Indian Response to Terrorism

Locked
samuel.chandra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 94
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 06:11

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by samuel.chandra »

Cross posted from Afghan thread. The speed with which the alternative route is being setup is amazing. I think GOI/US very clearly know that TSP will not hand over the 20-40 pigs. I think both sides are preparing. Thats why the rheotic from the Indian side hasn't died down.

I think we should seriously consider sending troops to Afghanistan. Has several benefits:
- Opens a new front for the porkis. We can fry them unhindered because its not our border.
- We cannot let the coalition break down in afghanistan and be taken over by taliban. That would be a huge mistake.
- In case of any war, the porkis cannot move all resources to the east if we have presence in afghanistan.
- Nice launchpad for any covert ops inside TSP.

Offense is the only strategy with TSP. We need to open up multiple fronts to keep TSP busy until we break it down.

Tilak wrote:Nato hard at work making deals to beat the Khyber Pass convoy trap
Jeremy Page, South Asia Correspondent
December 13, 2008
Nato plans to open a new supply route to Afghanistan through Russia and Central Asia in the next eight weeks following a spate of attacks on its main lifeline through Pakistan this year, Nato and Russian sources have told The Times.

Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, the former Soviet Central Asian states that lie between Russia and Afghanistan, have agreed in principle to the railway route and are working out the small print with Nato, the sources said.

“It'll be weeks rather than months,” said one Nato official. “Two months max.”

The “Northern Corridor” is expected to be discussed at an informal meeting next week between Dmitri Rogozin, Russia's ambassador to Nato, and Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, Nato's Secretary-General.

The breakthrough reflects Nato and US commanders' growing concern about the attacks on their main supply line, which runs from the Pakistani port of Karachi via the Khyber Pass to Kabul and brings in 70 per cent of their supplies. The rest is either driven from Karachi via the border town of Chaman to southern Afghanistan - the Taleban's heartland - or flown in at enormous expense in transport planes that are in short supply.

“We're all increasingly concerned,” Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters on Wednesday. “But in that concern, we've worked pretty hard to develop options.”

The opening of the Northern Corridor also mirrors a gradual thaw in relations between Moscow and Nato, which plunged to their lowest level since the end of the Cold War after Russia's brief war with Georgia in August.

However, Nato and the United States are simultaneously in talks on opening a third supply route through the secretive Central Asian state of Turkmenistan to prevent Russia from gaining a stranglehold on supplies to Afghanistan, the sources said. Non-lethal supplies, including fuel, would be shipped across the Black Sea to Georgia, driven to neighbouring Azerbaijan, shipped across the Caspian Sea to Turkmenistan and then driven to the Afghan border.

The week-long journey along this “central route” would be longer and more expensive than those through Pakistan or Russia and would leave supplies vulnerable to political volatility in the Caucasus and Turkmenistan.

The US and Nato are, though, exploring as many alternatives as possible as America prepares to deploy 20,000 more troops - three quarters of them by the summer - to add to the 67,000 foreign troops in Afghanistan. Turkmenistan represents the only realistic alternative that bypasses Russia. A route through Iran is out of the question because Washington does not have diplomatic relations with Tehran. Afghanistan's border with China is too remote to be used.

An agreement with Georgia has already been signed and negotiations with Azerbaijan are “ongoing”, a Nato official said.

Nato began exploring alternative supply routes in response to political instability in Pakistan last year and reached an informal agreement with Russia on the Northern Corridor at a Nato summit in Bucharest in April. At the same meeting President Berdymukhammedov of Turkmenistan offered to allow Nato to take supplies across its territory and to establish logistics bases there, according to Nato sources.

Negotiations stalled after the Georgian crisis, as Nato suspended high-level contacts with Moscow and Central Asian countries grew wary of angering the former Soviet master.

They have since shown their independence by refusing to back Moscow's recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states.

Russia, meanwhile, has been offering preferential treatment to Nato members that it considers “friendly”, such as France and Germany, the only Nato members allowed to fly supplies to Afghanistan through Russian airspace. In November Germany also became the first Nato member allowed to bring supplies for Afghanistan through Russia by railway.

Russian officials say that Moscow is ready to open the Northern Corridor to all Nato members as soon as the alliance finalises its agreements with Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. The agreements cover non-military supplies such as fuel, food and clothing, and some non-lethal military equipment.

All Nato countries will be able to use the Northern Corridor,” one Russian official familiar with the negotiations told The Times. “As far as we understand, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan have agreed to it and sent the relevant papers to Brussels. We're just waiting for Nato to sign the agreements. We've done our part.

BORDER WOES

A spate of attacks by Pakistani militants on supply convoys to Nato and US forces has caused backlogs and border closures (Jeremy Page writes). More than 1,000 trucks are stalled on the Afghan border and haulage costs are up by almost 70 per cent.Pakistani authorities have closed the border at Torkham, near the Khyber Pass, after militants set fire to at least 260 vehicles, including American Humvees, last weekend and attacked two cargo terminals in Peshawar on Thursday.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Lalmohan »

arun-dirty-boy-roy is the new comical ali
perhaps a rollicking roy?
forumites are welcome to create a new name...
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by NRao »

I am all for India hacking into the Western border of Pakistan. In support of the ISAF of course.

I do not think the effort to contain the terrorism problem will work, the cost would be to prohibitive.

The best stance should be to take out Western Pakistan with over saturation of boots - less expensive than containing over a long period of time.

Also, sad to state this, but democratic ways will not work here (they did not in WWs too). This extraordinary situation needs an extraordinary solution.

Bottom line: Pakistan as a State does NOT exist. Dismantling portions of it is a MUST. Dismantling all of it should be seriously considered.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by SaiK »

bottom line: declare and make all pakis as NSA!~ then allocate and assign states per individual groups wish within baki stan.
Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Rangudu »

Link

A very good event. Watch it in full. A bunch of senior Track-II types were in the US last week for the Aspen dialogue, that occurs regularly. This time, they discussed the Mumbai aftermath. G.Partha was at his best as usual but everyone was good.
asprinzl
BRFite
Posts: 408
Joined: 08 Sep 2004 05:00

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by asprinzl »

This particular individual is in exile. He cannot set his foot in India. He is a wanted man. There are only a few places in the world where he can travel to. Any other place he would be arrested. Yet, Dawood is able to control the underworld and a huge portion of the above ground of Mumbai. He will not run out of money as long as this persists and terror will continue to be funded no matter how much financial pressure India or US or EU imposes. How is this possible?

A king cannot rule his kingdom from exile. There would be a coup by either princes, ministers or militarymen. Can someone enlighten men what the hell is going on in Mumbail as far as D-Company is concerned?

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

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Rye »

ASprinzl wrote:
He will not run out of money as long as this persists and terror will continue to be funded no matter how much financial pressure India or US or EU imposes. How is this possible?
Good observation, Avram. There are surely many people in the top echelons of Mumbai/Maharashtra politics who are on Pakistan/Dawood's payroll/control (they could be blackmailed). The underworld's continuing control of the place cannot happen without cooperation from people of influence in Mumbai.
samuel.chandra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 94
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 06:11

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by samuel.chandra »

Yes. ISAF so we have proper cover of mandate. Sending boots into Afghanistan is the only long term option unless we want to turn India into a police state (I still don't think the internal security measures will continue beyond 2 years. Just not feasible). Check the map of pakistan. Afghanistan gives us too many options.
http://www.mapsofworld.com/pakistan/map ... an-map.jpg

NRao wrote:I am all for India hacking into the Western border of Pakistan. In support of the ISAF of course.

I do not think the effort to contain the terrorism problem will work, the cost would be to prohibitive.

The best stance should be to take out Western Pakistan with over saturation of boots - less expensive than containing over a long period of time.

Also, sad to state this, but democratic ways will not work here (they did not in WWs too). This extraordinary situation needs an extraordinary solution.

Bottom line: Pakistan as a State does NOT exist. Dismantling portions of it is a MUST. Dismantling all of it should be seriously considered.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by NRao »

Rangudu wrote:Link

A very good event. Watch it in full. A bunch of senior Track-II types were in the US last week for the Aspen dialogue, that occurs regularly. This time, they discussed the Mumbai aftermath. G.Partha was at his best as usual but everyone was good.

Transcript
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by NRao »

Rye wrote:ASprinzl wrote:
He will not run out of money as long as this persists and terror will continue to be funded no matter how much financial pressure India or US or EU imposes. How is this possible?
Good observation, Avram. There are surely many people in the top echelons of Mumbai/Maharashtra politics who are on Pakistan/Dawood's payroll/control (they could be blackmailed). The underworld's continuing control of the place cannot happen without cooperation from people of influence in Mumbai.

The UN needs to ban these Indians too. Cease their assets, get their passports, etc.
SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by SaiK »

Rangudu wrote:Link

A very good event. Watch it in full. A bunch of senior Track-II types were in the US last week for the Aspen dialogue, that occurs regularly. This time, they discussed the Mumbai aftermath. G.Partha was at his best as usual but everyone was good.
ah ha!.. lockheed martin sponsors it!!.. mmmm.. expect F16s to be marketed strongly for mmrca.
Vivek_A
BRFite
Posts: 593
Joined: 17 Nov 2003 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Vivek_A »

SaiK
BRF Oldie
Posts: 36424
Joined: 29 Oct 2003 12:31
Location: NowHere

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by SaiK »

hah tsp friend cohen bhai now wants technology answer, and marketing some tech company perhaps!?!? whatsup!?
a_kumar
BRFite
Posts: 481
Joined: 18 Jun 2008 23:53
Location: what about it?

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by a_kumar »

There seems to be a March organized in San Diego tomorrow..

Jingos from around San Diego should plan to participate..

Image
Flyer
rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by rsingh »

G Parthasarthy for NSA...............that should be first thing to be done. Real patriot and great diplomate.
kshirin
BRFite
Posts: 382
Joined: 18 Sep 2006 19:45

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by kshirin »

Rangudu wrote:Link

A very good event. Watch it in full. A bunch of senior Track-II types were in the US last week for the Aspen dialogue, that occurs regularly. This time, they discussed the Mumbai aftermath. G.Partha was at his best as usual but everyone was good.
Thanks Guru.
Chinmayanand
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2585
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:01
Location: Mansarovar
Contact:

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Chinmayanand »

[quote="narayanan"]Next time, instead of the tiranga, I hope they post something more descriptive of how the world would like to greet them:
Either this

If we look at this pic closely , it looks like a hand with the middle finger shouting @$$hole ... looks similiar to what our Guru Greg did in Kolkata..
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by NRao »

Pakistan regularly states that they scramble air crafts to prevent US "spy" planes from crossing over from A'stan.

But about an hour ago NPR reported that they scrambled because TSP felt that Indian ACs were approaching. http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/s ... ld&s_name=
Chinmayanand
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2585
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 16:01
Location: Mansarovar
Contact:

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Chinmayanand »

{Dear durgesh: There is a fine line between Rant-e-Pakistan and Rant-e-Religion, that one has to learn to walk, usually by hard experience of jhapads when one crosses it. The difference is that a great many Indians a heck of a lot more patriotic than you or I, and a heck of a lot more accomplished at standing up for India in the face of the enemy, happen to believe in religions that you may not believe in.

BRF's respect for these compatriots far outweighs the urgency of your having the right to post your views, if these two considerations clash. Please understand.

By all means, continue to rant against Pakis. :mrgreen: but please be careful to do that without generalizing to religion. Look at it this way: If Hafeez Saeed or Ten Percent Zardari took up Zen Buddhism, they would still be terrorist gandoos.

Cheers. n}
Last edited by enqyoob on 14 Dec 2008 05:45, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: delete content that needed 2 b deleted
Victor
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2628
Joined: 24 Apr 2001 11:31

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Victor »

From the paki thread:
A growing concern in intelligence circles is that LeT, originally backed by Pakistan’s ISI intelligence agency before LeT was banned in 2002, now has an autonomous organisation within India’s large Muslim population with the capacity to strike without back-up from Pakistan.
Clearly a threat. If we can't or won't do anything to cripple this enemy when everyone agrees it is pakistani, we are simply begging for an attack with designer IM labels on it for all to beat us with.
Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Rangudu »

Guys,

Remember "Kargil-2" from 2002-03? The abortive TSPA attempt to take a ridge near Gultari in J&K was foiled thanks to a M2K strike.

I'm betting that TSPA will try something like that to force India to respond and then say "India attacked us, India attacked us."

They obviously have some new weapons from Dragon and elsewhere that they want to use. They have a gameplan whereby they can escalate, launch an attack where they think India will not be prepared and thus declare "victory."
Vikram_S
BRFite
Posts: 359
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 23:49

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Vikram_S »

rangudu

the TSP are actually at a far weaker stage versus india still, but stronger than in many years before thanks to US funds. so could you say which weapons are you referring to, if you share some more info with us so that we can try to figure out the context/detail?
one thing i wonder about, whether now or tomorrow, every year and more nuke are added to TSP arsenal;
one way or the other we have to do something;
napunsak indian leadership has not even paid back TSP in own coin of eye for eye, tooth for tooth;
by the way there is serious rage in indian services about not hitting at pak

-----

meanwhile found this on search:
http://nightwatch.afcea.org/NightWatch_20081209.htm
For the record. An Indian 24 hour news channel affiliated with CNN broadcast the following report from an unidentified source.
“Any Indian decision to carry out a strike on terror targets inside Pakistan will be based on the Cold Start doctrine in place since 2004. The Cold Start doctrine followed the Operation Parakram experience when India took as long as a month to mobilise its troops.

The new doctrine will enable the Armed Forces to mobilise for a ground or air strike within hours. Integrated battle groups, comprising elements of the army including infantry, armour and artillery -- and working in tandem with the Air Force -- will carry out an operation against clearly defined targets in Pakistan. These could be terror training camps or launch pads to infiltrate terrorists into India. It could also target elements of the Pakistani army that may try to defend the terrorists.

The doctrine talks about eight rapidly-deployable "integrated battle groups," drawn from the Navy and the Indian Air Force. These groups would be trained to make swift and hard inroads into the enemy territory. The strikes should be "limited" and "calibrated" to ensure nuclear weapons do not come into play in any war scenario.”

The report is a reminder that after the 2002 crises, India adopted a new strategic doctrine. It is built around maintaining a core attack force in all three services at a level of constant combat readiness that is much higher than the rest of the armed forces. Thus, analysts monitoring conventional war indicators will be prone to miss the tell tale indicators of “integrated battle groups” already at high combat readiness in peacetime making final preparations for limited attacks.

Comment: When NightWatch first began studying Indian civil and military war preparations in 1971, the Indian Army required 8 months to mobilize men from the civilian sector; recall reserves; move logistics; generate, train and prepare the forces; bring them to full combat readiness and move 750,000 soldiers in 25 to 28 divisions with about 2,000 tanks to attack positions in western India,

In late 1986, during Operation Brass Tacks, India shortened that preparation process, but it was still considerable. By the time of the Kargil War in early 1999, the Army reduced the time to attain full combat readiness in battle positions to 45 days.

By the January 2002 crisis, the Indian Army had reduced the time to one month, with 750,000 men and some 4,000 tanks in battle positions and capable of attacking after three weeks of preparations. Full combat readiness was reached in the fourth week. In June 2002, the Army also showed it can maintain that large force in the field at a high state of readiness for up to six months, summer or winter. No other Army has achieved those results for a force that size.

Since 2004, India has adopted the Cold Start Doctrine, which has a long history in Soviet strategic military writings, more so than in the West. It emerged from Soviet leadership distrust in the reliability and precision of intelligence warning of a NATO attack. It was a safeguard against warning failure and surprise attack. However, it was never clear whether the Soviets achieved the ability to launch a nuclear attack from a cold start.

The Indians have taken the doctrine in an all-arms direction, which logically would include nuclear strikes by all three services because all of them have some nuclear weapons delivery capability. The record of Indian achievement in reducing the time to prepare the armed forces for conventional war is such that prudence commends a working hypothesis that they will do what they say they can do, as to cold start.
nightwatch:
http://www.afcea.org/mission/intel/default.asp
faraz
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 04:29

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by faraz »

durgesh wrote:{Dear durgesh: The difference is that a great many Indians a heck of a lot more patriotic than you or I, and a heck of a lot more accomplished at standing up for India in the face of the enemy, happen to believe in religions that you may not believe in.

BRF's respect for these compatriots far outweighs the urgency of your having the right to post your views, if these two considerations clash. Please understand.

If Hafeez Saeed or Ten Percent Zardari took up Zen Buddhism, they would still be terrorist gandoos. :rotfl: :rotfl:

Cheers. n}
Thanks, Narayanan. Bharat Rakshak embodies the true spirit of Indian

BTW: How did you like my quote on Unmentionable forum (deff and dumb) hacking

Jo Islamabad mein Gandoo wo Programming, Security aur Designing mein bhi Gandoo. :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:
uddu
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2091
Joined: 15 Aug 2004 17:09

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by uddu »

Rangudu wrote:Guys,

Remember "Kargil-2" from 2002-03? The abortive TSPA attempt to take a ridge near Gultari in J&K was foiled thanks to a M2K strike.

I'm betting that TSPA will try something like that to force India to respond and then say "India attacked us, India attacked us."

They obviously have some new weapons from Dragon and elsewhere that they want to use. They have a gameplan whereby they can escalate, launch an attack where they think India will not be prepared and thus declare "victory."
These Pakis, they are attempting for the second time after their first attempt of Pranab da threatening flopped.

India rubbishes Pakistani allegations of air space violation
Link

Delhi/Islamabad, Dec 14 (IANS) Indian airforce officials Sunday morning rubbished reports that its fighter jets had violated Pakistan’s air space and said they had received no complaint from the Pakistani side.Responding to Pakistani allegations that Indian fighter jets had violated their airspace late Saturday night by entering two places - Pakistani Kashmir and Lahore sectors - and were forced to turn back, a senior Indian Air Force (IAF) official in the Western Air Command told IANS: “There is no truth in the allegations, it is all rubbish.”

The official said, “We haven’t even received any complaint from the Pakistani air force.”

Dawn News of Pakistan quoted Pakistan Air Force Air Commodore Humyun Viqar as saying, “Both the Indian aircraft entered into Pakistan’s airspace between two to four nautical miles at two different sectors.” He said the Pakistani jets responded, forcing the Indian aircraft to turn back. {turn back :rotfl: .The order given and Indian jets in Paki Airspace means all Paki jinns down on the ground like jig-saw puzzle. No turning back.}

Information Minister Sherry Rehman told Dawn News that the Indian leadership had been contacted, and the incident was described as “inadvertent”, and that the Pakistan air-force and army had been placed on alert but “did not wish to escalate the situation” any further. :rotfl:

It quoted Reuters as saying that an Indian Defence Ministry spokesman when contacted in New Delhi said he had no information on the reported incursion.

Dawn also reported that people travelling between Lahore and Rawalpindi said that they had seen heavy movement of the Pakistan army on the way heading towards the border. “Long convoys of military trucks were heading towards Lahore from Jehlum,” a motorist Jawad Khan told Dawn.

The movement of army towards the border area is a sign that tension between the two nuclear rivals, already heightened following the terrorist attacks in Mumbai, is likely to increase in the days to come, Dawn said.

Meanwhile, a state run Pakistani TV channel reported that a loud blast was heard in the Arabian Sea between Badin and Jati cities Saturday night.

However, further details about the blast were not received. The cause and exact location of the blast is being ascertained.

{If there is laughter club in India then there is Liars club in Pakiland. Equal equal onlee}
IT (Information Technology) in India IT (International Terrorism) in Pakiland
Equal equal onlee.
enqyoob
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2658
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 20:25

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by enqyoob »

Meanwhile, a state run Pakistani TV channel reported that a loud blast was heard in the Arabian Sea between Badin and Jati cities Saturday night.


That would be the Pakistani Doobi Fauj submarine PNS "Aurangzeb" conducting a Fedayeen BakPak attack on a rock. Like the PNS "Ghazi" became the first submarine to conduct a BakPaki attack on Vishakapatnam's trash collector net in 1971.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by shiv »

I need help in making a video.

What is the meaning of the Urdu word "mauvnat? - as in "Mumbai attacks being cause by "Inside mauvnat of Hindu terrorists groups"
faraz
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 63
Joined: 04 Sep 2008 04:29

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by faraz »

Mau-nat is daily provisions or daily food as I know. It can also mean wallet or saddle bags according to some dictionary. I would be happy to translate anything from Urdu to English.

Another Translation from Urdu to English : Zaid Hamid means one who lies or boasts when he talks. It can also mean who talks stupid and does not think while talking :rotfl: :rotfl:
shiv wrote:I need help in making a video.

What is the meaning of the Urdu word "mauvnat? - as in "Mumbai attacks being cause by "Inside mauvnat of Hindu terrorists groups"
sanjchopra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 57
Joined: 08 Jul 2006 12:36

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by sanjchopra »

Enouh is Enough

Great series of videos on IBN. Thought Rajdeep did not give KC Singh and General RoyChowdhry enough time to talk which in my view was the highlight of the show. Mahesh Bhatt was a moron as we already know him to be one when it comes to pakis (I think its his lineage)
Raj Malhotra
BRFite
Posts: 997
Joined: 26 Jun 2000 11:31

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Raj Malhotra »

I think GoI should announce rewards for providing evidence as to the real identity, adddress, family, ID card No. of the rest of 9 dead Pakistani piglets, so that all the Paki commentators, diplomats, leaders come across as Naked Liers on world media. I bet oppressed and poor Pakistani villagers / curbed TV-Press media will take this opportunity to win some kaffir money as also get political asylum in Kaffir country without gettting debriefed by Army Chief
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by shiv »

sanjchopra wrote:Enouh is Enough

Great series of videos on IBN. Thought Rajdeep did not give KC Singh and General RoyChowdhry enough time to talk which in my view was the highlight of the show. Mahesh Bhatt was a moron as we already know him to be one when it comes to pakis (I think its his lineage)
Last night there was a memorable program on NDTV remembering the dead. It was justifiably a bit of a tear jerker - but a keeper nevertheless.

Must try and look for a link..
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Arun_S »

Pakistan accuses India of air space violation
14 Dec 2008, 0933 hrs IST, IANS
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan accused India of violating its airspace and declared emergency at all airbases Sunday two weeks after India vowed to take
strong action against Islamabad in the wake of the Mumbai terror attacks, media reports said.

Pakistan's official APP news agency quoted Pakistan Air Force spokesman Air Commodore Humyun Viqar as saying that Indian fighter jets entered into the country's airspace over Lahore and Pakistan-controlled Kashmir twice last night.

Pakistani fighter jets swiftly responded to the violations by Indian jets, forcing them to return to thier own territory, Viqar said, adding that Pakistani Air Force would remain on alert to "thwart any aggression" from India.

According to the official, the violation by Indian jets took place at 11. 30 pm Saturday and again at 13:05 am early Sunday.

The official, however, said this might be a "technical violation" by Indian jets. "But we are ready to deal with any misadventure. We are monitoring the situation, we are on alert," he said.

Meanwhile, Pakistani Information Minister Sherry Rehman said that Indians had told Pakistan that it was an "inadvertent incursion". She said that Pakistan did not want to prolong the matter.

The incident comes at a time when tension is running high between the two nuclear-powered neighbours after the deadly Mumbai attacks, which killed around 180 people and injured over 300.
Arun_S
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2800
Joined: 14 Jun 2000 11:31
Location: KhyberDurra

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Arun_S »

shiv wrote:
sanjchopra wrote:Enouh is Enough

Great series of videos on IBN. Thought Rajdeep did not give KC Singh and General RoyChowdhry enough time to talk which in my view was the highlight of the show. Mahesh Bhatt was a moron as we already know him to be one when it comes to pakis (I think its his lineage)
Last night there was a memorable program on NDTV remembering the dead. It was justifiably a bit of a tear jerker - but a keeper nevertheless.

Must try and look for a link..
So was the "Sa Re Ga Ma Pa" with Baba Ram Dev ji, Adesh Srivastav and songs by all singers that spite the Pakistani terrorists, and a memorable statement by contestant "Ms. Sharma".

that video recording is worth keeping for future generations.

There seems to a tide of awakening on Pakistan and Poletical Islam happening.
samuel.chandra
BRFite -Trainee
Posts: 94
Joined: 29 Nov 2008 06:11

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by samuel.chandra »

X-Posted from Russia thread. I think GOI is tired of US dithering.
samuel.chandra wrote:Brilliant US of A! The problem is they want to step on both boats. They do not want to understand GOI's problem. They don't realize that groudswell of anger after Mumbai cannot be "managed" by any political party... that too this close to an election. This is not pakistan. The russians are back in the game. First they trumped Obama with the missile defense and now they have gained India's gratitude with a clear statement of support. How could the Americans ****** up after working so hard to get India the nuke deal?? Its not late yet... pick your boat.


renukb wrote:India, Russia regain elan of friendship
By M K Bhadrakumar


The visit of Russian President Dmitry Medvedev to New Delhi last week turned out to be an occasion for the Indian government to fundamentally reassess the strategic significance of the traditional India-Russia partnership. No doubt, the visit took place at a turning point in contemporary history and politics against the backdrop of massive shifts in the international system.

Medvedev arrived in India in the immediate aftermath of the horrific terrorist strikes on Mumbai. The regional security situation - especially Afghanistan - naturally figured prominently in the agenda of the visit.

The joint declaration signed by Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Medvedev after extensive talks in New Delhi reflects that the two sides have taken serious pains to understand each other's vital concerns and have endeavored to go more than half the distance to accommodate them. They also made a conscious effort to expand their common ground in the international system. After a considerable lapse of time, Russian-Indian relationship seems to be on the move.

Things which were hanging fire in the general drift of Russian-India relations in recent years are being attended to. Principal among them is the tendentious issue of the escalation of costs for the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov, which India has contracted to buy. On the eve of Medvedev's visit, the Indian cabinet took the decision to agree to discuss an additional US$2.2 billion payment as demanded by Russia. The government also has approved the acquisition of 80 medium-lift Mi-17 helicopters from Russia worth $1.3 billion.

Reaching out
Medvedev also came with a brief to discuss the leasing of a nuclear submarine to the Indian navy. India-Russia military cooperation is back in full swing with a host of projects in the pipeline. Russia has consolidated its place as the number one arms supplier for India. But the icing on the cake is the proposed cooperation in the nuclear and space fields. Agreements were signed on Russia constructing four new nuclear power plants in India and on assisting a manned Indian space flight. Russia has offered a new power plant AES-2006, which incorporates a third generation WER-1200 reactor of 1170MW. Russia has also agreed to supply uranium worth $700 million to meet India's acute shortage.

Manmohan described the agreements as signifying a "new milestone in the history of cooperation with Russia". He added, "It is a relationship that has withstood the test of time." He acknowledged that India's dialogue with Russia has "intensified considerably". Significantly, he said the terrorist attacks on Mumbai "present a threat to pluralistic societies" [read Russia] and that "there is much Russia and India can do to promote global peace".

Clearly, the two countries have rediscovered the old elan of their friendship. They are reaching out to each other once again in a world that is in transition. Apart from the volatility in the international situation, both India and Russia sense that change is in the air in the United States' global policies, but neither would wager the extent and directions of the change. Both are acutely conscious of the inexorable decline in the US influence in world politics and the urgent need to adjust to the emergent realities of multipolarity.

At the same time, the US remains the single-most important interlocutor for both India and Russia for the foreseeable future. Neither would see their partnership as directed against the US. Even as Medvedev arrived in Delhi, a senior Indian official was making contacts with key advisors to president-elect Barack Obama to brief them on Delhi's perspectives and policies. On its part, Moscow is also in an expectant mood about the Obama presidency, though tempered with cautious optimism.

The balancing of Russian-Indian mutual interests evident in the joint declaration brings out these delicate impulses as they touch on many areas. The declaration is devoid of any anti-US rhetoric as such but it is very obvious that the two countries are overhauling their partnership in tune with a "post-American century". India has identified itself with the Russian position on reforming the international economic and financial systems so that it adapts to "new realities" and promotes a "more just world economic order based on the principles of multipolarity, rule of law, equality, mutual respect and common responsibility".

Russia seeks Sino-Indian rapport
India also finds itself emphasizing the "growing and more focused interaction" within the framework of the trilateral format among Russia, China and India, despite its lukewarm attitude in the recent past towards the process which annoys Washington as a needless endeavor on India's part.

Significantly, the joint declaration says that the trilateral format "acquires importance in the framework of multilateral dialogue mechanisms, substantially contributes to strengthening newly emerging multipolarity and promotes collective leadership of world’s leading states". This is a carefully drafted formulation that speaks of an intention to inject new dynamism into the format. Conceivably, Moscow has prevailed on Delhi to reassess the significance of the format in the volatile international situation. Russia had been viewing with growing despondency its inability to foster Sino-Indian rapport.

Equally, the Russian side seems to have urged India to play a more active role and "more constructive participation and contribution to" the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

Similarly, India has shed its carefully cultivated ambivalence and come out in open, unqualified support of the Russian position on the situation in the Caucasus region. It is a signal victory of the Kremlin to have finally got India on board, as this is a most sensitive issue which occupies the first circle of Russian foreign policy and is, in fact, a leitmotif of Russia's relations with the US in the coming period. The joint declaration stresses, "India supports the important role of the Russian Federation in promoting peace and cooperation in the Caucasian region".

The key expression is "Caucasian" - anything from the Caucasus region. India's support is open-ended and unequivocal.

Again, India has voiced its support for Russia's keenness to join the Asia-Europe meeting and East Asia summit mechanisms, while Russia has reiterated its support for India's claim to permanent membership in an expanded United Nations Security Council.


From the Indian perspective, no doubt, it is an invaluable asset that Moscow has voiced its total "support and solidarity" with New Delhi on the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. The Russian gesture by far exceeds the words of sympathy offered by Washington. Of course, Moscow is not facing Washington's dilemma, which is one of having to carefully balance between New Delhi and Islamabad. Simply put, what the Mumbai attacks have badly exposed is that much as terrorism is a shared concern for the US and India, their priorities at this juncture greatly differ.

India would expect Washington to come down like a ton of bricks on Islamabad to pressure the latter to take seriously the Indian allegation that the terrorist strike in Mumbai was perpetrated by elements in Pakistan with possible links to that country's security establishment. Evidently, Washington is in no position to fulfill the Indian expectations. Its number one priority is the war in Afghanistan and Pakistan's continued cooperation in the war. Washington cannot afford a "distracted" Pakistan, and its main political and diplomatic challenge, therefore, is to get Pakistan to remain "focused" on the war effort in the Afghan-Pakistan tribal areas.

New Delhi senses that as time goes by, it will find this paradigm frustrating. This is not a new paradigm, either. But Delhi's options are limited, though the government is under immense pressure not only to act but also to be seen actively acting. The delicate strategic balance between India and Pakistan virtually forecloses even a "limited" war option for either nuclear power. The only alternative open to India is to reassess its diplomatic options. But on this score, New Delhi needs to do some new thinking.

Which is where Delhi's partnership with Moscow comes into play. The strategic community in New Delhi would realize to their great discomfiture that the entire package of post-Cold War assumptions underlying the US-India strategic partnership just do not add up in the present situation for India to cope with the formidable task of pressuring Pakistan. Their broad assumption that the US would take care of India's "Pakistan problem" while India concentrated on its tryst with destiny as a great power or "balancer" in the international system is turning out to be a grotesque misjudgment by the Indian strategic gurus. So, indeed, their assumptions regarding "absolute security".

The Russian-Indian joint declaration suggests that New Delhi is swiftly adapting to the reality that it must diversify the sinews of cooperation and revitalize its diverse partnerships with countries on the basis of shared concerns and commonality of interests rather than pursue a foreign policy whose prime objective has been to harmonize Indian regional policies with the US's. This is most tellingly evident on the Joint Declaration's paragraph devoted to Afghanistan.

Realignment on Afghanistan
Ironically, New Delhi seems to have decided that if it is Afghan war that causes so much discomfiture for Washington to come out into the open in support of India over the Mumbai strikes, it shall also be Afghanistan on which Indian regional policy shall begin to make a new beginning and careen away for the first time in a long while from US benchmarks and expectations.

The punch line in the joint declaration comes almost innocuously. Sharing their concern over the "deteriorating security situation" in Afghanistan, India and Russia called for a "coherent and a united international commitment" to dealing with the threats emanating from that country. The implied criticism of the US-led war is obvious as also the rejection of the US strategy to keep the war strategy as its exclusive prerogative. The Joint Declaration then goes on to say, "Both sides welcome Russia's initiative to organize an international conference in the framework of Shanghai Cooperation Organization, involving its Member states and Observers."

New Delhi has come out into open support of a regional initiative on Afghanistan, which Washington would have loved to stifle in its cradle. The Indian stance is significant for various reasons. India has decided that there is no need to mark time until the Obama administration finalizes its own new Afghan strategy. It is asserting its own stakes independent of the US strategy. Two, India is identifying with Russia, China and Iran, which is an immensely significant happening in regional politics. Three, India is siding with a Russia-led regional initiative on Afghanistan at a time when various influential American opinion-makers have been floating the idea of a US-led "regional approach" to an Afghan settlement that virtually allows the US to be on the driving seat.

Most certainly, India is implicitly recognizing the SCO's relevance to South Asian security. Afghanistan is a member of the SAARC and could act as a bridge between South Asia and Central Asia. In essence, therefore, India is spurning the US's much-touted "Great Central Asia" strategy that aims at diluting the SCO's role in Central Asia and instead pins hopes on India as a counterweight to the Russian and Chinese regional influence.

It is apparent that India is dissociating from the concerted US policy to keep the SCO out of Afghanistan. Moscow has been vainly striving to carve out a toehold for the SCO as a regional body while Washington has been discouraging Afghan President Hamid Karzai from lending weight to the SCO-Afghanistan Contact Group. More than anything else, the fact remains that the Russian initiative on an SCO conference is intended as a challenge to the monopoly that Washington has kept in determining the contours of any Afghan settlement.

Indeed, it opens up more possibilities for Karzai to expand his "strategic autonomy" vis-a-vis Washington, which he has been inclined to exercise, even if timidly, of late. Karzai has every reason to cooperate with a regional initiative in which all the major powers surrounding Afghanistan such as Russia, China, India and Iran are associated. The onus is now on the US and Pakistan to explain why they should dissociate.

Of course, the US would have preferred to encourage the on-going Turkish initiative to mediate Afghan-Pakistan talks. The latest three-way round involving the presidents of Turkey, Pakistan and Afghanistan just concluded in Ankara. Washington was happy that Turkey lent a hand in keeping the Afghan peace process as an "in-house" affair - keeping "outsiders" like Russia or Iran at arm's length. The SCO initiative is a needless intrusion, from the US-Turkish perspective.

SCO stance on Afghanistan
A most significant aspect of the Russian-Indian Joint Declaration is its deafening silence on the US-sponsored talks with the Taliban. The Russian and Indian position is that there is nothing called "moderate" Taliban leaders, whereas, the US is edging close to a formula that so long as the Taliban leadership disengages and disowns the al-Qaeda, there should be no problem in assimilating them as part of a coalition government in Kabul. In fact, the second round of talks with the Taliban under Saudi mediation is due to take place shortly.

In the context of the Mumbai blasts, the Indian attitude towards the Taliban can only harden further, placing itself at odds with the US strategy in the coming period. In a manner of speaking, the Russian-Iranian-Indian convergence in bolstering the anti-Taliban resistance in the late 1990s is straining to reappear, though in an entirely new form. Interestingly, Iranian officials also held consultations recently in New Delhi regarding Afghanistan.

Without doubt, India would have given thought to the SCO's collective stance on the Afghan problem prior to lending support for the regional body's initiative to call an international conference. The Russian ambassador Vitaly Churkin's speech at the UN General Assembly session in New York on November 10 on behalf of the SCO becomes the benchmark for New Delhi. Evidently, Delhi finds itself in harmony with the major elements in Churkin's speech. The key elements were:

"Concerted joint action" by the international community is necessary to arrest the "continuing deterioration of the military and political situation" in Afghanistan.

The policy of isolating the extremist Taliban leaders should not be watered down and any reconciliation should only include those Taliban cadres who are "rank-and-file Taliban members who are not tainted by military crimes".

A system of "anti-drug and financial security belts" should be set up around Afghanistan with the coordinating role of the UN and involvement of neighboring countries.

The NATO must cease operations involving "indiscriminate or excessive use of force, including bombings" that cause heavy civilian casualties. The level of collateral damage in the military operations is hampering Afghanistan's long-term stabilization.

An enduring Afghan settlement is "impossible without an integrated approach on the part of the international community, led by the United Nations, and at the same time without delegating to Kabul greater independence in resolving inter-Afghan problems".

"The situation in Afghanistan cannot be fixed by solely military means". Therefore, security must be backed by "real measures" towards socio-economic revival.

"It is essential to ensure respectful attitude towards national and religious values, centuries-long customs and traditions of the multi-ethnic and multi-religious people of Afghanistan and on these grounds to achieve conciliation of Afghanistan’s antagonistic forces".

In sum, the Mumbai attacks may prove to be a watershed in Indian regional policies. Relations with Russia, China and Iran assume a new level of importance in New Delhi's regional strategies. The gravitation towards the SCO signifies the new thinking. Not too long ago, India visualized the SCO as primarily an "energy club". Actually, India's petroleum minister routinely represented India at the SCO summit meetings. Now, to envisage a crucial role for an SCO-led regional initiative on Afghanistan, New Delhi has indeed come a long way. Surely, Medvedev would have returned to Moscow quietly pleased that he met a long-lost friend.

Ambassador M K Bhadrakumar was a career diplomat in the Indian Foreign Service. His assignments included the Soviet Union, South Korea, Sri Lanka, Germany, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, Kuwait and Turkey.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JL09Df02.html
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by NRao »

Brown: Pakistan linked to most UK terror plots
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (CNN) -- Britain's prime minister Sunday asked India and Pakistan to allow UK police to interview Mumbai siege suspects as he revealed the extent of Pakistan-based extremists' involvement in terrorism in his country.

Gordon Brown, who met counterpart Manmohan Singh in New Delhi and Pakistan's President Asif Ali Zardari in Islamabad, said three quarters of the most serious terrorism cases investigated by British police have links to al Qaeda in Pakistan.

Brown said he asked both Zardari and Prime Minister Singh to allow British police to interview any Mumbai terror suspects arrested in their countries, saying "we all have an interest in discovering what lay behind the attacks."

He said he proposed to Zardari a new pact between Britain and Pakistan to "break the chain of terror that links the mountain of Afghanistan and Pakistan to the streets of the UK and other countries around the world."

It would be "the most comprehensive anti-terrorist program Britain has signed with any country," he said. "We will work to ensure that everything is done to make sure that terrorists are denied any safe haven in Pakistan."

"The time has come for action and not words and I want to help Pakistan and other countries root out terrorism."

More than 160 people -- including three with British passports -- were killed in the three-day Mumbai siege that started November 26. The 10 targeted sites included two luxury hotels, the train station and other landmarks.

Zardari said his government was investigating links between the Mumbai attacks and his country, but it is too early to know the results since Indian police are not finished with their probe.

"I'm hoping that once the Indian government completes the investigation and shares their results with us we will have further leads to further find if there are any culprits on this side of the border. We shall take action against them."

Brown said his government would also provide information to the Pakistani investigators.

Zardari, in a joint news conference with Brown Sunday afternoon, renewed his pledge that Pakistan would fully cooperate with India's probe of last month's attacks, but he said it was too soon to conclude that its roots were in Pakistan.

Zardari also downplayed reports that two Indian fighter jets encroached on Pakistan's airspace Saturday, calling it a "technical incursion."

Relations between India and Pakistan deteriorated amid evidence that the attackers were trained in Pakistan.

The United States has sent a steady stream of officials to the region, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice last week.

Zardari suggested media preference for bad news has aggravated tensions and insisted "we want to have the best of relations with India."

While news reports in both countries have made much of a Saturday incident in which two India fighter jets flew "several kilometers" into Pakistani airspace, Zardari said it was "a technical incursion" that happened when two planes flying at high altitude feet turned and "slightly entered Pakistan soil."

Earlier, Pakistani Prime Minister Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani said his government is not concerned that India's Air Force might attack suspected terror camp sites in Pakistan.

Indian Air Force spokesman, Wing Commander Mahesh Upasani, completely denied there was an airspace violation in an interview with CNN sister network CNN-IBN.

He said the report was part of a disinformation campaign designed to divert attention from the main issues. "These allegations are utterly untrue and I would call them rather preposterous," Upasani said.

Before leaving India for Pakistan Sunday morning, Brown told reporters he had no doubts there was a connection between the Mumbai attacks and Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LeT), a Pakistani-based terror group.

"We also know there have been arrests in Pakistan," Brown said. "We also know that the group responsible is LeT."

The only surviving suspect, identified by Indian police as 21-year-old Mohammad Ajmal Kasab, has written a letter to the Pakistan High Commission, or embassy, confessing to his role and seeking legal aid, a Mumbai police official said.

Indian investigators said Kasab is from Faridkot village in the Okara district of Pakistan's Punjab province and the other nine alleged attackers also are from Pakistan.

Pakistani officials have denied that assertion, blaming instead "stateless actors."

This week, Pakistani authorities banned a charity linked to the attacks and placed its leader under house arrest, Pakistan's information minister told CNN.

The move came after the U.N. Security Council designated the charity, Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD), a terror organization because of its links to Lashkar-e-Tayyiba and placed sanctions on the group.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by NRao »

Z should be tired of hearing his own stuff!
Vikram_S
BRFite
Posts: 359
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 23:49

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Vikram_S »

one thing is for sure pakistanis are shit scared of the IAF
note scared noise coming over so called violation, by pak

these cowards are good for only terrorism
vasu_ray
BRFite
Posts: 550
Joined: 30 Nov 2008 01:06

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by vasu_ray »

perhaps aircraft with full weapon load give off different/strong radar signatures than otherwise, hence paki contention, yet their radars couldn't tell how many or what kind of aircraft.

would radar absorbing paint on the weapons a feasible option?
Vikram_S
BRFite
Posts: 359
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 23:49

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Vikram_S »

it is standard practising during such times to "test" opponent air defence in attempts to have them start up air defence radars so that IAF can get location of each

so IAF will do it
pakis going public with it in attempt to use international pressure about bad bad IAF means they are very scared and know they cannot match IAF

not surprising because in real term IAF has overwhelm BVR advantage over PAF

this is also putting economic cost on TSP
each time paki plane flies on intercept, fuel and spare cost which paki AF will find hard to replace since pakistan is now very short of money
"friend" china cannot give mirage and f-16 spare or avaiton gas
Last edited by Vikram_S on 14 Dec 2008 23:28, edited 1 time in total.
NRao
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19236
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Illini Nation

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by NRao »

ZBhai needs to "improve" his governments relations with the Pakistani Army and ISI - have them work under the elected government of Pakistan. Then he can talk about Indian relations.

On "stateless actors", ZBhai, they ALSO have to have some domicile, a state what they were born in, stayed in, etc.

Unless you are saying that the State of Pakistan does not exist and therefore these Pakistanis are stateless actors. In which case we have but no choice but to agree with you.
Vikram_S
BRFite
Posts: 359
Joined: 05 Oct 2008 23:49

Re: Indian Response to Terrorism

Post by Vikram_S »

nrao

zardari can do nothing
all he wants is to retain his gaddi from army
he will make proper noises to both india and army and will be able to do nothing
Locked