Indian Response to Terrorism

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Dec 2008 07:07

Karan Dixit wrote:To the best of my knowledge, none of Paki F-16s have BVR capabilities. So, Paki F-16s will not be able to defend themselves if attacked in the flight from a beyond visual range attacker.

no, the f-16s can fire the amraam. they ordered some 500 odd copies. I'm not sure if deliveries have commenced or not. may be the pak thread in mil forum has the relevant articles.

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 24 Dec 2008 07:11

i only hope great shri mms (peace be upon his sleep) did not do something like this again:
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/200 ... 080800.htm

Dr Manmohan Singh astonished the country after a meeting with the Pakistan President, Gen Pervez Musharraf, in Havana in September 2006, when he announced that like India, Pakistan was also a “victim” of terrorism. He then proceeded to tell his baffled countrymen and the world at large that the terrorist violence in India was not being perpetrated by the ISI, but by “autonomous jehadi groups.”

The Prime Minister had earlier proclaimed that the dialogue process with Pakistan was “irreversible”, suggesting, as a perceptive observer noted, that: “the threshold of our tolerance for Pakistan’s sponsorship of terrorism has no limits”. He also proudly announced the establishment of a “Joint Terror Mechanism” with Pakistan, which was to be the magic mantra for curing all the ills of ISI sponsorship of terrorism.

i hope he has enough sleeping pills at hand.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 24 Dec 2008 07:16

no, the f-16s can fire the amraam. they ordered some 500 odd copies.

Sure, they can FIRE them,

but why do they need 500? 6 working F-16s (which is an optimistic estimate from the PAF pov) means only 2 missiles needed, see EUCAM above. When the other 4 see two PAF-16 Fireballs, they hit the Al PeptoBismol Model 30 e-Jet button.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Dec 2008 07:19

ah n^3 ji, you underestimate the tactical brilliance of fizzle'ya commanders !

all they need to do is declare a fatwa that EUCAM is haraam........

sonabh · Post by **sonabh** » 24 Dec 2008 07:47

i love how the paki stand is: "india stands to lose more than us, hence they will back down"

so basically, we being the more advanced nation is coming back to bite us. i pretty much find myself in agreement with them, whether it would be worth risking a nuke exchange at the time of this eco recession (or any other time for that matter).

a nuke exchange will send india back to the stone ages. pakistan is already there, so they essentially do not have much to lose.

part of me wants GOI to back up its tough talk with action, but the other part has a sick feeling about all of this.

theres two scenarios that i would like right now:
1) india does a pre-emptive strike on every known (and suspected) nuclear asset that pakistan has. get sat pics and intel from usa, hit everything and hit it hard. the attack must be "surprising" and might as well include "mini-nukes" to ensure complete destruction. then just cross ur fingers and hope u've destroyed everything that there is.
this might be hard if they have mobile nuke tipped missiles, hence i say it should be a surprise attack at "peace" time.

2) cripple the pak economy, call off the indus water treaty, just do everything you can to starve them to death. now as good as it sounds on paper, i do not think this would work. you might just end up seeing a "terrorist" strike on a dam used to hold up the water. also, considering that rogue elements within pak can have their hands on the nukes, trying to starve them might not be such a great idea.

---

there was a point, when i felt surgical strikes were the best option, but looking at the mood PA is in right now, im not so sure, they are just looking to escalate this, and it might end up getting very ugly.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 24 Dec 2008 08:13

Indians are the only intelligent id10ts who get threatned with 1.5 bums.

"Jo dhargaya woh Margaya"

Gabbar Singh not Man Mohana Sing of Sonia G

Vikram_S · Post by **Vikram_S** » 24 Dec 2008 08:17

i think we have to prepare for a nuclear war scenario. one way or other the pakistani pieces of pigsh*t will keep attacking indians all the time and things are going to get worse, even if mumble mumble singh and madam maino are not able to hold on to power.

1. this means actually working on evacuating metro cities at time of war to tier 2 and tier 3 (And taking economic hit) so that people who are actually the real city (than just infrastructure) can survive

2. working on emergency service in metros to become truly capable of large scale disaster for handling unforeseen WMD strike (as prelude to actual war)

3. creating proper command and control to back it up

if each citys measures cost 1000 crore also, it is worth it. no matter what chidambaram types say.
i am reasonably sure this kind of measure if adopted is better than losing faith in this nation itself because common citizen will not be protected in attack after attack

constant attack break morale of nation and self belief. so it has to be challenged. now paki has very smart trick it promptly points to nuclear war each time something occurs.

nuclear war is final step on escalation ladder. pakistani swine thinks they are very smart because they have made many things "redline". if you hit AF, ARMY, NAVY too much it is redline. if you stops water it is redline. if you attack pak territory ...

but we should be prepare to challenge this redline and hit them INTERNALLY in pakistan using shia-sunni and all other conflicts. when this goes on, they will rattle sword but if we are prepared then we can stare them in face and force them to back down.

this confidence will only come if generations of indians are prepared for "unthinkable" that is nuclear war. that requires govt work to build up assets ie evacuation of people and proper method to survive limited exchange without losing most valuable resource - people

but govt like UPA if it comes to power again, it will dismantle each every effort to secure india just because it was NDA govt attempt and national security is negotiable for "soft people freindly" image

that is the problem
there is no consensus on security. if one side is hawkish then other side is dove (UPa). and rest are outright sellout (Communist/left)

john snow

first prove there are only 1.5 bums
simple fact of logics is that if there were no bums in Pak control india would have invade pakistan and break it into tiny pieces.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 24 Dec 2008 08:20

Vikram_S wrote:are you just pretending or do you even know the reality of the topic including the fact that NSG was in plane?

How did that help? Should JS have gone with Masood Azhar i.e. to personlly deliver him to the Talban? That was even worse than the Rubaiya incident.

Vikram you've put up a spirited defence of your political beliefs my friend. I can put up a volley too. But, that does not help the people of India who are insecure while these politicians and their families stay safe. ALL POLITICIANS have huge swiss accounts. So do not waste your patriotism on them. We must demand that they provide the citizens the same security that they have. Drop your filters and see these scum (UPA/NDA/...) for what they are. Running around in cars full of security personnel. Does anyone remember the security personnel that gave their lives for these scum during the attack on the Parliament. Why did the security personnel give their lives for these scum. They should have let them die at the hands of the terrorists. Maybe that would have opened the eyes of the politicians to the reality that ordinary people face going to the train stations or bus stops.

dont be bloody stupid and stop telling me, an indian living in india about patriotism and pride.

Now you're getting lost. So one is more patriotic if he stays in India? Also, I would request Admins to please note the language being used. If it is permissible, I rest my case.

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 24 Dec 2008 08:35

People are talking about nuclear war as if it is a pieace of cake. Moving people from cities that are home to 15 million people or so. Jingoism, age or immaturity? Responses can take several forms. Vikram_S referred in passing to firefights, IAF shot down the PAF Atlantique with 16 on board presumably to avenge Kargil incidents.

Why should India strike now? That I would think should come when the enemy least expects it. Not when the enemy has his assets and resources deployed to tackle precisely such a situation. The strike must occur some months later when the enemy is secure in the belief that yindoo will not dare attack. Wear the enemy down with pretence of preparations for war.

At this moment the IAF should keep the enemy on its toes with more airspace violations.

Baljeet · Post by **Baljeet** » 24 Dec 2008 08:43

Katare, CRams
Let me ask you guys a question, why do we want to go to war with pakistan now. Why didn't we go to war when Trains blasts happened, Jaipur Blasts happened, Delhi Blasts happened. Is it because media types who are rubbing shoulders with India's elite raising the temprature and baying for blood? War is not some hooker that you rent for your pleasure and kick the tyres when done. It has some real consequences. Right now almost all of capitalistic countries are racing toward deep economic crisis. Everyone needs something to spur up the economy what better way to get economy of Bhest Bestern countries on track again by lighting the fuse between two arch rivals. Pakis are stupid ASS Morons they are playing in the hands of their western masters, they have nothing to loose, "Nanga nahayega kya or Nichode gaa kya". We on the other hand will be set back atleast two decades. Is anyone in this nation willing to accept stalemate? Who will take that responsibility? Commies are smelling blood they know, Indian Military prowess is not there to deliver decisive blow to pakis. DRDO hasn't delivered anything worth shooting yourself in head but always make tall promises. We have no intel network in Pakistan to disrupt their logistic lines all this time pakis have been coming to India, disappearing, sleeping under Indian Sari for the right moment. There is method to Paki Madness of raising the brazeness of their attacks every time. They are fully confident their assets are at right place to cripple the logistics and create panic in case of war.
We need to get rid of this fifth column first, Paki Born Indian PM's second, Italian Born Bharat ki RajMata third and all other politicians last. Once all this is accomplished then we can think of going to war. Don't forget the entire Indian Navy can be held hostage by Agostas that pakis have been procuring for a while, all this time, Indian Navy has what could be called Rust Buckets under water. There has been no new subs manufactured, purchased since HDW controversy. Does anyone have a plan to neutralize that threat?
A nation must go to war when it has weapons to win a war not just fight a war.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Dec 2008 09:00

When it comes to war - India has IMO been fairly sensible before starting conflict.

Attacking terrorist camps would be like pouring laxative into the toilet bowl.

Attacking the Pakistani border areas in an offensive would merely unite Pakistanis and give them the excuse they want to divert from their own ills.

Attacking when they are expecting an attack itself would be counter productive. I would prefer to see a sudden devastating strike that, for example kills Masood Azhar or some such creature coming at time when nobody expects it

I would like to see India take the posture that such an attack can come anytime - cutting off all possibility of a "peace process" keeping Pakistan continuously on tenterhooks and continuously "prepared for war" that takes its own time coming.

Pakistan in fact has always prepared itself for war with India, but it is India that has always been giving reassurances that it will not wage war. Such reassurances must stop

One final point about something that makes me sad and frustrated. I hear the India government saying things like "We would like to see Pakistan do more" and "We would like to see Pakistan actually winding up the terror apparatus" This is plain silly. The ethos of Pakistan means that India's success is seen as Pakistan's failure and India must be made to fail and be seen to fail to make Pakistan succeed.

I may post some thoughts on these lines in a new thread.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 24 Dec 2008 09:26

The fundamental problem with India is that our intellectuals. Strategists, Politicians and finally Babus have not left the cacoon of Gandhian romanticism! This is also evident from the chappal carrying for Soniqa Ghandhi (the merger of Gandhi).

Do Ankhe bara haath view of TSP lingers on hence the idiotic pronouncements of MMS at havana, LKg at Karachi etc.

We need new generation of idiots at the helm of affairs

suneels · Post by **suneels** » 24 Dec 2008 09:35

Hello
http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=neTsQng-70o
The only good terrorist is a dead terrorist.

Cheers
Suneel

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 24 Dec 2008 10:10

There is talk of war within 3 days.
Some sources are being visited by Generals. Military C&C in escalated readiness.

samuel.chandra · Post by **samuel.chandra** » 24 Dec 2008 10:25

People suggesting a wait and watch approach should understand that the pakis are not going to change without a strong danda. The longer we wait, the harder its going to be to tame them. Covert ops is good. Economic/Military sanctions is also good. But a very visible attack on their H&D is necessary to deter them...and that can be delivered only by limited war. They will have to back down because they have no money to keep going. Right now they are trying to see, who blinks first... and they have a definite advantage... we have more to lose and they have nothing much to lose. But imagine a decade or two down the line, you think India's economic superiority will somehow deter them from making more shocking attacks? Given their psychology, it will be bigger every time..maybe a dirty nuke. We need to tame them now. We cannot grow with a constant pain on the side.

Just simulate the thought process of ISI/Pakijernail/jihadi. What exactly does he gain by letting us grow... he feels smaller every day... he feels more and more isolated every day... he knows that he missed the bus and its especially painful because we both started at the same time... he doesn't want to think about it though because it makes him hate himself. He is like that distant cousin who hates you for your success...you can try anything, he will still hate you. I think we need to start with this analysis of their mind and then look at our options. The only option is to keep them in constant pain and keep them guessing.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2008 10:30

inshallah the early morning of Dec27 is when the first danda is wielded.

one month is up and pakis need to pay the price in blood.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 24 Dec 2008 10:37

Some interesting, but amateurish, discussion on cnnibn regarding role of media ( http://ibnlive.in.com/news/indiapak-lea ... 227-3.html). Apparently the conclusion was that: media should report what it sees rather than trying to shape public perceptions. Someone knock some sense into me, but Isn't that obvious?

Anyway, I am getting sick of people (or so called Pakistani political analyst as shown on an earlier cnnibn show) declaring in media: "You just had one mumbai terror attack, we in Pakistan have a mumbai style terror attack every day so cool down" What the hell! By that logic I guess it means that it is also ok for India to have a failed military dictatorship since Pakistan has had several of them. I guess Pakistan has also had several drone attacks, so I guess its ok for India to have one failed drone attack as well. What ridiculous bunch of nincompoops. Grow a brain and if you call yourself journalists (god knows which school you failed out of if you ever went to a real journalistic school) and challenge the person who makes such stupid statements next time.

India is not in a race to the bottom of the terrorist shithole with pakistan. It may be ok for you to have several failed military/civilian governments, it may be ok for you to have mullahs running your cricket team and army, and it may be ok for you to breed terrorists, have several drone attacks, and live off other peoples money. But its not ok for us and that's why a red line needs to be drawn. Brainless idots.

There is a reason we are the I in the "BRIC countries" and you are the P in TSP and for god sakes someone draw a freekin red line before these so called mama's boys in media start to sympathize with Pakistan and its multiple power centers with every cross-border terror attack that takes place in India.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 24 Dec 2008 10:45

Indian Journos are by and large sensationalist and lacking maturity , barring a few such as Arnab Goswami and sometimes Rajdeep - I cannot find any other half decent TV journo who knows what to say and how to say it.

Don't even tell me that Burqa or Gaurav gala or any other pathetic excuse is a journalist.

pradeepe · Post by **pradeepe** » 24 Dec 2008 10:49

One thing that is clearly visible is the heightened sate of alert all the police personnel are on. Try parking your vehicle on the sides on any major numbered road in Hyd. It will be gone in two minutes, and if you are in the vehicle you will be hounded to keep moving. The police have stepped up their patrols right after the mumbai attacks, but I saw it today at 8:00AM in the morning. That is new. They usually dont get into this mode till much later in the day, usually late evening.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 24 Dec 2008 10:51

Baljeet:

You are paiting a way too pessiomistic scenario; exactly what TSP is hoping for. I have never advocated a full-scale attack on TSP; matter of fact thats exactly waht they are waiting for, and the only reason why TSP undertook Mumbai slaughter. They are hoping for India to go head on, forcing a stalemate, nuke flashpoint bla bla, and Unkil stepping in and re-drawing the landscape. Short of that they are also expecting that India will be reduced to that of TSP in terms of foreign investment etc. Thats why all the heartburn that England resumed their cricket tour. My point is that TSP should be made to pay for this slaughter. And there are many ways of accomplishing this including military option. All this cowardly talk about TSP will be the ante, we will be held back by 10 years etc means TSP has already won the gaame and set. And boss, you and I both know TSP RAPE. When push comes to shove, when they sense they are loosing their wine, women, and $, you can be rest assured they will buckle like 9 pins. So, please stop all your cowardly nonsense. Freedom and great power status does not come for free, costs are involved. Look at US. It sacrificed 1000s of its troops for Iraqi oil and mid-east dominance.

Mayura · Post by **Mayura** » 24 Dec 2008 11:06

Strike the enemy when he least expects. This causes a considerable damage.

Porkis are dying to test their acquired second handle missiles if at all a war breaks out.

I hope USA are aware of the Taliban's press release that they are with PAK if IND attacks.

their(USA) troops as searching every shitholes in afghanistan while the PAK army is recruiting them on a large scale.

what was that Interpol cheif vomiting in front of press y'day??

and does PAK use Oracle or postgres database to keep records of their piglets?? or are they using a special DB (coded in pure Urdu XML!!) for this?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Dec 2008 11:15

War is what the Paki military establishment want.They know that the US will immediately intervene with a weak GOI of the moment,to end any conflict.A prolonged war would be economically very destructive.What the Paki military want is the opportunity of war so that they can "equalize" the situation,where they are in the pigsty at the moment due toi their terrorist ways.If war happens,the acts of terror committed by the Paki military will become less important than stopping the conflict.Pakistan has to recover "face" and "honour" that has deserted it thanks to its military's barbaric ways.The opium and hash high general staff of the Puki army,led by Gen."Arsefu*k Killany" grandly imagine that they can score a few "victories" on the battlefield,like their "victory' at Kargil! In any war,India is also bound to suffer casualties and picking through them,the Puki military will produce some great moments of fiction,like that of Alam in '65 to further fool the Paki populace,while grandiosely awarding themselves even more Christmas tree and New Year decorations to be pinned onto their bloated uniforms!

Zardari will have no other option but to look patriotic and all the anti-military politicos will have to shout from the gallery in concert or othwise fall victim as "traitors".India however,has an excellent opportunity to strike at Pak diplomatically.If they do not deliver on terror,here is what we should do.We must suspend diplomatic relations ,stop all overflights,ban Pakis from entering India,seal all borders even in J&K,publish a long list of Pakis invoilved in terror (including Musharrat and Hamid Gul) demanding that they be arrested if found abroad.If Gen.Pinochet could be arrested in the UK,such a strong supporter of hid dictatorship in Chile,there is no reason why the masterminds of "75% of all terror in Britain" cannot also be handcuffed.This sustained diplomatic campaign against Pakistan must be carried out with a vengeance by India.India should adopt a carrot and stick policy as far as Pak is concerned in all international fora.We should also rattle our sabres to warn the international coimmunity that pak could end up as a radioactive wasteland if these despicable uniformed barbarians are allowed to rule that country.The demand for "Sanctions" should be drummed into every major nation's head and we do not have to worry as there WILL be futrther terror attacks around the world emanating from Pak,more mayhem in Afghanistan against US/NATO forces who will have to come around at some time and take even further military action.Simultaneously,we should put as much international pressure from our friends upon the political elite in Pak,Zardari,Sharif,etc.,to work in concert and rein in the Puki military/ISI with international support,so that they can rid themselves of those in the Puki military whose hands are steeped in blood from aiding and abetting Islamist terror.

However,we cannot avoid keeping the military option closest to us right now,as the situation demands it.We should be ready to respond to any further Paki military perfidy within seconds,not minutes.Let Gen.Arsefu*k itch badly in his underpants.May the Gods also gift him a bellyfull of ulcers to go with his bellicosity!

shynee · Post by **shynee** » 24 Dec 2008 11:15

Take The Gloves Off
Kanwal Sibal

Our reluctance to take political steps upfront against Pakistan for the Mumbai terrorist assault is baffling. No clear action agenda surfaced even after the parliamentary debate. Apparently, we want the Mumbai horror to be seen in its international context rather than as an India-Pakistan affair. Our fear that bilateral action might impede multilateral action is misplaced. In reality, carefully calibrated bilateral action, by demonstrating seriousness of intent and raising the threshold, increases pressure on the international community to act.

Others will take the cue from us. Why should their attitude to Pakistan be more adversarial than ours? If we want to balance the Mumbai mayhem against our overall relationship with Pakistan, and keep doors open for the future, others would have more reason to do so. Outside intervention in our region, as our own long experience illustrates, is, in any case, not intended to back the wronged party, but to defuse tensions, prevent escalation, while leaving the core problem unaddressed. Why then this over-reliance on international action to hold Pakistan accountable for Mumbai?

For political, and even psychological reasons of public morale, some riposte to Mumbai was obligatory. Once we had ascertained that "elements in Pakistan" were involved and talked of price to pay, some concrete step should have followed to maintain our credibility. The ruling out of military action, a tactical error in itself, compounded further by inconsistent statements, did not preclude political action. Our approach seems procedural, that of serving a show cause for misconduct and awaiting a response before action can be taken. The unedifying politics of compromise over A R Antulay's unpardonable remarks exposes the government's incapacity to take hard decisions. And the cricket tour cancellation is an ad hoc step, not a policy decision on sporting and cultural contacts.

We had several political options. We could have immediately announced the suspension of the Composite Dialogue premised on Pakistan ending terrorism from its soil against India. The position never was that we would tolerate terrorism so long as the Pakistan government was not itself involved, but for four years we even gave this latitude to Pakistan by jointly declaring after attacks in India that terrorists would not be allowed to disrupt the bilateral dialogue. This gave, in effect, a licence to so-called non-state actors to continue murdering innocent Indians. Why we implicitly cling to this overly accommodating position after Mumbai is perplexing.

We speak of a "pause" in the dialogue because conditions are not conducive for holding it. Pause means a short break before resuming activity. Our anxiety to keep the doors of dialogue open suggests that we hope to get sufficient redress for Mumbai quickly enough to begin business as usual with Islamabad. On what are we basing this optimistic assumption?

The argument that as we have to talk to Pakistan ultimately, so why announce a halt to the dialogue is misleading. Formally suspending the dialogue has the advantage of pressuring Pakistan, and others, to deliver more to India than a reiteration of a commitment to end terrorism. Pakistan would have to take demonstrable concrete steps to have the Indian policy decision reversed. The West sees the dialogue as an insurance against escalation of tensions and would exert itself to revive it, which gives us leverage. In addition, the Joint Terror Mechanism, that gave Pakistan the political cover of appearing cooperative without any commitment to deliver, should be discarded; so also the fiction that both countries are equal victims of terrorism.

Islamabad is manifestly unwilling to meet the demands we have made. It will not hand over any wanted person. It is hedging on banning the Jamaat-ud-Dawa. It is not accepting the Pakistani origin of the terrorists, questioning even Ajmal Amir Kasab's confessions. The Jaish-e-Muhammad leader Masood Azhar is not under detention. The claim that Dawood Ibrahim is not in Pakistan, insinuations that Hindu terrorists might be involved in Mumbai and demanding evidence before Pakistan will move, despite known facts, reflects profound unwillingness to mend its conduct towards India. Pakistan's reflexive responses, whenever accused of complicity in terrorism, are in full display in the Mumbai case. In these conditions no meaningful clean-up operation can occur in Pakistan.

This requires a stepped up response from India that may include withdrawal of our envoy, calibrated economic sanctions, travel restrictions and demand that international economic assistance to Pakistan depend on implementation of its anti-terrorism obligations.

Our soft response stems partly from concern about weakening the brittle civilian democratic government vis-a-vis the military. We should shed sentimentalism about democracy in Pakistan as its future is not dependent on India's policies. Is it viable political strategy to continue absorbing terrorist attacks without reaction for the sake of the health of the democratic forces in Pakistan? This way we will bleed for years because profound democratic change in Pakistan will take that long. The rest of the world, rarely squeamish about military rule in Pakistan, will accept it again tomorrow if their interests so dictate.

Senator John Kerry mentioned in Delhi the planned $15 billion package for Pakistan with a military component. This exposes the gap between US and India on Pakistan. Offshoring our post-Mumbai anti-terror policy will not get us wanted results. Calling Pakistan's bluff about moving its forces from west to east may get all to address the core problem better. Our diplomacy should be based on realities, not wishful thinking.

The writer is a former foreign secretary.

uddu · Post by **uddu** » 24 Dec 2008 11:31

This is a response from Cyrus Brocha

Interview with LET/JUD/JUN/Select Next name chief
[youtube]KCS4zySohZ8&feature=related[/youtube]

Watch this. Interview with Dawn editor and AAZ (truly an ass)
[youtube]38afRo-6Lxw&feature=related[/youtube]

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 24 Dec 2008 11:36

I am wondering what exactly will be the Indian Military and Strategic Objective if there is any military action apart from sending a message. I feel that the objective should be to destroy targets with a high replacement cost, longer rebuilding time, while not leaving the TSP heartland vulnerable for the crazies to explore the Qayamat options.

I feel that instead of attacking any target on land, the Indian forces should try to sink a few surface ships of the TSP-N. In the TSP pecking order TSP-N is a distant third after the TSPA and TSPAF. The loss of a few ships without any economic blockade is unlikely to cross any so-called red-lines or for that matter hurt the H&D of the PakJabs in the same manner the loss of a few ef-solaahs can. It can be sold as a cowardly attack by the conniving YYY by the TSP establishment. The bang for the buck in terms of the economic loss caused per missile is immense, as is the time needed to replace the assets. If the IN can bag a sub, even better. Ideally the TSP ships should be taken out via the Indian made Brahmos. The targets should include some capital ships whose loss will have a psychological impact on the TSP Armed Forces without causing a major loss of H&D.

This is an approach which degrades the military capability with a large rebuilding cost without threatening TSP's ability to survive, as measured by the TSPA/TSPAF.

The risk of course is that TSP subs, attempting to sink IN vessels in retaliation, or merchant vessels in the future. However any attack on merchant vessels will itself by a major escalation opening the flood-gates to more punitive action.

krish.pf · Post by **krish.pf** » 24 Dec 2008 11:47

There is talk of war within 3 days.
Some sources are being visited by Generals. Military C&C in escalated readiness.

With people like MMS at the helm? I don't know about others but I have completely and irreversibly broken down now after having my hopes shattered again and again and again during the past years.

Edited.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 24 Dec 2008 11:53

krish,

MMS derives his power from the Indian constitution, he is our PM. You might criticize him for bad policy, lack of strategic thinking and initiative, incompetence and other things. But please spare the homophobia.

pradeepe · Post by **pradeepe** » 24 Dec 2008 12:01

IMO, its not material assets that need to be taken out. Its heads that need to roll. Taking out material assets and their cost metrics, only registers on the H&D hit scale. Ultimately the top guys need to fear for the loss of their own worthless lives or that of their loved ones.

Hit them there and make it hurt. Be cold and ruthless and take out the families of their top ISI generals. Its not a door we opened. Kalachuk is still in our memories.

krish.pf · Post by **krish.pf** » 24 Dec 2008 12:07

Edited.

Chandragupta · Post by **Chandragupta** » 24 Dec 2008 13:09

Vivek, I don't think you are aware of the conditions at the time of the hijack. NDA's inexperience (which I would not like to call a big factor) coupled with the massive pressure of the Indian public & media. I still recall how the media went crazy with calls to save the lives of the passengers, the government panicked. The fact that the kin of the hijacked passengers took to the streets, did'nt help much either. Ideally, the people should have given the government a go ahead to whatever it was planning, but sadly that wasnt the case. Plus, you had the Congress & the secular parties digging into the NDA.

The blunder was allowing the aircraft to go to Kandahar, not the release of the terrorists, which, let's be honest, was inevitable once the plane landed in Afghanistan.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 24 Dec 2008 13:18

The blunder was allowing the aircraft to go to Kandahar, not the release of the terrorists, which, let's be honest, was inevitable once the plane landed in Afghanistan.

That is the crux of it , if we would have blocked the aircraft in India and stormed it - perhaps a few more innocent lives would have been lost but Masood Azhar would still have been in Jail and would not have managed to stage so many terror attacks which ultimatly led to innocent deaths in far greater numbers.

It was a painful lesson for an inexperienced GoI

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 24 Dec 2008 13:23

Philip wrote:We must suspend diplomatic relations ,stop all overflights,ban Pakis from entering India,seal all borders even in J&K,publish a long list of Pakis invoilved in terror (including Musharrat and Hamid Gul) demanding that they be arrested if found abroad.

We are living in fool's paradise if we think that diplomatic pressure will work. What will be our response if Hamid Gul along with Masood Azhar visit KSA for Umra. What leverage do we have with Middle Eastern countries other than running to Uncle for help?
...

Philip wrote: We should also rattle our sabres to warn the international coimmunity that pak could end up as a radioactive wasteland if these despicable uniformed barbarians are allowed to rule that country.The demand for "Sanctions" should be drummed into every major nation's head and we do not have to worry as there WILL be futrther terror attacks around the world emanating from Pak,more mayhem in Afghanistan against US/NATO forces who will have to come around at some time and take even further military action.

The sabre rattling will just show to world our impotence in face of terror from Pakis. The world leaders will respond by praising our utmost restraint and privately laugh their arse off at our impotence.
No one is going to fight our battles.

Philip wrote: Simultaneously,we should put as much international pressure from our friends upon the political elite in Pak,Zardari,Sharif,etc.,to work in concert and rein in the Puki military/ISI with international support,so that they can rid themselves of those in the Puki military whose hands are steeped in blood from aiding and abetting Islamist terror.

It is just naive to think that political elite can rein in Paki Army upon international pressure. Even Nawaz has fallen in line after some initial fluster.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 24 Dec 2008 13:40

nawaz mota is scoring points against zardari today by saying he will help India in terror probe. would be singing a different song if in power.

kayani's bungalow taking a missile hit is what will force their hand.

milindc · Post by **milindc** » 24 Dec 2008 13:47

Singha wrote:nawaz mota is scoring points against zardari today by saying he will help India in terror probe. would be singing a different song if in power.

kayani's bungalow taking a missile hit is what will force their hand.

Nawaz mota just couple of days back was stating why Pakis were disowning the Girlie Pig. Today, he is demanding evidence from India regarding Girlie Pig's origin and he will take up with 10%.

Rahul M · Post by **Rahul M** » 24 Dec 2008 14:21

vivek k, NDA regime displayed pussyfootedness in handling many affairs some of which have been mentioned above (add BD problem to that) but JS going to kandahar was not one of them.

here is my response to this issue earlier in this thread :

Rahul M wrote:let me clear this at the outset that the following is NOT a discussion on politics.
I'm just analysing the kandahar episode as I see it as an Indian citizen, nothing more, nothing less.

However, I think an effort could have been made to stop the plane in Amritsar and that was dreadful lapse in security.
undoubtedly it was a major administrative failure on the part of GoI and the crisis management group.
but to their credit the whole system was refurbished and streamlined afterwards and pending authorisation from the political masters, the system itself reacts pretty quickly since then.

I know it was a Catch 22 situation for the government then and I sympathize with them. However when you consider in hindsight how many hundreds of Indians died because Masood Azhar was released then you'd probably come to the conclusion, as I have, it would have been better to let go of all the passengers instead of letting this bas###d go off scot free.
amit, this is really not expected from you !

just 'let go' 190 odd innocent people just because there is a chance that 5 freed terrorists could possibly indulge in such actions in the future ?
if your security apparatus can't deal with 5 men operating from foreign soil, then such an apparatus doesn't deserve to exist.

do realize that we had no chance of an armed assault once the plane was outside India.

all you can hope in such a situation is that the people at risk will be rescued and your security apparatus will deal with any future situations.

And what was Jaswant Singh thinking when he personally escorted the terrorists to Kandahar, what kind of message did it send out to the world. The Indian FM going with hands folded to hijackers?
oh c'mon, let's not fall for this cheap rhetoric. JS was at place to lead negotiations with the terrorists overseen by an extremely hostile taliban.
it wasn't just JS arriving at kandahar and exchanging prisoners, there were intense negotiations.
and the team there needed someone with enough political authority to carry out any decision.
a point that needs to be noted is that jaswant's plane did carry commandoes but the taliban put paid to any rescue efforts by surrounding IC-814 a/c with technicals and even tanks.

if anything it speaks of the commitment of an elected official to land up in a hostile foreign country and take charge of the situation. I would be proud if any other politician shows such cojones in times of crisis.

Most countries in the world have a zero tolerance to hostage-demand situation. India has paid a heavy price for not having one till now, it seems.
do remember that we had no opportunity to make a SF rescue effort.
NO country in such a situation would have stuck to 'no negotiations'. if you don't have the option of an armed assault, 'no negotiations' goes out of the window.

As for Parakram, Cold Start was a result of the failure of Parakaram to get our objectives? However, my question is was Parakaram a kind of knee jerk reaction - a sort of got to do something to show our manhood kind of move?

If the intention was never to attack then why do it in the first place. The Pakis think even that was victory for its martial forces and Musharraf said so several times.
AFA we know they did intend to attack, ALL signals suggest likewise.

but the army took too long to mobilise, long enough to lose the surprise factor. (due to time periods connected to deployment, surprise factor lasts as long as your enemy is not fully prepared and you are. in the Indo-pak context this is at a maximum of 7-14 days)

it was thus no longer possible to continue military operations given the nuclear backdrop.

edit: again, this is not an effort to whitewash efforts of NDA regime.
as amit says, softness is ingrained in Indian politicos, even IG went soft to ZAB at shimla.

I still haven't forgotten NDA's spineless response to the BD outrages.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 24 Dec 2008 14:43

Milind,there are two important communities that India has to take into account.Pak is a pariah state from its military's actions.We cannot act like Pak in an adventurist manner as the US does,because it has no hostile nations as its neighbours,insulated from most terror by two huge oceans,Atlantic and Pacific,making cross border terror almost impossible.The first community is the international one.If we don't take massive diplomatic action against Pak,then no one will suppport us internationally against Pak when it matters,for example imposing military and economic sanctions.The second most important community is that of India.We want action,yes,but before we take decisive military action we must show that other methods of persuading Pak to cooperate must have been exhausted.Certainly one must have a time frame for this in hand,as one cannot as was shown during Op.Parakram maintain a perpetual state of readiness.Furthermore,we are at the moment unprepared.I would venture that Pak,well knowing what was to happen is prepared for a short spat,for reasons I suggested in the earlier post.Once we've prepared and are forces are battle ready,we must strike according to our timetable and not to that of Pak's.I suspect that a strike willc ertainly come before the elctions as the Congress wants to show that MMS &Co. are macho men!

Our great folly is that we've time and time again believed all the bullsh*t that the US has spouted,us beign a "strategic partner" ,etc.,etc.,done nothing to stop Pak from raping India through terrorism again ad infinitum.Here are the views of a former diplomat on the same subject.

http://www.outlookindia.com/full.asp?fo ... F%29&sid=3

The American Pipe-Dream
The US never considered India 'special' as we were made to believe

M.K. Bhadrakumar

Islamabad has drawn the 'red line'. It ably took the 'pressure' from the United States on the Mumbai attacks, and is seen as adopting a 'principled position': India must provide evidence; Pakistan cannot hand over to India any of its nationals; no foreign agencies will be allowed to interrogate Pakistani nationals on its soil.

Alongside, Islamabad launched its own 'initiatives': a joint investigative mechanism and a high-level team to travel to Delhi. Islamabad says Delhi's green signal is awaited. Indeed, it promptly acted on the United Nations Security Council call, which was what India demanded as per US advice.

With its vast experience in dealing with Washington, Islamabad is concluding that US 'pressure' has run its course. Attention will soon turn to the gala ceremony in Washington on January 20 for a historic transfer of power. Unless Pakistan precipitates tension, time is not far off before the international community urges India to engage Pakistan in a spirit of dialogue.

India ponders, 'What now'? It put its strategic partnership with the US to the litmus test and is dismayed at the result. India conducted over 50 military exercises with the US over recent years but they couldn't forestall the act of war on Mumbai or help track down the mentors of the terrorists. India was sold a dream—that Washington was determined to make it a first class world power. The dream lies broken. The carpetbaggers who peddled the dream are nowhere to be seen.

It almost seems grotesque that our strategic gurus promised that the Indo-US nuclear deal was a prerequisite for India to become a 'balancer' in the 21st century international system. Where was it that we went so hopelessly wrong in our triumphalism? Quintessentially, what we're witnessing is that the US never really "dehyphenated" its policies towards India and Pakistan like we believed or were led to believe, or both. The US policy is to maintain stable, predictable, balanced relationships with both India and Pakistan so as to optimally pursue its regional policies as a superpower.

There was no question of the US abandoning Pakistan or elevating India in disregard of Pakistani security concerns. Pakistan is pivotal to the realisation of the US's 'Great Central Asia' strategy. Thus, building up the Pakistani power structure, including the military, is a crucial element of its regional strategy. India can never replace Pakistan in the US geostrategy, in which control of Afghanistan is a priority.

Of course, befriending India would have its benefits as well. Its growing market offers business opportunities and it is also a military power in the Indian Ocean region with the capacity to act as a junior partner. Coopting India is useful for the US strategy towards Russia, China and Iran. Certainly, India could mitigate Israel's regional isolation in West Asia. Hence, India is integral to the US objective to remain embedded in the Asian security scenario.

The US global strategy is to perpetuate its dominance as a world power despite the steady decline in its influence and emergence of new power centres and, to this end, build coalitions from time to time. In the mistaken faith that India's foreign policy can flourish with the single underpinning of strategic partnership with the US, Indian elite neglected the shared concerns and profound commonality of interests India has with Russia and Iran over the Afghan problem. They cut adrift from regional politics and fancied the idea that so long as India harmonised relations with the US, everything else willy-nilly would fall in place—our adversarial relationships with China and Pakistan or the atrophying of our traditional ties with Russia and Iran. Some were myopic enough to actually argue for Indian military deployment in Afghanistan and to play the 'Tibet card' against China.

Simply put, it's time we understand that the open-ended US military occupation of Afghanistan has destabilised Pakistan and, in turn, is drawing the region into the vortex of terrorism. We need to work with Russia and Iran on a regional initiative for an Afghan settlement. It is not in our national security interest to abandon Afghanistan as the playpen of a closely-knit US-UK-Pakistan-Saudi condominium.

The moot point is whether the breakdown of foreign policy is attributable to a failure of leadership, or is it that the Indian elite today is so compromised with the "Washington consensus" that it refuses to see hard realities. The first case is appalling, and the second, frightening. After all, our Pakistan problem is not something new. We sought to keep the tension under check through a judicious mix of factors of advantage. Which, of course, required a broad-based, independent foreign policy and an awareness that there is no such thing as absolute security.

(The writer is a former IFS officer)

More Stories: M.K. Bhadrakumar
More in Opinion

satya · Post by **satya** » 24 Dec 2008 15:02

I might be playing Devil's Advocate but i heard MMS remarks to press in front of Parliament yesterday and in that at no time he categorically ruled out war as an option , all he said was something like war was bad but nowhere he said its not under consideration or something like that ( what he didn't say was imp. in IMHO ) . Again , i might be wrong but going by GoI's diplomatic moves , they seem well thought & being executed in a well planned calibrated manner to increase pressure on TSP establishment & its bringing out many questions about its motives atleast in average minds in west as to why West is so reluctant to put pressure on TSPA to do .

Former NSA Mishra's interview to Thapar was a real good one & it showed that atleast he had no romantic notions about Obama's presidency , considering he is in touch with current NSA & others in PMO , we just might be wrong at least on policy moves by GoI . Again what he didn't say was important , answered many questions that been circling on forum ( he did said one thing even during his tenure there were options other than direct military strikes available ).

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 24 Dec 2008 15:26

MMS is a very unique person as he brings respect to idiots!

Why so ?

When MMS sqeeks (aka) speaks
It is neither comforting nor commanding, at the same time when he promises stern action against the enemy, He evokes termors of laughter, people are said to die laughing.

At best he is more suitable in writers building serving East India company or Sonia G company.

Utterly spineless leader in testing times.
Yeh dil 'mushkill' jeena yehan
Ye hai manmohan maya yehaan
Zera batchke, zara jhuke jeena yehaan

What ever happened .Marathas and mumbaikars? No hartal or jalose against MMS
The inheritors of Bal Gangadhar the Kesari of maharashtra and India

Arun_S · Post by **Arun_S** » 24 Dec 2008 16:50

John Snow wrote:MMS is a very unique person as he brings respect to idiots!

Why so ?

When MMS sqeeks (aka) speaks
It is neither comforting nor commanding, at the same time when he promises stern action against the enemy, He evokes termors of laughter, people are said to die laughing.

I am one of the survivors who almost died from laughing while listening to the feminine Sardar

satya · Post by **satya** » 24 Dec 2008 18:31

The Image of India: Terrorised & Tarnished

By Percy S Mistry.

9.30pm on 26-11-08 started sixty of the most ignominious hours for India. In that time its global reputation for competence disintegrated. TV screens around the world witnessed the unwinding of cumulative brand-building over fifteen years. India's image as a potential future super-power changed instantly to one of a brittle, incompetent, state. Sixty hours of mayhem, by just TEN semi-literate misfits, humiliated a nation of a billion in the eyes of the world. They underscored the dysfunctionality of a political establishment with misplaced priorities. They highlighted: (a) the lack of communication and coordination in our multi-layered system of government at city, state and central levels; (b) the confused, bureaucratic nature of our intelligence and security apparatus; and (c) the gross inadequacy of Indian forces of law and order to deal effectively with terrorism, despite its frightening frequency on our soil.

All our key agencies proved incapable. Yet many are now rewriting for posterity their roles with images of personal courage, sacrifice, 'martyrdom' and glory. Miles of footage and reams of prose make it redundant to repeat the trauma of those painful, insufferable hours. But much of it is now being criticised for revealing our public faults without air-brushing. The aftermath of 26/11 shows the deadly 'paralysis-cum-obfuscation-cum-foot-in-mouth' disease infecting our polity. Unfolding evidence suggests that central and state agencies had sufficient early warning, of sufficient specificity to be 'actionable', from a variety of internal and external sources, to take prophylactic action. Yet the state went into denial. The scale of the state's default in not performing its most basic duty - i.e. protecting its territory from attack and its citizens from harm -- is becoming clear. To its rulers, Indian lives are cheap. As Maharashtra's Home Minister, 'Dance-Bar' Patil succinctly put it: "small things happen in big towns"!

The anxiety of our government to divert attention from its failings led to immediate bellicose sabre-rattling against our perennially hostile, insecure, and even more incapable neighbour, to appease domestic outrage and baiting by the Opposition. Even if the ISI is behind this attack, our way of going about making the connection obvious to the world leaves much to be desired. We are being too shrill and indignant. Our ex-post handling of a still unfolding crisis could yet become a sub-continental tragedy, if we do not rise above ourselves to air our grievances more effectively, obtain redress, and protect India's interests over the long-term.

26/11 has revealed many things about India that we were content to obscure from ourselves but must now face frontally and do something about. First, we have to acknowledge openly that serving the Indian public could not be further from the minds of our political class. The statements made by satraps in every party after 26/11, prove that beyond reasonable doubt. Should they be taken at face value? Yes. Can they all be cases of misspeaking? They reflect a visceral contempt for us who are obviously seen as lumpen morons. We vote these sad excuses into office (despite their ignorance, malfeasance, self-enrichment and criminality) time after time. Thus we establish that we do not care for ourselves or how we are represented. They seem themselves as our masters (netas) rather than our servants (naukars). We collude in perpetuating that ridiculous notion; thus giving our democracy a particularly nasty twist.

Second, what comes across most clearly from 26/11, is how disconnected our political class is from us. It is apparent that, apart from undertaking the tedious task of seducing and bribing us at election time, our political class (with the exceptions being counted on two hands) exists to serve itself: i.e. to enrich, empower, indulge, protect and insulate itself from us; using the resources we provide but they command as their own. Our Treasury has become their piggy-bank. Our forces of law-and-order have become their vassals and servants used to serve their personal needs and political ends not ours. Our bureaucracy (endowed with some truly exceptional people who are badly used and abused) has become their machinery for their own political gain than for advancing our national interest.

Third, state-provided security of political megalomaniacs has become more important than the security provided to protect our lives. And, despite this tragedy, political goons at every level of government -- including those who go out of their way to destabilise our societies, divide and fracture us by accentuating ethnicity, caste and language, and open themselves to retaliation -- are surrounded by policemen putting themselves out of real harm's way. When will this absurdity cease? How many more of us have to die before things change? What will it take to dismantle the perverse, ridiculous, VVIP culture that disempowers us all?

Fourth, our great institutions of state have become political instruments for taking advantage of us in every way imaginable. Maharashtra, affected by the most vicious act of terrorism yet experienced was held hostage to the political machinations of the Congress and NCP for days before appointing a more capable Chief Minister. Is caste politics emblematic of a 21st century India? And should choices for the Maharashtra CM be confined to a list of the dubious?

Fifth, our political system has now become completely dysfunctional in form and substance. Present political machinery is inherently incapable of delivering good governance no matter how well-intended it might be; which it is not. The senior Mrs. Gandhi's imperial hauteur triggered the end of one great national party. Since her ascension, Congress has become a private family business that no one but the family can run. But family members are not wise, knowledgeable, or capable. If they were, they would not have kept as Home Minister someone who had proved himself so grossly incompetent (though sartorially elegant) time and again, just because he was loyal. They are unable to distinguish between their political interests and those of the country. They live off an unfortunate legacy of involuntary sacrifice. The Nehru-Gandhi dynasty has done some good. But it has also done much harm to India's economy, polity, and the integrity of its social fabric with profoundly mistaken strategic choices. What this family should do now is leave India to find its own feet without them. They could let India dispense with the curse of dynasty and allow what was once a great national party to rebuild itself, so that talent, not heritage and surname, are valued. They could let capable young politicians rather than sycophants kowtowing to the family come to the fore.

But, just as Congress has degenerated into becoming a family firm, the BJP has morphed from various preceding branches of an 'opposition' to Congress to go the communal route; hinting none too subtly that democracy should be replaced with a tyranny of the religious majority. An accompanying trend to the mutation of the two national parties has been the emergence of fractured regional entities posturing as political parties when they have no beliefs, values, or philosophies about economics, politics, social development or governance. But, playing on themes of caste, creed (greed?) and language, such parties have gained local traction. They are the price that India now has to pay in the form of dysfunctional coalition governments in which the national parties provide a platform. The rest represent caste interests (dalits, yadavs, thakurs, gujjars, marathas, brahmins ... the list is endless) or a Marxist Left incapable of learning. They are available to the highest bidder. They need ministerial office for immunity from prosecution and enrich their privy purses. But we have no defence from them.

Sixth, our ability to exert any real political choice and discipline over those who supposedly represent us, when they go astray, has disappeared. Since one political coalition is as venal as the other we have no real choice. Our laws for investigating assets disproportionate to known income as a check on political malfeasance have fallen by the wayside. Indeed no politician cares about being prosecuted for amassing wealth illegally. Many are happy to reveal ill-gotten gains publicly. They are aided and abetted by laws intended to encourage equal opportunity, but instead provide perverse incentives for entrenching the caste system through a pervasive and pernicious system of preferences. In all these ways, we the Indian public, have become complicit in the ethical disintegration and corruption that engulfs us; that makes India a lawless, non-compliant, undisciplined, ungovernable society, in more ways than one.

26-11-08 is a wake up call to all of us that we have let things slide too far. We have tolerated the evolution of a system of misgovernance and a political ethos that is damaging to our lives, and to the integrity of India as a nation. This tragic episode underlines the reality that India has no bright shining role in the world unless it focuses on upgrading radically and immediately the ethics, machinery and institutions of governance in the same way, to the same world standards, that so many Indian corporates have attained in the last two decades.

We all need a state that functions. We need a presidency that commands respect not derision. We need a legislature that works effectively. We need lawmakers who are not our worst, most conspicuous, law-breakers. We need a government that governs well, provides essential public goods like law and order (which no other agent can provide) and caters to our interests. Instead we have a government that does everything but govern, and caters only to the interests of those in government. We need a government whose business is governing, not running businesses. We need a judiciary that delivers justice, not endless delays and the denial of justice. We need a legal system and police forces that function to serve law and order, and not to serve the pecuniary interests of legal professionals and the security of politicians.

This is not as elusive as it sounds. In public service we have some extraordinary people, though they are swimming against the tide in an ocean of mediocrity and incompetence. We do not lack the knowledge or financial resources to make our government work and perform alongside the best governments in the world. What we lack is the political culture and will to make it happen. But we also lack in our desire as citizens to demand the best. Why?

Because: seventh, we are pretty lawless ourselves. We pride ourselves on our individualism to the point where we do not notice how antisocial we are. We take short cuts as a matter of course every day in every way. We seek preferences at every turn, and look for favoured treatment through political connections to employment, promotion, licenses and other forms of advantage. The way we drive on the roads, cross streets, or queue for buses, trains or tickets at a cinema, shows just how unruly and undisciplined we are. We have not yet come to accept what is taken for granted in developed societies: i.e. that laws and rules apply to us in every aspect of our daily lives. They are not applicable only to others. We need to become a law-abiding, compliant society to reduce the frictional losses and transaction costs of selfish and undisciplined behaviour. We need to care not just for ourselves but for our neighbours. We need not to keep just the inside of our home clean while allowing common areas outside to be filthy. We need all these things more urgently than we need anything else to develop and grow. We need them sooner rather than later.

If it were not for our own faults as people and as citizens, our government and polity would not have so many. Nor would we be so tolerant of them. If it were not for our shortcomings, our forces of law and order would not be as pressed as they are in normal circumstances. And if we justified our demands for better security and governance, by improving dramatically our own standards of behaviour, we might eventually get them. It is one thing for others to terrorise us. It is quite another for us to terrorise ourselves on an ongoing basis.