Rogue nuke out of Pakistan - article by KS and reactions

JCage
BRFite
Posts: 1562
Joined: 09 Oct 2000 11:31

Postby JCage » 24 May 2006 17:53

Amen sir.

This partly stems from our naive belief that since India won its independence through its morally superior non violence, the same can be applied anywhere, and by displaying this moral superiority of ahimsa, we are somehow superior to the boorish Americans, or whatever damn Imperialists.

No idea of India's own past and what a close shave it was for India, many a time to have escaped from becoming one large Pakistan.

Any mention of culture and religion, and it becomes rabid nationalism. In the meanwhile the only ones who mention it are the far right, elements of which are so blessed that they wont do anything against Pakistan, no sirree! They will sit and wage their mini-wars in Indian cities.
Meanwhile now that Pakistan has nukes, an impotent Indian Govt is fearful of letting the public develop a consensus to "take care" of Pakistan- gee, that would start something which can now cause big problems.

Super state of affairs. Even now India has no clue of how to deal with Pakistan.

And the US is continuing to mollycoddle the "Wayward child". Who knows when Americans will wake up and realize the viper they have amidst them.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 24 May 2006 18:20

The big difference between BRF and India is that Indians by and large are admirers of US roads, efficiency, innovation, wealth and generosity


(At some of the nodes of such great things are Indians.)

Even now India has no clue of how to deal with Pakistan


And, it is against Pakistan that we have the best response. We have no policy WRT BD, Nepal (IF it fails), etc.

It is a combination of things, the main one in the present predicament is that our political leaders are blind and deaf to the advice given by our scientists and forces. We are busy building an image of a "responsible member of the international society".

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 24 May 2006 19:03

If it took so long to understand the shenanigans of TSP and its rogue Xerox Khan Father of Bum who went to on to father Multi Nations bums for experts like KS, then God be with India.
BR with out the services of RAW data or other intelligent inputs could infer what is likely to happen…. Then more processing power BR

One also needs to reflect on the complicity of unkil in the whole process to understand
What lies beneath ( good movie)]

Keep at a safe distance and that too watchful

RajGuru
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 15 Sep 2004 11:41
Location: South of Musi, Deccan Plateau

Postby RajGuru » 24 May 2006 20:24

Rye wrote:Rajguru wrote:
India is not in top 3 targets. India is outranked by Israel, US and UK.


Rajguru, could you please explain why this is the case? I am not sure this is true.


Rye ji
This is my understanding. A nuke is too valuable for AQ. If one is not in the official numbers of Pakistan then that means AQ would have hands on it. The "Egyptian" and the "Sheikh" would not let it explode on India. Their HIT LIST is 1.Israel 2.US 3.UK. This list is not my invention but spelled out by Dr.Z himself in one of his videos. Their priorities wont change that easily.
Now some of us are saying that its the paki military which would sneak in a nuke. I say it was possible 3 or 4 years ago. A lot has changed in the past 3 years. A free nuke in Paki hands simply means a nuke in AQ hands. AQ needs a nuke to explode on those three nations than on India.
All the peace process and the Siachen would melt away if a nuke goes off. Its negative progress for pakis and it violates their "kill by a thousand cuts" rule. JMT

merlin
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2155
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: NullPointerException

Postby merlin » 24 May 2006 20:32

Actually it makes more than enough sense for Al Q to smuggle in a nuke into India and explode it.

1. India will not retaliate (not in its nature and there will be plausible deniability - plausible to the world that is)

2. It will serve to scare Israel/US/West into granting major, major concessions by threatening that they will be next. After all who's to know whether Al Q had only one nuke which they used on India or there are others hidden in their cavernous robes.

RajGuru
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 15 Sep 2004 11:41
Location: South of Musi, Deccan Plateau

Postby RajGuru » 24 May 2006 22:03

NRao wrote:IF the AQ group has the nukes, then that list will be mor eimportant than India.
IF however, Pakistan has to make a decision whom to use a nuke on, then India would be on top of the list.


Pakistan would make the decision for the greater islamic cause. The usual H&D. As a self appointed protector of Islam the paki military would oblige AQ chief to let the nuke go off in those three countries other than India.
Unless of course as merlin states they could first let it go in India just to scare the rest of the world. Then again they should have sufficient number up their sleeves to demonstrate it. My premise was that they dont have more than 3 nukes. If they have more than three then my logic fails.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 24 May 2006 22:12

JCage wrote:How long will this asinine state of affairs last, Lord alone knows.
National Interests are most defined by officials in power, who perceive a nation's interests in a specific way. These interests are not necessarily long term, but how these are perceived to be in the "current" interests of the nation. The perceived interests are highly conditioned by the individual in power and the situation of the day. E.G: Nixon/Kissinger decisions in 1971 on the Indo-Pak war, which did not make any sense to India - but did make a lot of sense from a US perspective in the short term for the President, who's center piece of foreign policy was to draw China away from the USSR.

So, the answer to that question is, If India wants US interests to be in alignment with Indian interests, India has to be able to make a broad and deep connection with US interests around economic, security and geo-political interests. Values and righteousness takes a second seat. Only a deep relationship on those lines will ensure a sane state of affairs. Even after having these deep connnections in allignment, the political capital and goodwill should be used by leaders in the right way at the right time. The question is How important and deep are these interest based relationships today? It seems IRoP takes a lead on the matter of geo-politics and security and China wins hands down on economic matters. The only area, where India scores high on is "values", which unfortunately is not valued much.

Dnirody
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 May 2006 21:48

Re: Rogue nuke out of Pakistan - article by KS and reactions

Postby Dnirody » 24 May 2006 22:18

[quote="shiv"]The following article has been linked from the News section of BR. It is by KS and I hope there is no parallel discussion going on. The topic is too important to ignore - but I wll post some of my own thoughts in a separate post.

Pity K. Subramanyam. The Cold War is over but, eagerly grasping at any available straw, he continues tilting at the windmill that is the US. Don Quixote pales in comparison. It is a fine irony that he looks to, of all things, the American Enterprise Institute, repository of the neo-conservative, the bumbling amateurs who with a reverse Midas touch have turned almost everything to lead with their ham-handed touch. I cannot say that I personally feel any great sympathy for the good general general (to reprise W's description) but it's a trifle simplistic to put everything on him, though granted that he is still around which is more than can be said for ZAB or the last general general to grace the gaddi in Iislamabad, both of them known either for pandering to Wahhabi money or/and dreaming of the Islamic Bomb.

The article totally overlooks what ought to be a natural reflex, that Washington no doubt is hatching contingency plans if an INDIAN nuke goes missing or indeed what to do should at some point New Delhi join the ranks of The Threat. It is worth noting that these days this may be as simple as not voting with the US on, say, the IAEA or at the UN or coyly escaping the enveloping, choking, embrace of the Pentagon. Further, the attitude of New Delhi to the US today has absolutely no bearing on the formulation of contingencies, perhaps someone ought to focus some attention on that. An especial peeve of mine is the use of 'existential', I know that its usage has become a fad, thanks to the 'existential' threat Iran supposedly (but in reality does not have) poses to Israel but that's hardly an excuse to trot it out in a misguided attempt to demonstrate erudition.

"existential blackmail has three components- the large scale presence of Jehadis in Pakistan, a reputation for pan-Islamic orientation among intelligence establishments, scientists and the Army, and proved attempts originating in Pakistan and aimed at the US for using WMD"

Really? Large-scale presence meaning what? Large numbers of observant believers or AK-wielding militants? Pan-Islamic is a non-idea that does not exist outside a vague sense of grievance that divers infidels are bent on oppressing the humble mussalman, humiliating him and generally being villainous all the way from North America to, say, Indonesia. And there is proof that Pakistan is a/the base for WMD aimed at the US? I'd have thought that Mr Subrahmanyam might want to concentrate a little less on worrying about the US and more about poor old Bharat Mata that has the God-given chance to be right next door to its renegade provinces gifted with a fictional independence by the power of which the US is an effective successor state.

"General Aslam Beg elaborated on the advice he had given to the Iranians. Whoever hits Iran, hit Israel and destroy it. He boasted that his strategy for Pakistan was, no matter who hits his country, he would hit India."

Dear me, Pakistani general officers are THAT dumb? Well, this poor Beg(gar) appears to forget that Tehran's interest for the Palestinians and its principled support for them would get in the way of any military action, assuming that a significant campauign could be mounted -- as is NOT the case...Not to mention that the likelihood of Israel striking Iran is somewhat higher than any action in the opposite direction. Beg may have wet dreams of Military Conquest but if he sees himself as a Latter-Day Ghazi he'd do well to go knock down a few pegs and have a few lady bodyguards wave a fan or three over him.

"How long the US will put up with Pakistani blackmail? Will the US be able to keep blackmail under manageable levels or will it someday or other breach the limits of US tolerance? Will US succeed in democratising Pakistan under these circumstances or will it have to reconcile itself to successive army regimes flaunting its linkages to jehadis? These are the issues that need to be addressed in Indo-US Track II deliberations."

Hubris. The idea that the US is interested is disucssing with India what to do with any aspect of Pakistan is, frankly, ludicruous. The style of this administration, like AA its predecessors, is my way or the highway. Previous dispensations may have been somewhat subtle but this is not the way of Team Bush. Democratisation? Don't make me laugh. There is a difference between a ZAB or his annoying daughter or Nawaz Sharif and a prancing uniformed popinjay? Come now, please...

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 24 May 2006 22:20

RajGuru wrote:Now some of us are saying that its the paki military which would sneak in a nuke. I say it was possible 3 or 4 years ago. A lot has changed in the past 3 years. A free nuke in Paki hands simply means a nuke in AQ hands. AQ needs a nuke to explode on those three nations than on India.
All the peace process and the Siachen would melt away if a nuke goes off. Its negative progress for pakis and it violates their "kill by a thousand cuts" rule. JMT
Are you saying that the Pakistani Army will act in a sane manner, especially if there is plausible deniability.... :?: I would not be so sure, Au contraire, I would bet on it.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 24 May 2006 22:20

If India wants US interests to be in alignment with Indian interests, India has to be able to make a broad and deep connection with US interests around economic, security and geo-political interests. Values and righteousness takes a second seat. Only a deep relationship on those lines will ensure a sane state of affairs. Even after having these deep connnections in allignment, the political capital and goodwill should be used by leaders in the right way at the right time. The question is How important and deep are these interest based relationships today? It seems IRoP takes a lead on the matter of geo-politics and security and China wins hands down on economic matters. The only area, where India scores high on is "values", which unfortunately is not valued much.


IOW GUBO is the mantra :D

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 24 May 2006 22:37

plausible deniability


:lol:

In the Indian sub continent Pakistan cannot make that statement and get away. It is the most stupid thing I have ever heard WRT a nuke. IF a nuke blows up in India, Pakistan goes down. IF Pakistan fires a nuke, China goes down.

IF a Muslim organization has a nuke, it is the responsiblity of Pakistan to control them here and now. India should never entertain the concept of "plausible deniability".

When a nuke explodes in India, to hell with every think tank in the world.

This thing called "plausible deniability" is similar to "responsible member of teh international community" - India seems to be the only one to follow that concept and pay for it. Even the US is not a responsible member, and, I do not see ANY othernation even talking of that.

No space for weak thinking IMHO.
Last edited by NRao on 24 May 2006 22:41, edited 1 time in total.

Omar
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 30 Aug 2005 07:03
Location: cavernous sinus

Postby Omar » 24 May 2006 22:39

Why is there anything special about the timing of the publication of the op-ed other than the fact that AEI came out w/a piece of analysis that mirrors what has been known in India's intelligence and military community?

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 24 May 2006 22:40

John Snow wrote:
If India wants US interests to be in alignment with Indian interests, India has to be able to make a broad and deep connection with US interests around economic, security and geo-political interests. Values and righteousness takes a second seat. Only a deep relationship on those lines will ensure a sane state of affairs. Even after having these deep connnections in allignment, the political capital and goodwill should be used by leaders in the right way at the right time. The question is How important and deep are these interest based relationships today? It seems IRoP takes a lead on the matter of geo-politics and security and China wins hands down on economic matters. The only area, where India scores high on is "values", which unfortunately is not valued much.


IOW GUBO is the mantra :D
Even GUBO would not do it, it has to be an allignment of interests. The sooner we get this the better off we will be. E.G: Taiwan can do all the GUBO it wants but at the end of the day will the US really intervene against a strong China, where the US has deep economic interests many times the value of its investments in Taiwan? After all the US is only obligated to support Taiwan....Support is not clearly defined.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 24 May 2006 22:43

NRao wrote:
plausible deniability


:lol:

In the Indian sub continent Pakistan cannot make that statement and get away. It is the most stupid thing I have ever heard WRT a nuke. IF a nuke blows up in India, Pakistan goes down. IF Pakistan fires a nuke, China goes down.

IF a Muslim organization has a nuke, it is the responsiblity of Pakistan to control them here and now. India should never entertain the concept of "plausible deniability".

When a nuke explodes in India, to hell with every think tank in the world.

This thing called "plausible deniability" is similar to "responsible member of teh international community" - India seems to be the only one to follow that concept and pay for it. Even the US is not a responsible member, and, I do not see ANY othernation even talking of that.

No space for weak thinking IMHO.
I agree with your sentiments but lack the confidence in my leaders to affirm the same.

Dnirody
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 May 2006 21:48

Postby Dnirody » 24 May 2006 22:44

US interests can never be identical with Indian interests, nor can there exist a truly equal partnership on any level. There is no reason to believe that Washington is all of a sudden going to renounce its mantra of 'US leadership' where this means a simple dictation to subordinates what their bit roles are, on an a la carte basis. There is a 'debate' on whether China is a friend or a competitor of the US? It is a mark of how low India ranks in US eyes that it is not deemed to be either the first or the second. If India crops up somewhere, it is typically as a 'strategic' counterweight to China. Now, should this mean that Indian interests are served by acting as a patsy for Washington this is the partnership between a horse and its rider. No prizes for guessing who is what.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 24 May 2006 22:49

Rajguru saab, I see what you are saying. I think we cannot assume that pakis have only 2-3 nukes. They have as many as the chinese are willing to provide them at one time. I agree with NRao's earlier post that it depends on who controls the nukes and the object of the Paki Army's hatred -- if the "peace process" is used as a ploy by the GoI to do nothing, the pakis will be tempted to use it against India, but if we are lucky and the pakis are royally screwed by the US/UK combine, then India will fall off their radar, and they will transfer nukes to the mythical "Al Qaeda" and thereby achieve plausible deniability in another terrorist attack against the US just like they did with the 9/11 incident. But the US/UK combine has already decided to be the "lesser enemy" of the pakis, but the mistake they are making is in not comprehending the "we are the saviours of islam" mindset of the paki RAPE/army/jihadis. For this reason, I think that a US attack on Iran will be beneficial to India as it will divert the jihadis attention away from India....but then India seems to be throwing in its lot with the US, and if that happens, then the Iran war is not a good idea from India's POV. Too many variables at this time....


In the Indian sub continent Pakistan cannot make that statement and get away. It is the most stupid thing I have ever heard WRT a nuke. IF a nuke blows up in India, Pakistan goes down. IF Pakistan fires a nuke, China goes down.


NRao ji,
If the pakis fire a nuke armed missile, then there is no question of deniability. But what if the nuke is brought into India in pieces and then detonated? India has a massive porous border on all sides, and the pakis have unrestricted access via Nepal and BD, even if the Indo-pak border is sealed shut.

IF a Muslim organization has a nuke, it is the responsiblity of Pakistan to control them here and now. India should never entertain the concept of "plausible deniability".


What if this muslim organization is SIMI or some other "Indian" muslim organization? Pakis can achieve plausible deniability by shifting the blame on "internal civil war groups" in India, no?
Last edited by Rye on 24 May 2006 22:53, edited 1 time in total.

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5219
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Postby ShauryaT » 24 May 2006 22:50

Dnirody wrote:US interests can never be identical with Indian interests, nor can there exist a truly equal partnership on any level. There is no reason to believe that Washington is all of a sudden going to renounce its mantra of 'US leadership' where this means a simple dictation to subordinates what their bit roles are, on an a la carte basis. There is a 'debate' on whether China is a friend or a competitor of the US? It is a mark of how low India ranks in US eyes that it is not deemed to be either the first or the second. If India crops up somewhere, it is typically as a 'strategic' counterweight to China. Now, should this mean that Indian interests are served by acting as a patsy for Washington this is the partnership between a horse and its rider. No prizes for guessing who is what.
China has earned its right to be in such a debate by engaging with the US economy and managing its security and geo-political interests, while India has not, yet.

Dnirody
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 May 2006 21:48

Postby Dnirody » 24 May 2006 23:04

ShauryaT wrote:
Dnirody wrote:] China has earned its right to be in such a debate by engaging with the US economy and managing its security and geo-political interests, while India has not, yet.


China has not merely engaged the US economy. To hear the loud complaining from quarters in the US you'd suppose that Beijing is trying to do to Washington with low-priced goods what Mexico is allegedly trying to do with Texas, California and Arizona. Not to mention that China does not wonder what the US would like it to have as security and geo-political interests first and then try to tailor its own policies second. India, I'll grant you, has skewed priorities because of one reason, a fixation with its western border where may be found a stumbling near-failing state. This is still largely true.

Dnirody
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 8
Joined: 24 May 2006 21:48

Postby Dnirody » 24 May 2006 23:05

ShauryaT wrote:
Dnirody wrote:] China has earned its right to be in such a debate by engaging with the US economy and managing its security and geo-political interests, while India has not, yet.


China has not merely engaged the US economy. To hear the loud complaining from quarters in the US you'd suppose that Beijing is trying to do to Washington with low-priced goods what Mexico is allegedly trying to do with Texas, California and Arizona. in Hispanic population. Not to mention that China does not wonder what the US would like it to have as security and geo-political interests first and then try to tailor its own policies second. India, I'll grant you, has skewed priorities because of one reason, a fixation with its western border where may be found a stumbling near-failing state. This is still largely true.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 24 May 2006 23:05

Innate urge to be called strategic partner, natural allies, synergies of largest and greatest democracies and the falling for Basmati Rice ( How wonderful it could be falling into arms of a woman with out falling into her hands) are indicators of our urge to glow in the shadows of a power.

The nearest analogy is like sage Viswamitra looking for recognition by Vashista as ‘Brhama Rishi ‘ when he was already one (latently)

Strategic partnership in order to contain China is contingent on relations between PRC and Unkil being adversarial which may not always be as such. (as can be seen when TSP issues come to fore , both unkil and PRC are hand in glove in such matters)

India as a partner because of its own unique position and weight is what should be desired.

Why does TSP endear itself to Unkil simply because of its own unique position.

Now we screwed ourselves with Iran vote assuming unkil would be true love , but it is not to be , now the J18 is so full of conditions that have been added or unearthed on the fly, and we may not know many more skeletons till some fine day unkil marches into the bedrooms of BARC looking for radio active jelliy being used…

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 24 May 2006 23:06

Innate urge to be called strategic partner, natural allies, synergies of largest and greatest democracies and the falling for Basmati Rice ( How wonderful it could be falling into arms of a woman with out falling into her hands) are indicators of our urge to glow in the shadows of a power.

The nearest analogy is like sage Viswamitra looking for recognition by Vashista as ‘Brhama Rishi ‘ when he was already one (latently)

Strategic partnership in order to contain China is contingent on relations between PRC and Unkil being adversarial which may not always be as such. (as can be seen when TSP issues come to fore , both unkil and PRC are hand in glove in such matters) :x

India as a partner because of its own unique position and weight is what should be desired.

Why does TSP endear itself to Unkil simply because of its own unique position.

Now we screwed ourselves with Iran vote assuming unkil would be true love , but it is not to be , now the J18 is so full of conditions that have been added or unearthed on the fly, and we may not know many more skeletons till some fine day unkil marches into the bedrooms of BARC looking for radio active jelliy being used…

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 24 May 2006 23:12

If the pakis fire a nuke armed missile, then there is no question of deniability. But what if the nuke is brought into India in pieces and then detonated? India has a massive porous border on all sides, and the pakis have unrestricted access via Nepal and BD, even if the Indo-pak border is sealed shut.


YOU have answered your own question. SIMI or anyone else is not able to make nukes. ALL of them, including AQ has to get it from someone who has made in the past.

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

Postby svinayak » 24 May 2006 23:42

ShauryaT wrote:
John Snow wrote:
If India wants US interests to be in alignment with Indian interests, India has to be able to make a broad and deep connection with US interests around economic, security and geo-political interests. Values and righteousness takes a second seat. Only a deep relationship on those lines will ensure a sane state of affairs. Even after having these deep connnections in allignment, the political capital and goodwill should be used by leaders in the right way at the right time. The question is How important and deep are these interest based relationships today? It seems IRoP takes a lead on the matter of geo-politics and security and China wins hands down on economic matters. The only area, where India scores high on is "values", which unfortunately is not valued much.


IOW GUBO is the mantra :D
Even GUBO would not do it, it has to be an allignment of interests. The sooner we get this the better off we will be. E.G: Taiwan can do all the GUBO it wants but at the end of the day will the US really intervene against a strong China, where the US has deep economic interests many times the value of its investments in Taiwan? After all the US is only obligated to support Taiwan....Support is not clearly defined.


ShauryaT wrote:
Dnirody wrote:US interests can never be identical with Indian interests, nor can there exist a truly equal partnership on any level. There is no reason to believe that Washington is all of a sudden going to renounce its mantra of 'US leadership' where this means a simple dictation to subordinates what their bit roles are, on an a la carte basis. There is a 'debate' on whether China is a friend or a competitor of the US? It is a mark of how low India ranks in US eyes that it is not deemed to be either the first or the second. If India crops up somewhere, it is typically as a 'strategic' counterweight to China. Now, should this mean that Indian interests are served by acting as a patsy for Washington this is the partnership between a horse and its rider. No prizes for guessing who is what.
China has earned its right to be in such a debate by engaging with the US economy and managing its security and geo-political interests, while India has not, yet.



ALso factor in race which is important in the geopolitical situation. Han race has decided to be subservient to the saxon race for the some time.
Last edited by svinayak on 24 May 2006 23:49, edited 1 time in total.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 24 May 2006 23:42

NRao wrote:
YOU have answered your own question. SIMI or anyone else is not able to make nukes. ALL of them, including AQ has to get it from someone who has made in the past.


Ah, I see what you are saying...basically, what is saving us it the inherent backwardness and ignorance of the islamists...the only islamists who can end up achieving such abilities to hurt India will be Indian islamists going through the Indian education system and specialize in nuke tech.

Alok_N
BRFite
Posts: 608
Joined: 30 Jul 2004 19:32
Location: Hidden Gauge Sector

Postby Alok_N » 24 May 2006 23:45

looks like I am too late for the "reply to neilg" party ...

in case neilg hasn't had enough, I will be happy to provide my one-line Paki Policy ...

"treat pakistan as south china and things will be clear" ....

RajGuru
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 31
Joined: 15 Sep 2004 11:41
Location: South of Musi, Deccan Plateau

Postby RajGuru » 24 May 2006 23:46

Rye ji
Chinese hate us, no doubt but they would not be tempted to give pakis their nuke to sneak into India. They have too many friends in India at the moment. They dont need any external factors to change the status. Their friends in India are doing the job well for them at the moment. Their nuke is out of question. They will loose more than gain.
US can identify the origin of the HEU if the nuke goes off. That information will reach us if need arises.Pakistani army will not use the weapon which has any Pakistani Uranium.
Reason is simple: It will be too obvious. They will be fried.
Yes the Paki military can still detonate and get away, smuggling RA-115's they bought from the mafia after the breakup. Hameed Gul did talk about them, I remember.

p_saggu
BRFite
Posts: 1058
Joined: 26 Nov 2004 20:03

Postby p_saggu » 24 May 2006 23:53

Plausible Deniablility


Just to give an example in our and Pakistan's context. We may have seen it being busted before... The few moments that india's parliamentarians spent shitless when the parliament was under attack by the terrorists, blew away PD for pakistan, as it would if India or india's interests ever got nuked. I think india has made that amply clear to everyone.

No news though on what India has told the Pakistanis (In response to the things that Gen Beig mentioned) should be interesting to know :twisted:

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 24 May 2006 23:55

.....inherent backwardness and ignorance of the islamists......


No.

What I am saying is that I want is ALL Indians (including Indian Muslims) to sleep well.

Making life simple is my goal. Plausible whatever does not.

SO, here is my rule, no matter what, IF a nuke explodes within India then Pakistan is responsible.

Forget nukes, I would include reactors and dams too.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 25 May 2006 00:04

Ryeji,

Gen Beg(sp? sorry), has done exactly the same. No matter who attempts to destroy Pakistani nukes, he holds India responsible. In short no PD - even though we have no plans on making briefcase or dirty bombs.

Outside of Indiacentric, this concept of PD is very dangerous for anyone who accepts it. Not worth it.

It does make a huge difference to the Paksitanis and Think tanks. Bhashan ke liye. And, to corner India. Other than that it has no utility value.

neilg
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 5
Joined: 14 Apr 2006 22:50

Postby neilg » 25 May 2006 00:21

Alok N, we can always do with some humor . We can restart the party.

Rye
BRFite
Posts: 1183
Joined: 05 Aug 2001 11:31

Postby Rye » 25 May 2006 00:21

Gen Beg(sp? sorry), has done exactly the same. No matter who attempts to destroy Pakistani nukes, he holds India responsible. In short no PD - even though we have no plans on making briefcase or dirty bombs.

Outside of Indiacentric, this concept of PD is very dangerous for anyone who accepts it. Not worth it.


NRaoji,

I absolutely agree. PD is self-defeating, but the actions of our politicos and their goody-two-shoes "what will the international community say" attitude is what motivated me to push this line of possibilities. Also, I don't think the GoI has stated such a policy of retaliation in such clear terms as you have, which is why I am harping on PD, since the GoI has not explicitly ruled that out as irrelevant.

It does make a huge difference to the Paksitanis and Think tanks. Bhashan ke liye. And, to corner India. Other than that it has no utility value.


Agreed. As long as the GoI has stated such a policy to the Pakis and chinese, even if only in private, that should suffice.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 50757
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby ramana » 25 May 2006 01:10

neilg, It has to be some other thread.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Johann » 25 May 2006 01:17

Bin Laden and Al Qaeda have gone through a lot of trouble to have a fatwa issued in 2003 governing the use of WMDs.

The fatwa essentially states that the Quran and Hadith do not support a distinction between WMDs and conventional weapons. In other words their use must be governed by the same Islamic rules of warfare. It states that the US for example can be held responsible for 10 million Muslim deaths, and so Muslims are entitled to kill an equivalent number of Americans, including civilians regardless of sex and age.

Bin Laden has issued a number of messages offering a truce and negotiations on one hand, and on the other threatening the most dire destruction through unspecified means to both America and Europe. By the Salafi jihadi rules of war, he's entirely entitled, and in fact obligated to use WMDs within his reach against the Americans (within that 10 million limit), against Europeans (whatever reciprocity they calculate) unless they accept his terms.

So in short Al Qaeda has *already* made threats. It now *has* to make good on them, just as London, Madrid, 9-11, the Cole and East African Embassy Bombings, etc made good on earlier threats. So if it has access to CBRN weapons its certainly going to use them.


Al Qaeda arent the only jihadis around. The LeT works closely with Al Qaeda, but its own leadership has talked about nuclear weapons much more in terms of deterrence, as have some other non-Al Qaeda Arab jihadis.


So at this point the manner in which WMDs will be used (actual employment vs deterrence) really boil down to which set of hands they end up in.

Johann
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2075
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Postby Johann » 25 May 2006 01:31

As far as HEU and a terrorist attack on India goes, I think its unlikely that India would be entirely dependent on the US to confirm the Pakistani origins of the materials. There are enough credible sources that India took its own environmental samples from the Kahuta enrichment programme to suggest otherwise. A positive isotopic match between samples from the area of the attack and the samples obtained from Pakistan would be damning within India, and difficult to ignore outside it.

VikramS
BRFite
Posts: 1755
Joined: 21 Apr 2002 11:31

Postby VikramS » 25 May 2006 01:33

Johann wrote:As far as HEU and a terrorist attack on India goes, I think its unlikely that India would be entirely dependent on the US to confirm the Pakistani origins of the materials. There are enough credible sources that India took its own environmental samples from the Kahuta enrichment programme to suggest otherwise. A positive isotopic match between samples from the area of the attack and the samples obtained from Pakistan would be damning within India, and difficult to ignore outside it.


TSP has multiple sources of radioactive material.
I can say with 4000% guarantee that any atomic attack on India will be TSP's brainchild. It should and whould invite massive retaliation to get rid of the ugly wart on the face of this earth once for all. Match or no Match.

John Snow
BRFite
Posts: 1941
Joined: 03 Feb 2006 00:44

Postby John Snow » 25 May 2006 01:55

Johann wrote:As far as HEU and a terrorist attack on India goes, I think its unlikely that India would be entirely dependent on the US to confirm the Pakistani origins of the materials. There are enough credible sources that India took its own environmental samples from the Kahuta enrichment programme to suggest otherwise. A positive isotopic match between samples from the area of the attack and the samples obtained from Pakistan would be damning within India, and difficult to ignore outside it.


Johaan you are commiting a cardinal sin by going against the grain Wallace & Co who dispute Indian capability of anything Nuclear ....
India is way way behind TS Pakistan in Technology delivery etc, If only our babus and politicos shake a leg they may even kick TS P on their behind...

ReicherRitter
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 5
Joined: 07 Apr 2006 16:25
Location: Germany

Postby ReicherRitter » 25 May 2006 02:36

If We really want to take care of TSP, then one sure bet is to have a three-prong strategy.

1. Let TSP burn in its own ethnic-sectarian fires, be it
a. FATA-Taliban,
b. Pakhtoonistan Issue,
c. Baluchistan,
d. Gilgit-Baltistan-centered Shia-Sunni Problems,
e. Deoband-Barelvi Conflict,
f. Sunni-Shia Conflict,
g. Kalabagh Dam originating Sindh-Punjab Conflict,
h. Bhasha Dam Protests.
i. Political Instability
j. Jihadi Culture
k. Al-Qaida
etc.

On 50% of Pakistan there is already no writ of GoP.

2. We should get the West to stop all its economic help to the Pakistanis. In 2001, the Pakistanis hardly had any money left for their exports. With Oil becoming even more expensive, and thereby import bills rising, any cut-off of aid to Pakistan would have dramatic consequences. It is time, that the beggar should go hungry.
Pakistan is already beset with unprecedented levels of corruption and loot by the elite. Should inflation rate rise ever faster, the masses in Pakistan would bring down any government there, be it civilian or military. We had a sneak preview of it during the Cartoon Protests in Peshawar and Lahore. There is more to come. All this coupled with the destitution because of the Earthquake would help topple the balance. WESTERN AID MUST STOP.

3. West must help only those portions of Pakistani Military, which helps USA dismantle their Nuclear Programme. Indian and US Intelligence should penetrate the nuclear establishment in Pakistan to fly out all nuclear weapons and materials at short notice. Once that is done, one can always offer Pakistani nuclear scientists comfortable jobs abroad in the West as secretaries. There must be enough nuclear establishment people out there up for sale, just like their rulers.

If these three policies are put into effect, it will not take long for all special-interest groups in TSP to rise up, and demand autonomy, etc. and Pakistan would be on the direct flight to integration and denuclearisation.





2.

NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16052
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Postby NRao » 25 May 2006 02:48

Johann,

I know you do not mean anything bad, but it is just such discussions that Mush and troops like.

All they need is a non-Kahuta isotope and you are sunk. And, Mush will live for ever. You have perfect deniability and no means to counter. Not just India, the US and Europe too. To me this isotope level discussion is (to put it very politely) disastrous.

From a Jihad's perspective this is an ideological war - as you have stated (10 million or my way). It has to be treated as such. I can deal with a Muslim vs. a non-Muslim isotope (like a Muslim nuke, etc).

I hope that India does not subscribe to this kind of rubbish.

ShibaPJ
BRFite
Posts: 146
Joined: 20 Oct 2005 21:21

Postby ShibaPJ » 25 May 2006 02:50

ReicherRitter wrote:If We really want to take care of TSP, then one sure bet is to have a three-prong strategy.

...

2. We should get the West to stop all its economic help to the Pakistanis.

....
3. West must help only those portions of Pakistani Military, which helps USA dismantle their Nuclear Programme. Indian and US Intelligence should penetrate the nuclear establishment in Pakistan to fly out all nuclear weapons and materials at short notice.

Wonderful wishlist.. just what the doctor had ordered.. I was wondering just who is going to get it done by the West; you, me or the BRF? :?:

rocky
BRFite
Posts: 142
Joined: 08 Mar 2006 22:52

Postby rocky » 25 May 2006 02:55

dnirody, KS is doing quite a bit of pro-US batting recently. Re-read his article with that at the back of the mind, and the effect is completely different.

Johann, Al-Qaeda does not exist. It is as existent at the ether. One can allude to an ideology that lots of people in certain countries subscribe to and giving them a single label is the signalling of the inability to act against the nation-states harboring and promoting such ideas.

This "Al-Qaeda threat" is just a strawman constructed by the US and UK among others to avoid striking at the deeper problem.


Return to “Strategic & Security Issues Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests