Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 2011

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
archan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6822
Joined: 03 Aug 2007 21:30
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby archan » 08 Aug 2011 21:29

sanjeevpunj wrote:^^^First we need to clean up India of any terror cells, IM and its related proxies,local ISI stooges,FAI followers.

saar my take on that is - if there was no brainwashing, funding, arming, training done from our western neighbours, would there be an IM? or its related proxies, or the local ISI stooges? the attempt should be, with all our capability, to subver the source rather than trying to control the effect. I am concerned when I hear things like people wanting to plug all internal security holes. Given the size of the nation and its population, how many such 'holes' can be plugged? you plug one, the next one will pop up. There were talks of securing the coasts after26/11. I don't say that the security has been fool proof but can one put an impenetrable border all along the land, sea and air routes into a nation as big as Bharat? do we risk to create another police state?
This is like my neighbour shooting firecracker rockets aimed at my house and I say I will continue to clean up the mess they leave after explosion before I try to stop the neighbour from actually shooting those rockets. JMVHO.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2773
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby darshhan » 08 Aug 2011 21:55

archan wrote:saar my take on that is - if there was no brainwashing, funding, arming, training done from our western neighbours, would there be an IM? or its related proxies, or the local ISI stooges? the attempt should be, with all our capability, to subver the source rather than trying to control the effect. I am concerned when I hear things like people wanting to plug all internal security holes. Given the size of the nation and its population, how many such 'holes' can be plugged? you plug one, the next one will pop up. There were talks of securing the coasts after26/11. I don't say that the security has been fool proof but can one put an impenetrable border all along the land, sea and air routes into a nation as big as Bharat? do we risk to create another police state?
This is like my neighbour shooting firecracker rockets aimed at my house and I say I will continue to clean up the mess they leave after explosion before I try to stop the neighbour from actually shooting those rockets. JMVHO.


+1 Archan ji , Making India a police state.That is exactly what Pakistan wants.Infact even Bharat verma has said that instead of dealing with pakistan in lieu of terrorism , we are losing our own freedoms gradually as India hurtles towards becoming a police state.Today every mall has a metal detector.Getting a new cell phone connection is a big headache.Pakistan has definitely succeeded in raising our costs.

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Altair » 08 Aug 2011 22:20

Can any one give me a cost estimate of an operation involving 200 sorties of Su-30's,MiG-29UPG & Jaguars supported by Phalcon AEWCS with all the firepower needed?
My point is it cannot be more than what we or the entire world is paying each day.

Tumba
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 53
Joined: 06 Aug 2011 09:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Tumba » 08 Aug 2011 22:21

darshhan wrote:
archan wrote:saar my take on that is - if there was no brainwashing, funding, arming, training done from our western neighbours, would there be an IM? or its related proxies, or the local ISI stooges? the attempt should be, with all our capability, to subver the source rather than trying to control the effect. I am concerned when I hear things like people wanting to plug all internal security holes. Given the size of the nation and its population, how many such 'holes' can be plugged? you plug one, the next one will pop up. There were talks of securing the coasts after26/11. I don't say that the security has been fool proof but can one put an impenetrable border all along the land, sea and air routes into a nation as big as Bharat? do we risk to create another police state?
This is like my neighbour shooting firecracker rockets aimed at my house and I say I will continue to clean up the mess they leave after explosion before I try to stop the neighbour from actually shooting those rockets. JMVHO.


+1 Archan ji , Making India a police state.That is exactly what Pakistan wants.Infact even Bharat verma has said that instead of dealing with pakistan in lieu of terrorism , we are losing our own freedoms gradually as India hurtles towards becoming a police state.Today every mall has a metal detector.Getting a new cell phone connection is a big headache.Pakistan has definitely succeeded in raising our costs.


a police state is always better than a bleeding state, more security means more employment, more home land security equipment manufactured in house and the best thing MORE SECURITY.

darshhan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2773
Joined: 12 Dec 2008 11:52

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby darshhan » 08 Aug 2011 22:38

Tumba wrote:a police state is always better than a bleeding state, more security means more employment, more home land security equipment manufactured in house and the best thing MORE SECURITY.


tumba ji , your logic is sure as weird as it gets.What else can I say.Majority of people on BRF as well as in rest of India don't agree with your viewpoint.Infact Indira Gandhi tried to make India a police state in 1975.She failed.

And if you do not want to be a bleeding state then you have to be a courageous and gutsy state , not a police state.By courageous state I mean a state which can neutralise the Pakistani threat comprehensively rather than restricting freedoms of its own citizens.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin " Those who are ready to trade their freedoms for security , deserve neither" .

Sorry for ot.

Tumba
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 53
Joined: 06 Aug 2011 09:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Tumba » 08 Aug 2011 23:12

darshhan wrote:
Tumba wrote:a police state is always better than a bleeding state, more security means more employment, more home land security equipment manufactured in house and the best thing MORE SECURITY.


tumba ji , your logic is sure as weird as it gets.What else can I say.Majority of people on BRF as well as in rest of India don't agree with your viewpoint.Infact Indira Gandhi tried to make India a police state in 1975.She failed.

And if you do not want to be a bleeding state then you have to be a courageous and gutsy state , not a police state.By courageous state I mean a state which can neutralise the Pakistani threat comprehensively rather than restricting freedoms of its own citizens.

In the words of Benjamin Franklin " Those who are ready to trade their freedoms for security , deserve neither" .

Sorry for ot.


i think i might have used the incorrect word to describe the home land security situation currently arising, A POLICE STATE is not what i meant, most of companies with significant revenue base and a good employee base hires private security as done by malls.
Its just like a wealthy man hiring more for its security, I don't mean straight Govt Control agencies checking every thing that moves or crush peaceful protests or put anyone in prison for just suspicion. Its good for country as country is becoming more aware about its security and the threat it faces. Govt Agencies should connect them in there security network and count them as outer layer of security net/ scouts.

archan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6822
Joined: 03 Aug 2007 21:30
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby archan » 08 Aug 2011 23:32

Tumba wrote:a police state is always better than a bleeding state, more security means more employment, more home land security equipment manufactured in house and the best thing MORE SECURITY.

The question is not whether more security is better or not. It is how to get to that state.

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 710
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Y I Patel » 09 Aug 2011 00:27

Shiv, Rohit

You are the proud inheritors of Rajput Strategic Vision. And you are operating with a millennium-old blind spot. The Rajputs, and by extension all Hindus, lost our collective smriti of coalition building 850 years ago, when the Solankis and Chauhans did not support each other or the Hindu Shahis against the Ghorid invasions. This strategic tamas reached its height when the Rajputs aided neither Vijayanagar nor the Marathas but chose to become the vassals of the Mughals to protect their H&D. In fact, your current snit is no different than that of the Rajput princes who did not ally with Marathas against Ahmed Shah because the Marathas installed a Mughal puppet instead of a Rajput one on the Delhi throne. You are entirely consistent with the glorious INC which decided to launch Quit India at the height of German and Japanese ascendance, and with that brilliant National Hero who travelled by German submarine to befriend the Japanese. And finally, you are the direct heirs of that glorious Durga Mata, the Iron Lady who forgot a millennium worth of invasions to side with an aggressor from Central Asia who took over Afghanistan. Luckily for you, the art and Dharma of coalition building was not lost to your natural allies.

You are misreading America’s observance of Coalition Dharma as their WKK equivalent of pandering to Pakistan. USA did not become the sole superpower because it has the best generals, most brilliant commandos or the best weapons – it did so because it was the best at building and holding temporary coalitions to fight the main and immediate threat. It became a superpower by building the coalition of WW-II, and it sustained that coalition by swallowing the sacrifice of all of Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union. It won the Cold War and became the sole superpower by building yet another coalition – one that spanned continents and religious divides. Again, the coalition contained strange bedfellows that USA made temporary alliances with; coalitions that required significant concessions to partners.

In 1979, India was the unquestioned hegemon in the subcontinent. India had a great equation with progressive and secular rulers of Afghanistan. Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan was an affront to India’s strategic interests. If USSR had won in Afghanistan, they would not have needed an invasion to control India. We would have elected communists to power, such has been their hold on our blinkered intellects. If we were saved, it was because USA built a coalition to fight off Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. As with their other great victories, they used temporary allies to win the war. And they followed their coalition dharma by conceding to Pakistani interests in Afghanistan (and tacitly, J&K) after the Soviets left. India’s craven acquiescence of the Soviet invasion was a monumental blunder, one which we paid for with blood in J&K. And we ended up supporting the losers, which then shut us out of Afghanistan.

So why are you now angry at USA for ignoring Indian interests? This is a material world. What has India done to further American interests? When USA asked India to help out in Iraq, it was our opening to form an anti-fundamentalist Islam coalition of our own. Instead, we chose the safe way of sitting it out in the sidelines. But history keeps giving us choices, and we now have to make another defining choice. Is USA a natural ally, past history notwithstanding? Is there an Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan (+China?) alliance looming on the horizon, a Nadir Shah redux in the making? Do we want a world where USA is diminished and India is not developed enough to fill the strategic vaccum? I know where I stand, but then, I have chosen to eat American salt. You have no such divided loyalties, and you are proud Rajputs. Quo Vadis?

Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1282
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Nihat » 09 Aug 2011 00:50

Altair wrote:Can any one give me a cost estimate of an operation involving 200 sorties of Su-30's,MiG-29UPG & Jaguars supported by Phalcon AEWCS with all the firepower needed?
My point is it cannot be more than what we or the entire world is paying each day.


A few million dollars (50-100) considering the theater of Ops. is just next door but question is what purpose will that solve. NOTHING IMHO.

Archan talks of one more Internal security hole popping up for every one plug. Is the same not true for TSP that if one terrorist is killed then a hundred more will pop up. After all, TSP has millions of potential terrorists. We need to take out a few important pigs inside TSP and work really hard to develop a comprehensive Spy network within TSP. Threat of conventional war is important but only beyond a certain threshold, to counter proxy war we need our own proxies with deniability.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby svinayak » 09 Aug 2011 00:52

Y I Patel wrote: Do we want a world where USA is diminished and India is not developed enough to fill the strategic vaccum?

This will spur India to develop itself and protect itself.

Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 1259
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Lisa » 09 Aug 2011 01:14

shiv wrote:Lisa people who live in wealthy countries are constantly told that poor countries are suffering. So it becomes easy to be a rich man somewhere and imagine NoKo to be an bad shape "They are begging" ha ha ha

In my view there is a serious problem with this viewpoint. Countries are not individuals - so when you have a few individuals controlling a country - those individuals can become more and more and more dangerous even as their countrymen become poorer and more screwed up. The fact that Koerans (North) are poor and hungry does not matter to anyone - but yet Korea remains as a dangerous nation. The fact that one man has over 25 mill USD is just a rationalization -a piskological mental massage to say "Korea is screwed up"

We on BRF spend a lot of time talking that way bout Pakistan. Pakistan's screwed up economy and its poverty make us all happy and we all cheer when Pakis die or kill each other. But the Paki army is nearly immune to all this they are rich - the average jernail is richer than you or me and many Paki individuals are worth more than that measly 25 million. No matter how bad things are in Pakistan or North Korea - both countries are carrying on surviving and being a danger and no country in the world is able to do much about it in a reasonable time span. Both failing nations have an inherent strength by virtue of their failure where the lives of their people matter less and less and the leaders are cocooned by a protective layer of millions of indoctrinated hungry people who do not care if they die.

No matter how happy we feel about screwed up Pakis or North Koreans - both failed nations remain an insoluble problem. Everyone has clever ideas about what to do. But no one has succeeded in actually doing anything much


Shiv, you are erroneous in your suggestion that North Korea is not in bad
shape. It's in very bad shape and a great deal of this situation is brought
about by the sanctions that you claim do not work.

When a sovereign nation is reduced to having as its principle demand at
international talks, the consent to move 25 million dollars though a banking
system, then yes like it or not that is begging. You would be had pushed
to find be a comparable situation in the case of another nation. This is a
fact whether it is viewed from a rich nation or a poor nation.

Let me give you another example of how unilateral or multilateral sanctions
work and do very much have the ability to make even great nations feel the
pinch. Look when able at the Indian Nuclear page on this formum and the
ongoing discussion on ENR and what the American are willing to do alone
and how they are attempting to use multilateral agencies be coerced into
arresting India's ability to move ahead with ENR. If as you say sanctions
do not work do you care to explain the anomaly, ie why this concern about
these American moves?

Lets stick to the point, sanctions against pakistan would work. They need
to be thought out and slowly and methodically applied. We do not yet
process the ability to use any multilateral agencies offices to make this
move but even unilaterally we can cause pain. A little pain first but
gradually leveraging move as our economy advances and its size begins to
dictate terms on a global basis much as Americas does now.

In all nations, irrespective the grease that keeps them ticking at any level
is money. Your ability to 'transact' any 'business' eventually requires some
money, good money, reliably money not just locally printed stuff. You
much sequestrate pakistans ability to trade and earn money by all means
fair and foul for it is money that allows them to 'finance' the misery they
cause not Allah.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55358
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby ramana » 09 Aug 2011 01:21

"Distances may dim the vision, but should not distort the prespective!'

Lisa
BRFite
Posts: 1259
Joined: 04 May 2008 11:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Lisa » 09 Aug 2011 01:40

ramana wrote:"Distances may dim the vision, but should not distort the prespective!'


Could you kindly elaborate.

RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16003
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby RajeshA » 09 Aug 2011 01:45

Acharya wrote:
Y I Patel wrote: Do we want a world where USA is diminished and India is not developed enough to fill the strategic vaccum?

This will spur India to develop itself and protect itself.

Acharya garu,

I think, Y I Patel ji has a point about coalition building. May be Indian Governments too are learning about this art, as they share power at the center!

It is a question of entering a coalition as a confident partner, aware of one's strengths and limitations, but most importantly aware of our national interests.

We don't always need to be a follower. We can lead, and in order to lead a coalition India would again have to develop and protect herself and her allies.

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby CRamS » 09 Aug 2011 01:54

Let we forget, we reminded that India TSP equal equal onlee. Throw in Nepal too.


The prescription for India is applicable as much for Pakistan and Nepal. Only the politics of consensus can save South Asia.


Cosmo_R
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3407
Joined: 24 Apr 2010 01:24

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Cosmo_R » 09 Aug 2011 02:19

Y I Patel wrote:Shiv, Rohit
So why are you now angry at USA for ignoring Indian interests? This is a material world. What has India done to further American interests? When USA asked India to help out in Iraq, it was our opening to form an anti-fundamentalist Islam coalition of our own. Instead, we chose the safe way of sitting it out in the sidelines. But history keeps giving us choices, and we now have to make another defining choice. Is USA a natural ally, past history notwithstanding? Is there an Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan (+China?) alliance looming on the horizon, a Nadir Shah redux in the making? Do we want a world where USA is diminished and India is not developed enough to fill the strategic vaccum? I know where I stand, but then, I have chosen to eat American salt. You have no such divided loyalties, and you are proud Rajputs. Quo Vadis?


+1
Add to that Vietnam when LBJ asked for Indian help, Carter for condemnation of USSR invasion of Afghanistan, Ike for Chinese invasion of Tibet and USSR invasions of Hungary 1956 and LBJ again for Czechoslovakia in 1968.

Whatever the merits of US requests, we did not 'help'. We not just equivocated, we were hostile. GoI was terrified of its vote bank.

India cannot afford a diminished US not that it will happen, but we better can the schadenfreude because we are going get seriously whacked before we have a chance to generate escape velocity. The US is the only country that stands between us and a Confucian-Islamist axis not out of altruism but converging interests.

Truth be told, GoI and many other Indians expect the US to fix our problems without reciprocity. The relationship between states is not Dharmic, it is quid pro quo vadis.

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 710
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Y I Patel » 09 Aug 2011 02:34

Smart alec post deleted.

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Sushupti » 09 Aug 2011 02:55

Syed Zaid Zaman Hamid [Official]

Never mess with Pakistan! Allah (swt) retaliates with Jalal! Brititish Intelegence used MQM and ANP to burn Karachi into massive rioting. The plan was to draw in Pakistan army into the streets for an urban war. Allah turned the tables on MI6. Now London is burning uncontrolably with massive riotng and British govt is thinking of deploying army into London!! Allahu Akbar! This is also a warning for India and traitors inside Pakistan!


from Kitabechera panna of Mahadi

Brad Goodman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2383
Joined: 01 Apr 2010 17:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Brad Goodman » 09 Aug 2011 04:23

Looks like army does not share mahadi's faith in allah

Pakistan’s Military Concerned About Karachi Violence

Brad Goodman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2383
Joined: 01 Apr 2010 17:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Brad Goodman » 09 Aug 2011 04:26

Covert diplomacy: At India’s behest, Britain lobbies for LeT crackdown

India has apparently waged a covert diplomatic campaign to pressure Pakistan to rein in Jamat ud Dawa (JuD) – the charity wing of the Lashkar-e-Taiba militant group which New Delhi has blamed for the 2008 attacks on landmarks in Mumbai, The Express Tribune has learnt.

British diplomats have met senior Pakistani officials to convince them to crack down on JuD. Diplomats at the British missions in Islamabad and New Delhi had successful rounds of talks with Pakistani leaders in the last week of July, said diplomats privy to these talks.

The officials added that these talks might lead to the detention of JuD chief Hafiz Muhammad Saeed and a possible crackdown on his group.

Britain, which is home to a sizeable population of immigrants from South Asia, including Pakistan, has been facing threats from homegrown militants.

The British government has reservations about the JuD activities and the Punjab government’s alleged ‘soft corner’ for outlawed extremist groups, such as Sipah-e-Sahaba Pakistan (SSP) and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi (LeJ).

Last month, the Punjab government had released LeJ founder Malik Muhammad Ishaq, the self-confessed killer of over 70 people, mostly Shias. The move invited criticism from home and abroad.

The British government hopes it can convince Pakistan to address India’s concerns about Hafiz Saeed and restrict the activities of his group in Pakistan as well as in Indian Kashmir, the diplomats said.

Though the Pakistan-based LeT has been blamed for most violence in India, including the 2006 train attacks and the 2001 siege of Indian parliament, it was after the Mumbai attacks that New Delhi mounted pressure on Islamabad to move against JuD which is thought to be a façade for LeT.

India had called a ‘time-out’ in its snail-paced peace talks with Pakistan, called composite dialogue process in diplomatic jargon. Talks between the two neighbours have resumed, but India says Islamabad must bring the ‘perpetrators’ of the Mumbai attacks to justice if talks are to succeed.

Pakistan has conceded that the Mumbai attacks were plotted and partly launched from its soil. Subsequently, Islamabad put on trial seven suspects linked with LeT, including Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhvi.

Lakhvi was identified as the mastermind of the Mumbai attacks by David Coleman Headley, the American national who admitted in a US court that he had scouted targets for LeT in Mumbai.

Other than that, the counter-terrorism wing of a Pakistani federal agency has identified another 20 people for their suspected involvement in the attacks. All of them are affiliated with LeT.

“They (the new suspects) had allegedly provided logistical support and funds for the Mumbai attacks,” says a classified report a copy of which is available with The Express Tribune.

The suspects include 10 crew members of the two boats and the alleged captain of one vessel used by the gunmen to travel to Mumbai to launch the attacks that had killed over 160.

Nine of the gunmen were killed by the Indian security forces during the hours-long operation, while the lone surviving gunman, Mohammad Ajmal Kasab, has been sentenced to death by an Indian court. He has challenged the verdict in the Indian Supreme Court.

The prosecution of the suspects in Pakistan stalled after officials demanded that India allow Kasab to testify in the Pakistan court. New Delhi has turned down this request.


RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby RamaY » 09 Aug 2011 04:50

Altair wrote:Can any one give me a cost estimate of an operation involving 200 sorties of Su-30's,MiG-29UPG & Jaguars supported by Phalcon AEWCS with all the firepower needed?
My point is it cannot be more than what we or the entire world is paying each day.


We did some of those maths before.

Estimating the cost of Paki terror over past 20 years to be
- 80,000 lives (JK terror + Khalistan terror + assorted terror attacks)
- $250B economic cost (a 1% terror premium on GDP growth for past 20 years)
- loss of 2+ million Sq. Mile land (PoK and CoK)

This is more than a couple of nuke attacks.

An all out India war will not cost more than this.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby RamaY » 09 Aug 2011 04:52

Nihat wrote:
Altair wrote:Can any one give me a cost estimate of an operation involving 200 sorties of Su-30's,MiG-29UPG & Jaguars supported by Phalcon AEWCS with all the firepower needed?
My point is it cannot be more than what we or the entire world is paying each day.


A few million dollars (50-100) considering the theater of Ops. is just next door but question is what purpose will that solve. NOTHING IMHO..


That is tooooo low an estimate. I would put anywhere between $100-150B, and 10-20000 lives.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby svinayak » 09 Aug 2011 05:11

$1b TO $5b DOLLARS A DAY

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby shiv » 09 Aug 2011 06:43

Y I Patel wrote:So why are you now angry at USA for ignoring Indian interests? This is a material world. What has India done to further American interests? When USA asked India to help out in Iraq, it was our opening to form an anti-fundamentalist Islam coalition of our own. Instead, we chose the safe way of sitting it out in the sidelines. But history keeps giving us choices, and we now have to make another defining choice. Is USA a natural ally, past history notwithstanding? Is there an Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan (+China?) alliance looming on the horizon, a Nadir Shah redux in the making? Do we want a world where USA is diminished and India is not developed enough to fill the strategic vaccum? I know where I stand, but then, I have chosen to eat American salt. You have no such divided loyalties, and you are proud Rajputs. Quo Vadis?


I am glad that you have been candid about what salt you have eaten. I admire and appreciate your honesty and I bow to you personally, though not to your salt supplier.

Long before the final attack on Iraq, and shortly after 9-11, India offered assistance with Afghanistan. The USA took Pakistan's "help" and is now enjoying the fruits of that. I come from a bloodline that created and sustained the Vijaynagar empire. They too were good at coalitions and controlled the horse trade of Arabian horses on the sea coast to choke other empires. Let's not get into old Indian empires and whose help they took and who in turn took them. The past is a guideline, not a rule.

Do I want a weak US before India can fill those boots? India will fill those boots only if it is big enough, size and power of the US notwithstanding. It is not as if the US is going to wait till India grows before it shrinks. The US is already shrinking because of strategic mistakes. India cannot grow by Indians "excusing" the US for what it did. We might as well excuse Pakistan.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby shiv » 09 Aug 2011 06:49

Lisa wrote:Shiv, you are erroneous in your suggestion that North Korea is not in bad
shape. It's in very bad shape and a great deal of this situation is brought
about by the sanctions that you claim do not work.


Please don't get me wrong. I do not recall suggesting that NoKo is not in a bad shape. But I believe that you are making a mistake in being unable to see the power of a rich elite ruling over a destitute human society.

The leaders are rich and they lord over poor people and control their choices. That is what makes the leaders powerful. Nations do not have to have rich and healthy people like the USA to be powerful as long as they are able to rule their neighborhood. The mighty USA is able to do little about the chaos that NoKo is able to sow in its own neighbourhood.

The same holds true for Pakistan. Rich, powerful nuclear armed leaders with a destitute population. The fact that Pakis are poor and illiterate makes no difference to the fact that the US , sole superpower is powerless to control Pakistan or stop Pakistan from affecting its neighbours. Worse, the US has actively assisted Pakistan to meddle with its neighbors - but that is a separate subject.

habal
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6894
Joined: 24 Dec 2009 18:46

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby habal » 09 Aug 2011 06:55

darshhan wrote: Making India a police state.That is exactly what Pakistan wants.Infact even Bharat verma has said that instead of dealing with pakistan in lieu of terrorism , we are losing our own freedoms gradually as India hurtles towards becoming a police state.Today every mall has a metal detector.Getting a new cell phone connection is a big headache.Pakistan has definitely succeeded in raising our costs.


what if this is the actual goal & Pakistan only a pretext. Curtailing civil liberties of commons ties in with a certain global agenda. There is one school of thought that believes that Pakistan will survive intact as long as all civil liberties of Indians are eventually curtailed and we become reduced to the level of vassals owned by our politicians & corporates as in US. After this goal is achieved Pakistan will either cease to matter or cease to exist. The main impact of 9/11 was not felt on Saudi Arabia; the country of origin of the hijackers but esp on native air passengers via TSA. They were checking diapers on 90 yr olds.

Pranav
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5280
Joined: 06 Apr 2009 13:23

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Pranav » 09 Aug 2011 06:55

Y I Patel wrote:Shiv, Rohit

You are the proud inheritors of Rajput Strategic Vision. And you are operating with a millennium-old blind spot. The Rajputs, and by extension all Hindus, lost our collective smriti of coalition building 850 years ago, when the Solankis and Chauhans did not support each other or the Hindu Shahis against the Ghorid invasions. This strategic tamas reached its height when the Rajputs aided neither Vijayanagar nor the Marathas but chose to become the vassals of the Mughals to protect their H&D. In fact, your current snit is no different than that of the Rajput princes who did not ally with Marathas against Ahmed Shah because the Marathas installed a Mughal puppet instead of a Rajput one on the Delhi throne. You are entirely consistent with the glorious INC which decided to launch Quit India at the height of German and Japanese ascendance, and with that brilliant National Hero who travelled by German submarine to befriend the Japanese. And finally, you are the direct heirs of that glorious Durga Mata, the Iron Lady who forgot a millennium worth of invasions to side with an aggressor from Central Asia who took over Afghanistan. Luckily for you, the art and Dharma of coalition building was not lost to your natural allies.

You are misreading America’s observance of Coalition Dharma as their WKK equivalent of pandering to Pakistan. USA did not become the sole superpower because it has the best generals, most brilliant commandos or the best weapons – it did so because it was the best at building and holding temporary coalitions to fight the main and immediate threat. It became a superpower by building the coalition of WW-II, and it sustained that coalition by swallowing the sacrifice of all of Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union. It won the Cold War and became the sole superpower by building yet another coalition – one that spanned continents and religious divides. Again, the coalition contained strange bedfellows that USA made temporary alliances with; coalitions that required significant concessions to partners.

In 1979, India was the unquestioned hegemon in the subcontinent. India had a great equation with progressive and secular rulers of Afghanistan. Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan was an affront to India’s strategic interests. If USSR had won in Afghanistan, they would not have needed an invasion to control India. We would have elected communists to power, such has been their hold on our blinkered intellects. If we were saved, it was because USA built a coalition to fight off Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. As with their other great victories, they used temporary allies to win the war. And they followed their coalition dharma by conceding to Pakistani interests in Afghanistan (and tacitly, J&K) after the Soviets left. India’s craven acquiescence of the Soviet invasion was a monumental blunder, one which we paid for with blood in J&K. And we ended up supporting the losers, which then shut us out of Afghanistan.

So why are you now angry at USA for ignoring Indian interests? This is a material world. What has India done to further American interests? When USA asked India to help out in Iraq, it was our opening to form an anti-fundamentalist Islam coalition of our own. Instead, we chose the safe way of sitting it out in the sidelines. But history keeps giving us choices, and we now have to make another defining choice. Is USA a natural ally, past history notwithstanding? Is there an Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan (+China?) alliance looming on the horizon, a Nadir Shah redux in the making? Do we want a world where USA is diminished and India is not developed enough to fill the strategic vaccum? I know where I stand, but then, I have chosen to eat American salt. You have no such divided loyalties, and you are proud Rajputs. Quo Vadis?


YI Patel, I agree with you about focusing on the immediate threat, but your history is not accurate.

Soviets had no intention of invading Afghanistan. Brzezinski working with Zia started a proxy war which led the beleaguered Afghan govt to invite the Soviets.

As regards Iraq, Saddam was a friend who supported India on Kashmir, at a time when the US was sympathizing with the Hurriyat and their ISI backers. The Iraq project is a total fiasco, based on doctored intelligence, and has resulted in approx 1 million civilian casualties, as per a credible Lancet study.

Yes, we can and should build pragmatic coalitions. You can consume Amreeki salt, but be clear eyed about what we are dealing with.

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Airavat » 09 Aug 2011 07:02

Y I Patel wrote:This strategic tamas reached its height when the Rajputs aided neither Vijayanagar nor the Marathas

Talking about "strategic vision" was Vijaynagar located somewhere in North India or Central India to be in contact with any Rajput state? :mrgreen:

anjan
BRFite
Posts: 448
Joined: 08 Jan 2010 02:42

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby anjan » 09 Aug 2011 07:03

Y I Patel wrote:You are misreading America’s observance of Coalition Dharma as their WKK equivalent of pandering to Pakistan. USA did not become the sole superpower because it has the best generals, most brilliant commandos or the best weapons – it did so because it was the best at building and holding temporary coalitions to fight the main and immediate threat. It became a superpower by building the coalition of WW-II, and it sustained that coalition by swallowing the sacrifice of all of Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union. It won the Cold War and became the sole superpower by building yet another coalition – one that spanned continents and religious divides. Again, the coalition contained strange bedfellows that USA made temporary alliances with; coalitions that required significant concessions to partners.

Interesting theory this. Except you know they're paying the people who're training/paying/arming the people who're shooting them. So if the Pakistanis(and by extension the Afghan insurgency) are allies then who are they fighting in Afg? Who is this elusive main and immediate threat that the US & Pakistan are partnered against? Last I heard the only fighting Pakistan was doing was against the TTP. To me it sounds more like if the US decided to fund and arm the Soviet Union while fighting the East Germans during the Cold War, if we're really stretching your examples.

So why are you now angry at USA for ignoring Indian interests? This is a material world. What has India done to further American interests? When USA asked India to help out in Iraq, it was our opening to form an anti-fundamentalist Islam coalition of our own. Instead, we chose the safe way of sitting it out in the sidelines. But history keeps giving us choices, and we now have to make another defining choice. Is USA a natural ally, past history notwithstanding? Is there an Iran-Afghanistan-Pakistan (+China?) alliance looming on the horizon, a Nadir Shah redux in the making? Do we want a world where USA is diminished and India is not developed enough to fill the strategic vaccum? I know where I stand, but then, I have chosen to eat American salt. You have no such divided loyalties, and you are proud Rajputs. Quo Vadis?

No. They didn't "ignore" our interests. They directly aided(and continue to do so) in subverting our security. They arm and fund a state and organisation that pathologically hate us. We didn't help them invade the middle east =/= They gave them war material placing them on even plane with us =/= tacitly acquiesced to transfer of nuclear knowhow from China. If we were busy arming Cuba then there would be an equivalence. Pakistani terrorism is and has been perpetrated under an umbrella of conventional and nuclear capability that the US is directly and indirectly responsible for. With deliberate intent.

We don't want them to actively help us. It would be nice if they just bloody stopped hurting us. Of course coming from a view of American exceptionalism this may be a hard to understand.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby shiv » 09 Aug 2011 07:05

Cosmo_R wrote:Add to that Vietnam when LBJ asked for Indian help, Carter for condemnation of USSR invasion of Afghanistan, Ike for Chinese invasion of Tibet and USSR invasions of Hungary 1956 and LBJ again for Czechoslovakia in 1968.

Whatever the merits of US requests, we did not 'help'. We not just equivocated, we were hostile. GoI was terrified of its vote bank.


On the general topic of all the occasions on which the US asked for Indian help and India refused I want to point out that the US became and remained superpower without Indian assistance. The USA managed perfectly well without Indian help. It was India that arguably suffered for not helping the US.

Is it being suggested on here that India would not have suffered if it had helped the USA on all those previous occasions? If that argument is being made it only means exactly what I have been saying. The USA will viciously punish people who do not help them. Having faced and survived such punishment India owes the US nothing. India too has begged the US on many occasions in the past and received no help. So that is one more reason for not giving a damn about US interests.

if we are going to bring in the relevance of history then there is every reason for India to reject and spurn the US unless the US becomes demonstrably pro India. A USA that cannot control Pakistan or North Korea is hardly going to be able to exert pressure on India over and above the indirect suffering they have imposed on India over the decades.

abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby abhishek_sharma » 09 Aug 2011 07:08

-deleted
Last edited by abhishek_sharma on 09 Aug 2011 11:48, edited 2 times in total.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24264
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby SSridhar » 09 Aug 2011 07:15

Folks, take this general India-US discussion to the appropriate thread please.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby arun » 09 Aug 2011 08:06

Note the mention of BR Webmaster Jagan in this article by Pakistani newspaper, the News, on the shooting down of a civilian aircraft by the Pakistani Air Force during the 1965 War:

Pakistani pilot writes after 46 years to daughter of Indian pilot he shot down

gakakkad
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4475
Joined: 24 May 2011 08:16

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby gakakkad » 09 Aug 2011 08:44

Lisa wrote:

Look when able at the Indian Nuclear page on this formum and the
ongoing discussion on ENR and what the American are willing to do alone
and how they are attempting to use multilateral agencies be coerced into
arresting India's ability to move ahead with ENR. If as you say sanctions
do not work do you care to explain the anomaly, ie why this concern about
these American moves?


US is not trying to retard India's ENR tech. Our indigenous ENRT is not under the deal. US will not export its indigenous ENRT to anyone including India. (which may not be the most superior in the world) . Sanctions do not necessarily work. US attempts to prevent India from receiving cryogenic rocket engine were not successful . However we were actually lucky they made such an attempt. Because we now have or own cryogenic rocket engine besides the one the Russians supplied to us.
Last edited by SSridhar on 09 Aug 2011 10:50, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Just two posts above I said no more US-India relationship in this thread. There is another thread for that.

Y I Patel
BRFite
Posts: 710
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Y I Patel » 09 Aug 2011 10:48

Being a parochial Gujju bhai from Siddhraj Jaisingh's Karnavati, I always get confused about places south of the Vindhyas. But I have always wondered how it was possible for a Jai Singh to attack a Shivaji in vassalage of an Aurangzeb, but not for his ancestors to go to the aid of Vijayanagar when the Bahmani sultanats were razing it to the ground.

Also, I have known shivji long enough to have reported his exact caste and gotra to CIA. But Hakimullah has been atypically angry the last few TSP dhagas, and it even looks like he shouted johann out of the forum for saying what I am now saying. And now Rohit, who normally is not the angry type, is also getting angry.

So Hakimullah, per your recent posts a two bit entity like Pakistan gets bribed handsomely for following their own interests and paying lip service to the alliance with US. On the other hand, proud Suryavanshi India pays greivously in its most recent avatar, for not supporting US on several occassions. Now this Gujju bania is confused. Why is it not better for India to pay lip service to an alliance with US, and then be bribed handsomely instead of being the subject of such criminal neglect? If I may try some piskology of my own, is it that Indians are not over a colonial hangover and are afraid of getting conned by another set of baniyas? Perhaps we feel more comfortable in dealing with godless hunas?

My thesis is not that India has suffered because it did not ally with US. It is more of sorrow over what could have been, had it done so. Now there is going to be another decision - deal seperately with fundamentalist Islam, or bleed together.

Sridhar, please indulge me - this is about US-Pakistan, and I'll try not to be too sweeping with metaphors.
Last edited by SSridhar on 09 Aug 2011 10:52, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: So long as the discussion involves Pakistan, it is fine. Don't make it like that boy who had studied only about cows and the question was about the coconut tree.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby shiv » 09 Aug 2011 11:41

YIP the tone and tenor of my posts about my existing attitude towards US perfidy has been shriller for the last 2-3 months. Not because I have changed -but because the world has changed.

No one will believe me if I say I admire the US. But admiring the US is what everyone is expected to do. Only enemies of the US do not admire the US. They are supposed to be jealous of the US. These are the cliched observations that I have lived with for decades. This is BRF and this thread is about Pakistan, so it is absolutely right for anyone to be critical of India and Indian leadership with regard to mistakes and missed opportunities in dealing with Pakistan.

However the connection with the USA came up only when Indian mistakes and Indian missed opportunities were compared unfavorably with actions of the USA which was declared to be controlling and using Pakistan, and a myth was gradually built up on BRF that the US acts in its interests and actually controls events in Pakistan. Events of the last three months tell me that the US has neither been able to keep its own interests on top, but it has also failed to display the much advertised control of Pakistan. This tells me two separate things

1. The India-USA comparison is a fatuous one. India and the US have, as nations, related in different ways to Pakistan - ways that have put India and the US on opposite camps. But if India failed to solve its Pakistan problem, the US too seems incapable of doing that. Perhaps "hot air" is too harsh an expression to use when describing the US ability to control Pakistan.

2. The situation that now faces both the USA and India is something both countries realise and something that I believe more people on BRF ought to realise. Pakistan is a hard country. It is not a problem that can be easily solved and the future is extremely uncertain. As long as people on or off BRf imagine that the US has things under control there is a mistaken belief that control is possible. That is rubbish. My efforts on BRF in the last few weeks and months have been to show how weak the US hand is, and in comparison, how strong the hand of chaos is in Pakistan. It is not the Paki army, or ISI, or Islamists or Taliban that is controlling Pakistan. No one is in full control. It would be a grave error to see Pakistan as an entity that is magically controllable by the US and one that could somehow be managed by India if only India behaved like the US or acted like a great power.

The US has built up too big an aura for itself. Especially after the cold war the US declared itself winner and sole superpower. We have heard expressions like "Two countries for two building". These are all examples of mythbuilding. High hopes.

Pakistan is in trouble. We are also in trouble. The US is in trouble. Unkil is going to rescue no one. Unkil may pull out and lick his wounds and we will be left to handle things as we have always done. My view is more pessimistic than that of people who trust that the US will do teh right thing and will prevail. But I believe pessimists will survive.

The best hope is for the US to see its mistakes wrt to Pakistan and understand where the future must lie. That is a cryptic sentence. But it is up to the US to figure that one out. the US is plagued by bad leadership too, and that is why I am perfectly happy for Indian leaders to be cursed as weak and bad, but any claim that puts the US leadership as "great" and Indian leadership as bad makes my bullshit meter ring out loud.

kmkraoind
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3908
Joined: 27 Jun 2008 00:24

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby kmkraoind » 09 Aug 2011 12:21

US bars media from covering return of 30 dead soldiers killed in Afganistan - TOI

Deafening silence of US on its biggest loss is astonishing. For me, it seems like calm before a fierce storm. Well done Bakis, you have completed the next stop for your down hill skiing.


Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Lalmohan » 09 Aug 2011 12:43

kmkraoind wrote:US bars media from covering return of 30 dead soldiers killed in Afganistan - TOI

Deafening silence of US on its biggest loss is astonishing. For me, it seems like calm before a fierce storm. Well done Bakis, you have completed the next stop for your down hill skiing.


any word on stray stingers involved in this episode?

Sri
BRFite
Posts: 1327
Joined: 18 May 2005 20:19
Location: Earth

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 05, 20

Postby Sri » 09 Aug 2011 12:56

If whether a sanction by UN (sponsored by you know who) on Pakistan will make a diffrene or not is the question, then answer is absolutely. There is NO doubt about it. Ability of a nation state to transfer it's wealth from abroad to domestic institutions and vice verse is corner stone of global economic order. Specially a country like Pakistan which depends on foreign trade to produce energy and feed it's people.

Example in point the UN sanctions on Iran. Look at the way Iran is finding difficulty in getting payments from India. With huge trade surplus that Iran enjoys it can only except payments in dollars as Rupee payment is worthless for them. It took 6 months for India to transfer the money. By that time we had run the bills up to the tune of $6bn. Iran was forced to give this loan to our Oil Marketing companies interest free. This is a BIG deal. Why didn't they turn the tap off? Simply because no one else can transfer this much amount either.

International sanctions do work, and to think otherwise is incorrect. Ask the Iranian Oil minister who must have had sleepless nights for months.

Pakistan is even more fragile. It will be foolish for them to think China will be able to carry them through if the crisis does hit them. Total dependence on a single country for every need is expensive both monetarily and for H $ D.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AshishA, Lisa, plushyphen, ravikr, Sri and 45 guests