Consortium of Indian Defence Websites
https://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/
A Pakistani Facebook friend of mine recently confronted me following the Peshawar massacre and killings of civilians on the border by saying,
“Do you realise you have an evil government?”
“Hmm…”
“Why did you guys vote for such people?”
Note the attempted connection between Peshawar and GoI
I told the Pakistani categorically that I could not be held responsible for the possible evil deeds committed by my government. I did not vote for this government. In fact, I tried my best to stop them in my individual capacity.
Hmm..no surprises but it's quite revealing..these folks are trying to convince their masters and "higher-ups" that "Look janaab, I tried to stop Namo from coming to power, as you asked me to, despite my best efforts, the evil yeendus thwarted our plan..but please do not pull your support, I will continue to oppose them "in my individual capacity" and try and bring them down, all I need is your support and cooperation
.....
As I mentioned earlier, it is a fight between good and evil, love and hate.
No points for guessing who "evil" and "hate" refers to..likewise for "good" and "love"
Expect the Indian MSM to pick this up as part of *Aman ka tamasha* and add to it and present it to the Indian public as threat to peace and security in the region. Expect the noise, especially on the Indian side, to keep increasing with time as the MSM feels more and more confident to take on the current dispensation. Expect the equal-equal logic to become more brazen with time. I wouldn't be surprised if the Indian MSM starts pushing the Indian *meddling* in Bakistan more forcefully than the Baki media. What we've just witnessed in the terror boat story was just the trailer for things to come.Anujan wrote:Expect a slew of statements and articles in the Paki rags doing India--Pakistan equal equal, nuclear stability, Pakistan desires peace onlee, now that Kerry is in the region.
Amber G. wrote:
Why is Sharif crying..?
कभी आता था, उनके रोने पर प्यार।
अब उनके प्यार पर रोना आता है।
Nice Sir.The omnipresent geopolitical advantage of Pakistan. See how blatantly and arrogantly Pakistan plays its geographical card. It is entirely to Pakistan's advantage that problems persist in the region. This is one solid reason for breaking apart Pakistan.After the US pullout from Afghanistan, Pakistan can play either a negative or a positive role. The US still needs the support of Pakistan for bringing normalcy in Afghanistan. In the wake of recent threats from the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Pakistan has attained more importance. Mr Kerry, who is widely seen as pro-Pakistan, having authored the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Act for aid to Pakistan that is now in the doldrums, will further pursue good ties with Pakistan due to its geopolitical importance. . . . The US is in dire need of Pakistan’s political, diplomatic and military help to deal with the terror groups posing a serious threat to the region’s stability. It also wants to prevent the hegemony of China while in return Islamabad looks for military and economic assistance from Washington.
The whole editorial is about India and India-US relationship, not about what Pakistan needs to do to improve its own economy and security. And, purely transactional too. I do this to you and you give me military assistance to take on India. From that 1906 Mussalman delegation to Viceroy Minto, it has always been Hindu India that has been tormenting the Muslim elite of Ganga-Jamuna belt and PakistanThough successive Pakistani leaderships have always been pro-west, yet they have never been able to win the complete trust of the US. While safeguarding its own interests, the US is following a nuanced policy between India and Pakistan. Mainly two factors explain this phenomenon. First, China is in quest of attaining the status of a superpower, which the US wishes to contain. Second, the US views India favourably, both as a counterweight to the rise of China, as well as because of India’s huge emerging economy as a vast consumer market with untold business opportunities.
The reality is that US is involved with the whole world and most US politicians unless gifted with extradinary attention to details will not catch those nuances. It is a very likely case that Kerry confuses working boundary with LoC. Unless some one is familiar with the mischief pukis are playing recently by calling IB as working boundary, many would think working boundary refers to LoC.arun wrote:^^^ Good Spot.
Use of terminology “working boundary” by US Secretary of State Kerry is mischievous. The term “working boundary” is a concoction of recent vintage by the Islamic Republic of Pakistan for what India terms “International Border” aka “IB” that runs in Jammu & Kashmir. This is the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s way of not accepting Jammu & Kashmir is an integral part of India.
India needs to strongly protest the use of the term “working boundary” by the US Secretary of State.
In a blunt message to Pakistan, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar on Tuesday warned that India will take “proactive steps” to deal with proxy war by that country.
He also made it clear that for any dialogue to take place, Pakistan should first stop ceasefire violation and intrusion of terrorists.
“On proxy war, the government is very clear about what is happening. We have taken a stand and though I will not like to tell you what is the exact action we are taking...you will be able to see the difference in six months in actual figures,” he told a press conference here.
“One difference is already visible because this year the number of terrorists neutralised is about almost 65 per cent, 70 per cent more than that last year,” he said.
Mr. Parrikar said, “We want peace with our neighbours, but if there is an attempt for proxy war, we will take some proactive steps. What kind of proactive steps cannot be revealed in a press conference.
“But, I can assure you that we will ensure that enemy doesn’t show any interest in proxy war or the interest comes down,” he said.
To a question on dialogue with Pakistan, the Defence Minister said, “India’s position is very clear. The stand taken by the Ministry of External Affairs is clear. If any dialogue has to be done with Pakistan, they should first stop ceasefire violation and intrusion of terrorists.”
He said, “If it does not stop, then dialogue alone will not bring a solution. That should be very clear, intention expressed should be reflected in performance and delivery on the ground.”
Parrikar is turning into a bad boy!! He is saying: "MC...Tu aank bhi maraa..main tera loongaa.......BC."SSridhar wrote:Parrikar warns Pak of ‘proactive steps’ - The HinduIn a blunt message to Pakistan, Defence Minister Manohar Parrikar on Tuesday warned that India will take “proactive steps” to deal with proxy war by that country.
He also made it clear that for any dialogue to take place, Pakistan should first stop ceasefire violation and intrusion of terrorists.
“On proxy war, the government is very clear about what is happening. We have taken a stand and though I will not like to tell you what is the exact action we are taking...you will be able to see the difference in six months in actual figures,” he told a press conference here.
“One difference is already visible because this year the number of terrorists neutralised is about almost 65 per cent, 70 per cent more than that last year,” he said.
Mr. Parrikar said, “We want peace with our neighbours, but if there is an attempt for proxy war, we will take some proactive steps. What kind of proactive steps cannot be revealed in a press conference.
“But, I can assure you that we will ensure that enemy doesn’t show any interest in proxy war or the interest comes down,” he said.
To a question on dialogue with Pakistan, the Defence Minister said, “India’s position is very clear. The stand taken by the Ministry of External Affairs is clear. If any dialogue has to be done with Pakistan, they should first stop ceasefire violation and intrusion of terrorists.”
He said, “If it does not stop, then dialogue alone will not bring a solution. That should be very clear, intention expressed should be reflected in performance and delivery on the ground.”
The Indian army are not a bunch of mercenary sepoys to run around on orders from foreign armies. Rest is all bollocks. The americans created all the trouble there and India should create its own reputation in Afghanisthan untarnished by all the cretinous cr@p the US has pulled in Afghanistan in the past few decades with their rent-boy pakistan.Mr. Bush offered India to send troops to Afghanistan for some money which we promptly refused.
No tactical opportunities or strategic goal is worth India acting the lackey of a foreign power period, US included. It appears you have permitted your location in the US to permit relegating India to underdog poodledom. No thanks for your suggestion .SBajwa wrote:I remember back when Mr. Vajyapee was in power in 2001. Mr. Bush offered India to send troops to Afghanistan for some money which we promptly refused. GOI has a habit of consistently losing the tactical opportunities for strategic goals.
We lost nothing but the opportunity to fight in a country that's bedevilled invaders since forever, alongside 'partners' who would have left us holding the bag at the end of a dubious supply chain and an ever constricting geopolitical reality.SBajwa wrote:.....We lost a god send opportunity to join the NATO in Afghanistan and circle the Bakis to finish them. Now they are back and will try to do it again!! The same old policy of Prithviraj Chauhan (and people before him) to not follow and finish the offender rather wait and watch!! Eventually if not destroyed Bakis will enslave us! So the best thing is to grab the tactical opportunities and at least move an inch towards a bakiless future? I guess you guys and long GOI also believe that a strong and prosperous bakistan is in India's interest!
SBajwa, If the americans could not finish them on their own, what makes you think that Indians operating under american orders would have done the job? The only thing it would have achieved is provided Pakistan more excuses to attack India and validate their "strategic depth" nonsense, which is not at all in India's interest.Once again!!! We lost a god send opportunity to join the NATO in Afghanistan and circle the Bakis to finish them.
Altair wrote:Indian Army is at least kept away from Americanization by prosetylization. Do you want IA to hail Mary instead of Bharat Maa? Our political parties,our media is not Americanized enough for you now? In hindsight this was best decision taken by Hajpayee.
I think there can be more interpretations then just a name calling.arun wrote:No tactical opportunities or strategic goal is worth India acting the lackey of a foreign power period, US included. It appears you have permitted your location in the US to permit relegating India to underdog poodledom. No thanks for your suggestion .SBajwa wrote:I remember back when Mr. Vajyapee was in power in 2001. Mr. Bush offered India to send troops to Afghanistan for some money which we promptly refused. GOI has a habit of consistently losing the tactical opportunities for strategic goals.
Indian soldiers operating on the orders of their government. If you have surrounded your enemy from two sides who do you think has advantage?by Tuvuluan
SBajwa, If the americans could not finish them on their own, what makes you think that Indians operating under american orders would have done the job? The only thing it would have achieved is provided Pakistan more excuses to attack India and validate their "strategic depth" nonsense, which is not at all in India's interest.
You are assuming the Americans would not turn on India and take Pakistan's side on the flip of a coin -- I am sure they would have. India did not have the werewithal either in its leadership or politically or militarily for such a decision back then (not that it is much better now) and it would have only entwined India with the US's problems in the region and allowed US to get their claws into India's strategic decision making. No reason for that -- India should choose the place and time of where and who it wants to fight, and not get embroiled in asinine wars of foreign powers that seem to be funding the very enemy they are fighting in Afghanisthan by providing 10Billion dollars to the very people who core supporters of "al qaeda".India is the only local power and should have shown the Bakis their place with boots on Ground (Sikh Infantry and Sikh light infantry are excellent for Afghanistan region along with a mechanized regiment).
India is much more needed by USA than bakistan! USA under kissinger and Nixon could not dare to cow us down! now they can? I doubt it!! Bakis have nothing to offer to USA except their nukes., after which they will lose their existence.by Tuvuluan
You are assuming the Americans would not turn on India and take Pakistan's side on the flip of a coin -- I am sure they would have.
and when will that be? Indians leaders are suffering from Gandhiism and will never make pragmatic and rational decisions despite all opportunities!No reason for that -- India should choose the place and time of where and who it wants to fight,
I believe you misunderstand the US's compulsions and their world view -- it is not about whether the US can "cow down" India. They cannot and that is not the point I am trying to make. The point is whether US's alliance will be tactical or not, and given how they are funding pakistan even after it has been proven that the pakis were aiding "al qaeda" and providing them sanctuary and double-crossing the US, it would be simplistic to assume that the US would stop doing things not in India's interests just because India got involved in the US's GOAT (Global Offence Against Terrorism) in Afghanisthan.India is much more needed by USA than bakistan! USA under kissinger and Nixon could not dare to cow us down! now they can? I doubt it!! Bakis have nothing to offer to USA except their nukes., after which they will lose their existence.
That will be when Pakistan has the least number of powerful allies that are currently willing to aid pakistan in its existential war against India. But for Pakistan rentboys to be useful to foreign powers, Pakistan needs to be in one piece (in terms of administration) and in control of their entire territory -- the moment the paki army and "civilian government" lose the ability to influence large parts of pakistan, they are no longer useful to their allies any more than a criminal mafia is useful to world powers (which they are on occasion).and when will that be? Indians leaders are suffering from Gandhiism and will never make pragmatic and rational decisions despite all opportunities!
SBajwa, You speak as if that is a bad thing -- these "good talibs" with nukes, i.e. the paki army, are currently only interested in targeting India. But outside of paki army control, these good talibs have no reason to follow the paki army agenda, the rest of the world is open for targeting too. Let us all share pakistan's pure islamic peace and love with the western world, and not be selfish about it.Let's wish that it is soon that Bakis lose their writ over entire territory but their bases and hope that they do not start distributing their nukes to their "good" talibs.
BVKGdeejay wrote:Amber G. wrote:
Why is Sharif crying..?
MODERATOR NOTE:arun wrote:No tactical opportunities or strategic goal is worth India acting the lackey of a foreign power period, US included. It appears you have permitted your location in the US to permit relegating India to underdog poodledom. No thanks for your suggestion .SBajwa wrote:I remember back when Mr. Vajyapee was in power in 2001. Mr. Bush offered India to send troops to Afghanistan for some money which we promptly refused. GOI has a habit of consistently losing the tactical opportunities for strategic goals.
