh thinks, India should hand over to pakistan, with interest, as part of the CBMs)