Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Feb. 12, 2011

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 16 Feb 2011 07:32

POTUS spoke yesterday in press conf about Davies case. and john kerry the usual go-between to the pakis has proclaimed that in cases of this nature, US will by itself launch a criminal investigation on Davis....so the carrot is being dangled that paki H&D will be preserved and if davis is released he will be prosecuted in the US

unconfirmed reports speak of Davis beating up and abusing some fellow prisoners in the pakjail

archan · Post by **archan** » 16 Feb 2011 07:33

I hope the pakis do something entertaining so we can have some fun back in this thread. Else some of you are making it into boreistan thread.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Feb 2011 07:42

Well, when will Pakistan turn Rahat Fateh Ali's arrest for smuggling in a large sum of money into "India not open for Foreign Direct Investment"?

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 16 Feb 2011 08:06

shiv wrote:
VikramS wrote: It is clear that TSP was created to serve Anglo interests something Jinnah proudly claimed in those famous interviews; hence the Anglos reciprocating the favor is not unexpected.
I am bemused by the fatalistic statement here: "reciprocating the favor is not unexpected". Very Indic. Sorry if you don't like repetitions but I want to see an end to this Anglo-US liaison with Pakistan and not some rationalization and fatalistic explanation.

The argument that a continuous reference to the past hinders a view of the future is one that stuns me. If this is the feeling that a majority of people have it explains to me in one crushing blow why my fellow countrymen - some of whom wear the "I am a patriot" label with vulgar clarity are so nonchalantly sanguine about the continued supply of US arms to Pakistan. They are forgetting the past and looking to the future.

There is a difference between forgetting history and being trapped by it.

You make these Unkil==Evil posts on a regular basis, repeating the same story again and again, but never respond to counter questions posed.

There is a basic premise that Unkil's arms are responsible for TSP aggression, when apart from 1965 that is not the case. What did Unkil provide to enable Kargil or 11/26? We all know it is the nukes but you refuse to consider that.

So we have the following statements to comfort ourselves:
1) Aid to Pakistan is "not unexpected" as a return for favors.
2) Since we must forget past episodes of arms supply and look to the future, we will never ever object to the US supply of arms to Pakistan. Let bygones be bygones. Like 26/11 I guess.

No Sir. That is not the way my mind thinks. I am not gaming any scenarios here. Merely demanding that the US must stop supplying arms to Pakistan and trying to think of schemes that will sabotage the US or Pakistan or both rather than forgetting the past have them sabotage us.

The problem is that you are making an issue out of a non-issue. Your basic premise that it is Uncle's arms which drive TSP behavior is fundamentally flawed. There have been numerous discussions on this but being the undisputed dada of BR, you have the luxury to ignore them.

It is not Uncle's F-16s or Harpoons; it is the Chipanda Nukes and Missiles which provide TSP with its defense shield.

I will stop responding to your baits going forward, but you are not doing BR a favor by repeating the same flawed premise ad-nauseum.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 16 Feb 2011 08:17

shiv wrote: No No cosmoji. Bad self goal!! This is another highly Indic suggestion that calls for "doosron ki jai se pehle khud ko jai karein". We punish ourselves and starve ourselves because we want to make sure we are blameless before blaming someone else. Blow me down!! We Indians think this way and I am hoping to point that out and change a few minds.

We must get everything. Pakistan must get nothing. We carry on doing whatever we want and stop the US from supplying Pakistan with arms. That is the way forward. Not self punishment and self denial. After all that is the way the world thinks - certainly the US and Pakistan think that way. Only Indians flagellate themselves and other Indians when the problem that needs to be solved is not within India but outside.

If we want the luxury of being weak and diffident, we can't afford to complain when we get kicked around. Nature doesn't work that way.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Feb 2011 08:30

WRT RaFAK (Rahat Fateh Ali Khan).

The guy was in India for the last 15 days doing concerts all over the place, at Ajmer etc etc.
He WAS NOT coming into India or Passing through delhi.
He was Flying out to Lahore via Dubai from IGI Delhi. (Perhaps he has bank accounts and houses in Dubai as most pakistanis have migrated to dubai ever since Dubai opened up the housing sector to outsiders)

His manager, India contact gave him the foreign currency in the airport.
It has been revealed by several hindi film industry sources in newspaper articles that all these pakistani artists who come into india accept money in cash and as deposits in overseas accounts - ie ALL of it in Black Money (Compare that to Indian artists who get the bulk of their payments in cheques and is mostly white - In fact a certain Mr ShahRukh Khan is amongst the top income tax payers in India).

That the pakistanis accept money in Black, and don't want to pay taxes either in India or in Pakistan is to be expected given their upbringing in Pakistan, and the social norm there of not paying taxes.

RaFAK has been dealt leniently by DRI because of GoI mantris asking them to let him off custody. The guys that DRI gets are usually people who have money, and contacts so go figure on comparitive rates and duration of detention of Indian citizens vs foreigners that they arrest/detain.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 16 Feb 2011 08:35

Now given that Pakistan is increasingly unsafe for the Pakjabi RAPE class, and the fact that western nations are tightening the screws on them visiting / migrating there, the pakistanis have their eyes set on the UAE as the promised land to settle in while the jeehad blows hot back home in Pakistan.

It seems that the UAE allows people to live there if they buy expensive property, which a lot of Indians, Pakistanis, etc have bought. For the pakistanis this would be the place that they can escape to should a revolution occur back home. How safe it is for the tiny nation of UAE given that it will be deluged by pakistani 'refugees' with their pakistaniyat and fervour for Jihad, only they can calculate.

Dhiman · Post by **Dhiman** » 16 Feb 2011 08:44

Brad Goodman wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:Shiv, a modest proposal: A bipartisan bill in parliament that says: "The MoD is hereby prohibited from purchasing from any vendor that supplies arms to Pakistan that can be used against India. The stipulations under this bill are not retroactive but shall be effective this date forward"

Let the GoI/MEA/MoD act helpless. See what pressure Boeing/LM bring to bear on GOTUS
This is perfect. With $11B deal for MMRCA and least another $40B in pipelines. Boeing & Lockheed will do all the lobbying that we can only dream of acheiving.

I guess a simple clause in MMRCA contract stating that supplier or suppliers of supplier should not be found to supply arms to TSP after so-and-so date would be too much to expect.

skumar · Post by **skumar** » 16 Feb 2011 08:50

VikramS wrote: The problem is that you are making an issue out of a non-issue. Your basic premise that it is Uncle's arms which drive TSP behavior is fundamentally flawed. There have been numerous discussions on this but being the undisputed dada of BR, you have the luxury to ignore them.

It is not Uncle's F-16s or Harpoons; it is the Chipanda Nukes and Missiles which provide TSP with its defense shield.

I will stop responding to your baits going forward, but you are not doing BR a favor by repeating the same flawed premise ad-nauseum.

This baba agrees with the "undisputed dada of BR".

TSP gets its arms from only 2 sources - the US and China. Both provide arms knowing well that these will be used against India eventually, China probably provides it with that condition/hope.

Your premise that TSP's behaviour is driven more by the nuclear weapons than conventional weapons is flawed since it implies that TSP is willing to use nuclear weapons readily. Would you say that TSP embarked on Kargil ready to use them? Nuclear weapons are primarily a deterrent, not something that would encourage a Kargil. I think they are as s... scared of a fallout as we are. Though TSP does not have conventional parity with us, they enjoy an advantage on a per capita basis and this is due to the conventional weapons provided gratis by uncle and panda. Do you think TSP would be adventurous if we had a 7:1 advantage over them or even a 4:1? Unless these are provided gratis, would TSP be able to afford them?

In addition to the tangibles, the other point is the intangibles provided by uncle and panda. TSP knows that they can get into s... and uncle/panda will get them out (though that seems to be changing).

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 16 Feb 2011 09:11

skumar wrote:
VikramS wrote: The problem is that you are making an issue out of a non-issue. Your basic premise that it is Uncle's arms which drive TSP behavior is fundamentally flawed. There have been numerous discussions on this but being the undisputed dada of BR, you have the luxury to ignore them.

It is not Uncle's F-16s or Harpoons; it is the Chipanda Nukes and Missiles which provide TSP with its defense shield.

I will stop responding to your baits going forward, but you are not doing BR a favor by repeating the same flawed premise ad-nauseum.
I agree with the "undisputed dada of BR".

TSP gets its arms from only 2 sources - the US and China. Both provide arms knowing well that these will be used against India eventually, China probably provides it with that condition/hope.

Your premise that TSP's behaviour is driven more by the nuclear weapons than conventional weapons is flawed since it implies that TSP is willing to use nuclear weapons readily. Would you say that TSP embarked on Kargil ready to use them? Nuclear weapons are primarily a deterrent, not something that would encourage a Kargil. I think they are as s... scared of a fallout as we are. Though TSP does not have conventional parity with us, they enjoy an advantage on a per capita basis and this is due to the conventional weapons provided gratis by uncle and panda. Do you think TSP would be adventurous if we had a 7:1 advantage over them or even a 4:1? Unless these are provided gratis, would TSP be able to afford them?

In addition to the tangibles, the other point is the intangibles provided by uncle and panda. TSP knows that they can get into s... and uncle/panda will get them out (though that seems to be changing).

4:1, 7:1 or even 100:1 is meaningless if you are unwilling to use them.

And India is unwilling to use it because the risk-reward does not work out. There is always the risk of the conflict going nuclear. TSP has nothing to lose; India has a lot to.

Prior to Kargil the TSP forces had been cut off from aid from Uncle for almost a decade but it did not deter them. And if nukes did not deter India, why didn't Indian forces go for the TSPA bases in POK? Why was IAF restricted from operating on the Indian side of the LOC when it had a qualitative and a quantitative advantage over the TSPAF. Indian leaders chose to keep the conflict local. WHY?

All those intangibles are provided because the TSPA asks for them in return for services provided. It could ask for stuff which makes the life of the Mango Abdul better, but then the TSP would not be TSP.

No one wants to bell the cat but Crying Uncle is easy.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 09:20

Pak warns Lakhvi will walk free

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Pak-w ... ree/750678

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 09:25

Pak thanks PC for Rahat release

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1110216/j ... 588560.jsp

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 09:34

Facing the music

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Facin ... sic/750427

Pakistani singer Rahat Fateh Ali Khan was detained at Delhi airport after his 15-member troupe was found to have over $100,000 in their possession, undeclared to customs authorities. He was grilled for over 20 hours by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, his manager’s and relatives’ homes were raided, and his passport has been impounded until the issue is resolved. He was initially even denied consular service. He has now got a conditional release, but the incident has shown up the inherent overkill in these cases. Carrying undeclared cash of this kind is a garden-variety civil law infringement, and one that comes — and should come — with strong financial penalties.

And while the law does give the authorities the option to detain the offender, must it be used as a matter of course, even when there is little chance of the offender fleeing the law?

But it is not as though Khan, as a foreign citizen, is being singled out for flouting excise law. This is a longstanding pattern at our airports — in mid-2009, businesswoman Sheetal Mafatlal was arrested for carrying more jewellery than is allowed, and the incident was turned into a tidy parable about the moral bankruptcy of wealth. Before her, it was Pune builder Avinash Bhosale and former managing director of Escorts, Anil Nanda, who were hauled up for carrying undeclared high-value items including a diamond-studded watch. Evading customs is an infraction, it costs the state, and it must come with hefty penalties. But it doesn’t need to be turned into theatre, an opportunity for a little official swagger and lessons in civic responsibility.

We need to examine whether acts like this need to be answered with such brutal shaming. All crimes are not created equal — and while Rahat Fateh Ali Khan’s detention was backed up by provisions in the Customs Act and the Foreign Exchange Management Act, perhaps application of the rule-book itself needs a rethink. Too often, incidents of this kind are accompanied by the harsh possibility of humiliation (compounded when the individual is famous or visible in some way, so that the customs authorities have a chance to grab the headlines) when simply allowing the law to take its course should suffice.

True spirit of Aman ki Asha. This is the original Thimphu spirit.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 09:39

VikramS wrote:
There is a difference between forgetting history and being trapped by it.

Meaningless semantics sir. Worth a response to point that out

VikramS wrote:You make these Unkil==Evil posts on a regular basis, repeating the same story again and again, but never respond to counter questions posed.

Counter questions do not take away the fundamental truth of what I am saying although I have never painted the US as uniformly evil. That is your interpretation. You are hypersensitive to criticism of the US I am not. You are you . I am me.

VikramS wrote:There is a basic premise that Unkil's arms are responsible for TSP aggression, when apart from 1965 that is not the case. What did Unkil provide to enable Kargil or 11/26? We all know it is the nukes but you refuse to consider that.

Communication devices, night vision equipment and weapons locating radar were all provided by the USA - and all were used in the Kargil conflict. Read Kaiser Tufails notes on F-16s in the Kargil war. You are welcome to choose to be in denial - but as you can see, that will in no way restrict me from pointing out facts.

VikramS wrote:I will stop responding to your baits going forward, but you are not doing BR a favor by repeating the same flawed premise ad-nauseum.

Criticizing the US="baiting you". Is that a Freudian slip? You are welcome to hold your opinion about the favors or disfavors I might be doing, but it is curious to see that criticism of the US is seen by you as both "bait" and "disfavor to BR". I find that both amusing and illuminating.

Sorry nothing personal. But when certain facts are pointed out they are bound to cause discomfort. I am sorry if they cause you discomfort. But my need to post an Indian viewpoint over and above an American viewpoint overwhelms any desire that I may have not to inadvertently cause discomfort

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 16 Feb 2011 09:40

^ Arrest one Baki for breaking the law and you need to "rethink" it.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 09:44

VikramS wrote: Prior to Kargil the TSP forces had been cut off from aid from Uncle for almost a decade but it did not deter them.

Faith and belief are a matter of personal taste, but let me set the facts on the table. Allegiance to America and a willingness to believe fiction could be anyone's choice. but not mine.

From 1992

Despite Ban, U.S. Arms Are Sold to Pakistan

n October, 1990, the Administration was unable to certify Pakistan's compliance with the law, and the arms ban passed by Congress took effect, freezing $570 million in U.S. military aid. Although the Administration cut off direct country-to-country arms sales at the time, it decided to allow continued private, commercial arms sales to Pakistan, according to documents and interviews.

skumar · Post by **skumar** » 16 Feb 2011 09:46

VikramS wrote: Prior to Kargil the TSP forces had been cut off from aid from Uncle for almost a decade but it did not deter them.

A decade is not much, weapon systems are generally used for many decades, TSP had lots of unused stock since Afghanistan has not blown over then and TSP had a continuous supply from the other (panda).

VikramS wrote: 4:1, 7:1 or even 100:1 is meaningless if you are unwilling to use them.

And India is unwilling to use it because the risk-reward does not work out. There is always the risk of the conflict going nuclear. TSP has nothing to lose; India has a lot to.

... And if nukes did not deter India, why didn't Indian forces go for the TSPA bases in POK? Why was IAF restricted from operating on the Indian side of the LOC when it had a qualitative and a quantitative advantage over the TSPAF. Indian leaders chose to keep the conflict local. WHY?

Granted that our inability to use overwhelming force and take the fight to the enemy, even in defense, is no one's fault but our own. But we are discussing TSP here; we are the status-quo power and the action to change it comes from TSP. The question again is, would TSP be adventurous if we had a conventional 7:1 or 4:1 advantage?

VikramS wrote:No one wants to bell the cat but Crying Uncle is easy.

Can you see that the argument can go both ways here?

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 16 Feb 2011 09:57

Govt has no funds for railways, NA body told

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Railways has turned into a shambles because there are no funds available even to repair its out of order locomotives.

A meeting organised by the National Assembly Standing Committee on Railways to discuss affairs of the ever-sinking national organisation was informed on Tuesday that the government had released only Rs2.1 billion so far against Rs25.1 billion allocated to it for the current financial year.

The meeting, presided over by Ayaz Sadiq of the PML-N, was attended by Railways Minister Ghulam Ahmad Bilour, MNAs Nauman Islam Sheikh, Begum Nasim Akhtar, Dr Talat Mahesar, Rahela Baloch, Tariq Ayub Sheikh and Haji Rozuddin, Finance Secretary Waqar Masood, Planning and Development Division Secretary Sohail Ahmad and Railways Secretary Shahid Hussain Raja.

Mr Bilour said: “The PR is virtually dying because out of its 500 locomotives, only 227 are in running condition. Despite repeated presentations before the cabinet, the government is non-committal to bail the railways out.”

He said it was ironic that the government had funds to bail out the PIA, which was used only by a fraction of Pakistanis, while the railways was a cheap mode of transportation.

The minister said the government had been promising for the past one year to release Rs5 billion for making old locomotives functional, but nothing had happened, and as a result “we will have to close down more routes”.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 10:02

Baluchistan: Pakistan's other war

http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... _other_war

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Feb 2011 10:04

Pak has three principal sponnsors/godfathers-call them what you will.Each does so for selfish reasons.

1.The US:The US supports Pak to the hilt with weapons and money,turning a blind eye to its terrorist ways,because it sees the Pakis as a willing mercenary military nation,ready to do the US's bidding,"yours obediently",occupying a very strategic place on the planet,from where it can monitor the Persian Gulf,Arabian Sea/Indian Ocean,Afghanistan and the Central Asian republics and even unto Tibet and China by ensuring that J&K is conveniently detached form India as an independent nation from where the US can squat for centuries and able to destabilise Iran.It also is a very handy tool with which to cut India down to size,keeping the world's largest democracy engaged in other matters silent on key global issues where India's moral standing and historic role in supporting the freedom movements of the colonial era has given it considerable influence especially in nations part of the NAM movement.Using Pak,the US/NATO has effectively "squatted" in Afghanistan and further destabilised an already fragile region.

2.China:The Chinese see Pak as their powerful proxy with which to destabilise India and the equivalent of a rabid "rotweiler" which can be unleashed to destroy India at a future time of its choosing.For this purpose,the PRC has equipped the Paki military for decades with enough eqpt. to counter India's numerical supeiority.In recent times,China has embarked upon improving Pak's defence infrastructure,so that it can be integrated into China's massibve arms industry.The Karakorum trainer,JF-17 aircraft,MBTs,UAVs,missile craft/warships ,and now a new capability to build Chinese radars for its strike aircraft,indicates the potential that Pak has with the backing of the PRC.

Further to the boosting of manufacturing of conventional weapon systems,China has sceretly boosted Pak's nuclear weapons production capabilities,so that Pak has a numerical superiority over India,releasing Chinese efforts at countering the US's overwhelming N-weapons superiority and also extra production for the Saudis,who already have Chinese SSBMs in their inventory.Burma might be future recipient of Paki built Chinese N-weapons.China has also developed its own infrastructure links through Tibet into pak by road,a rail and pipeline link is also on the cards,linking Tibet through POK/Aksai Chin (Indian territory) to Gwadar at the mouth of the Gulf.China also provides Pak with strategic planning and the constant usage of terror to create internal havoc wihtin India.

3.The Saudis: Islamic brothers,defenders of the Saudi royalty,fellow "crusaders" of Wahabai Islam,the Pakis are Allah's greatest gift to the Saudis after the two holy sites.The {Pakis will do the Saudi's dirty work for them in the region to see that the ruling clique in the kingdom are safe from their own people and can rule in their own despotic style.The Saudis also need the Pakis to counter the Shiite Iranians whom they loathe even more than the Jewish state of Israel.Thus the Saudis provide a safe haven for Paki dictators when out of favour,see Pak as a source of cheap labour,its military to beef up its defences if required and most importantly as a conduit and siource for Chinese made weaponry,ballistic and cruise missiles and even Paki built Chinese designed N-weapons.Saudi money helps keep Pak afloat and in many ways the US and Saudis are in need of Pak for these manifold reasons as well as all three being allies.

With India's weakest ever political leadership at the helm,seemingly unable to even comprehend what is happening around it and the stranglehold of India that is being made by China and its proxies,India is like the Titanic heading for the Sino-Pak-Saudi iceberg at full speed!

PS:The Davis charade goes on with each side not wanting to lose face.When thieves fall out...! It will inevitaby end up in acompromise and pak will get its "pound of flesh"

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheat-shee ... /intrigue/

Pakistan: U.S. Contractor a Murderer

The U.S. and Pakistan continue to face off over the fate of a U.S. contactor being held in Lahore on charges of murder. The Lahore police chief said Raymond Davis didn’t act in self-defense and would be charged with murder, while the U.S. government maintains he has diplomatic immunity—though they have so far refused to say exactly what Davis did at the Lahore consulate. According to the U.S. embassy in Islamabad, Davis had withdrawn money from an ATM and was driving his Honda Civic when two men on a motorcycle tried to rob him. He shot and killed them both, while a second car driving from the embassy to help Davis struck and killed a bystander. According to a senior Pakistani official, however, Davis was a spy, carrying maps of high-security installations, and knew both the men he shot.

Read it at Wall Street Journal

skumar · Post by **skumar** » 16 Feb 2011 10:26

shiv wrote:
n October, 1990, the Administration was unable to certify Pakistan's compliance with the law, and the arms ban passed by Congress took effect, freezing $570 million in U.S. military aid. Although the Administration cut off direct country-to-country arms sales at the time, it decided to allow continued private, commercial arms sales to Pakistan, according to documents and interviews.

In addition, recent Pentagon audits have confirmed that hundreds of billions of dollars cannot be accounted for. http://www.counterpunch.org/christie11192010.html "Right now, the Pentagon does not know how or where it spends its money. As the Government Accountability Office and DOD's own Office of the Inspector General have reported for decades, the Pentagon cannot track the money it spends. Routinely, DOD does not know if it has paid contactors once, twice, or not at all. We recently learned it does not even know how many contractors it has, how many they employ, and what they are doing."

Would it be fair to assume that at least some of that money has found its way to TSP in cash and kind during the 1990s? Accusations of conspiracy theories are welcome.

ajaytripathi · Post by **ajaytripathi** » 16 Feb 2011 10:28

Shekhar Gupta continues to abuse his editoral space to support criminals and terrorists. After the bomb blasts in Mumbai conducted by pakistani terrorists, he blamed Gujarati community for it and sort of said you deserve it to the victims. If you have relatives and friends having Indian Express subscriptions please inform them of this fact and encourage them to stop buying this paper.

abhishek_sharma wrote:Facing the music

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Facin ... sic/750427

Pakistani singer Rahat Fateh Ali Khan was detained at Delhi airport after his 15-member troupe was found to have over $100,000 in their possession, undeclared to customs authorities. He was grilled for over 20 hours by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, his manager’s and relatives’ homes were raided, and his passport has been impounded until the issue is resolved. He was initially even denied consular service. He has now got a conditional release, but the incident has shown up the inherent overkill in these cases. Carrying undeclared cash of this kind is a garden-variety civil law infringement, and one that comes — and should come — with strong financial penalties.

And while the law does give the authorities the option to detain the offender, must it be used as a matter of course, even when there is little chance of the offender fleeing the law?

But it is not as though Khan, as a foreign citizen, is being singled out for flouting excise law. This is a longstanding pattern at our airports — in mid-2009, businesswoman Sheetal Mafatlal was arrested for carrying more jewellery than is allowed, and the incident was turned into a tidy parable about the moral bankruptcy of wealth. Before her, it was Pune builder Avinash Bhosale and former managing director of Escorts, Anil Nanda, who were hauled up for carrying undeclared high-value items including a diamond-studded watch. Evading customs is an infraction, it costs the state, and it must come with hefty penalties. But it doesn’t need to be turned into theatre, an opportunity for a little official swagger and lessons in civic responsibility.

We need to examine whether acts like this need to be answered with such brutal shaming. All crimes are not created equal — and while Rahat Fateh Ali Khan’s detention was backed up by provisions in the Customs Act and the Foreign Exchange Management Act, perhaps application of the rule-book itself needs a rethink. Too often, incidents of this kind are accompanied by the harsh possibility of humiliation (compounded when the individual is famous or visible in some way, so that the customs authorities have a chance to grab the headlines) when simply allowing the law to take its course should suffice.
True spirit of Aman ki Asha. This is the original Thimphu spirit.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 10:30

For the record. US WLR in Kargil

http://www.indiastrategic.in/topstories129.htm

During the Kargil War, according to Army Headquarters reports, the Pakistanis could detect Indian fire and counter attack while Indians were at the receiving end and had to deploy massively disproportionate firepower later to suppress the Pakistanis.
<snip>
Pakistan has had the advantage of US-supplied radars from the mid-1980s, and they were also built by Raytheon, but an earlier model, AN-TPQ-36.

manjgu · Post by **manjgu** » 16 Feb 2011 10:31

as G parthasarthy once said ' americans have allowed Pakis to box in a heavier category than their actual weight'... i totally agree with Shiv.

the current leadership is totally clueless to handle any issue.. and u have the geriatric FM who reads wrong speeches !

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 10:36

manjgu wrote:u have the geriatric FM who reads wrong speeches !

Don't blame him. He has explained it saying: "There were so many papers there - so I picked up one in Portuguese and read it for less than 35 minutes"

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 16 Feb 2011 10:41

VikramS wrote: The problem is that you are making an issue out of a non-issue. Your basic premise that it is Uncle's arms which drive TSP behavior is fundamentally flawed. There have been numerous discussions on this but being the undisputed dada of BR, you have the luxury to ignore them.

It is not Uncle's F-16s or Harpoons; it is the Chipanda Nukes and Missiles which provide TSP with its defense shield.

I will stop responding to your baits going forward, but you are not doing BR a favor by repeating the same flawed premise ad-nauseum.

Right on VikramS. Your statement is dead-on. The repeated rants of some of posters just sound like pukish anti imperialist speeches by Nehru and Menon and then come Oct 1962 all the chamchas of them were standing at the gates of American embassy in their shiny white Ambassadors with their list of demands for IA. Banned Org RSS was first time allowed in 1963 Republic Day parade. Its hard for them to understand that constant US baiting just plays into hands of Communists and Digvijay Singh types, since they listen to this bogey and take it further that since US is not Indian friend, let's be friends with KSA, Iran and PLO.
For Indian security matrix the difference between F-16s or Harpoons and Chipanda Nukes and Missiles is as much as between an AK-47 and a Bofors. Of course a really determined person with preconceived unchangable one sided views would convince everyone how AK-47 is more dangerous than Bofors(and forget to mention that only at 2ft range).
Comparison between Chipanda Nukes and Missiles and F-16s is like Kahan Raja Bhoj and Kahan Gangu Teli.
NoKo has no F-16s and still it's acts prove what TSP would have been even without F-16s.

The main problem with India is not keeping a 3x nooks than TSP, with 1x for TSP 2x for Chipanda and 3x for others in Agni 3 range.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 10:56

shiv wrote:Read Kaiser Tufails notes on F-16s in the Kargil war.

In fact Kaisar Tufail's accounts of F16 usage during Kargil is an illustration of what is WRONG with the US from a Pak perspective..the Pakis were under sanctions at that time, and quickly ran out of spares - F16 sorties had to be kept to a minimum..If the conventional conflict was expanded, the F16 fleet was not effectively available to them..

At a conventional level, whatever US gives/sells to Pak does not build an enormous amount of deterrence..The real Pak deterrence is its nukes - it has been proven thrice now - Kargil, Parakram and 26/11...

No one, not US, nor anyone else is under any obligation to extend us a favour..They act according to their own perceived interests, we do likewise...The conversaiotn should be on what WE can do to influence events in our favour...Badmouthing US/UK/Europe/3.5 friends makes no sense..

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 11:09

somnath wrote:The conversaiotn should be on what WE can do to influence events in our favour...Badmouthing US/UK/Europe/3.5 friends makes no sense..

What the "conversation should be" is a matter of opinion. Your opinion and mine could well be different. What WE can do is to influence the US or sabotage the US. But first we need to acknowledge that supply of lethal arms to Pakistan by the US is a problem for India. There is no talk of what We can do because a lot of people don't even believe it to be a problem and often prefer to change the subject when the topic is brought up.

You want a change of conversation?

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 11:21

shiv wrote:But first we need to acknowledge that supply of lethal arms to Pakistan by the US is a problem for India

In the list of problems from Pak that India has to face, it comes pretty low..The first ten slots in that list is taken up by Pak's nukes..the next ten by Pak's geogrpahy making it so important to the US..conventional arms supplies would come after that...Of course strictly IMO..

And the conversation is more meaningful and interesting if one talks of things that we can do to influence the events, and which "events" need influencing...Otherwise, abusing US/3.5 friends at evey news flash only gives a feeling of deja vu, and after a while, ennui, no?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 16 Feb 2011 11:36

Somnath/Vikram,

with all due respect, cut the crap. US support, by way of militar/economic/diplomatic support to TSP has blunted any offensive move India could make towards TSP. I will grant you that US supply of weapons is only one piece of the puzzle, but were this terrorist abomination called TSP arrayed against any other western country or Israel, you can be rest assured TSP would have been castrated. And you are missing the fundamental reason for US support to TSP: to box India in a "South Asia" framework. Now does all this mean India has to be so impotent as it right now under MMS? Of course not, US support to TSP notwithstanding, there are any number of no nonsense messages India can deliver to TSP.

Karna_A · Post by **Karna_A** » 16 Feb 2011 11:39

What the "conversation should be" is a matter of opinion. Your opinion and mine could well be different. What WE can do is to influence the US or sabotage the US. But first we need to acknowledge that supply of lethal arms to Pakistan by the US is a problem for India. There is no talk of what We can do because a lot of people don't even believe it to be a problem and often prefer to change the subject when the topic is brought up.

You want a change of conversation?

Deliberately leaving out Chipanda from the above discussion and only focussing on a self selected peripheral issues is a self defeating argument.

Leaving out the perfidity of Chipanda in arms to TSP discussion is like leaving out devilish TSP machinations from Kashmir valley discussion.

I'll just read your statement back to you:(You'll see how absurd it sounds when you are on the opposite side of your own statement)

What the "conversation should be" is a matter of opinion. Your opinion and mine could well be different. What WE can do is to influence the Kashmiri people or sabotage the Kashmiri people. But first we need to acknowledge that discontent of Kashmiris is a problem for India. There is no talk of what We can do because a lot of people don't even believe it to be a problem and often prefer to change the subject when the topic is brought up.

Just as discontent of Valley Kashmiris is an insignificant part of the overall Kashmir problem,(Every community has some or the other grievance like Gujjars and valley kashmiris are no special) the arms provided by US so far are insignificant part of the overall India-TSP problem.
Everyone knows what the main problem is, so lets cut the chase and get the elephant out of the room instead of harping on screaming cats even though one may be allergic to cat dander.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 11:57

CRAMSji,

If the US has supported Pak in the past (and present), it has been to achieve its own objectives...Why are you/we so surprised at that? There is little merit in shouting blue murder at that...The objective should be to see what we can do to change US behaviour..

BTW, if you think the MMS govt is "impotent" etc, do read Jaswant Singh's "Call to honour" to figure out the thought process of the "muscular, nationalist" govt...The red lines, in both Kargil and Parakram, were clear, and not dissimilar to those of the presetn govt..And they were drawn by Pak's nuclear capability, not conventional...

American convemtional arms is actually a fairly small problem..In Kargil and Parakram, it was the American sanctions that meant that Pak's "tip of the spear" was blunted...Kaisar Tufail (wonder why Shivji brought THAT up!) brings that up succinctly in his accounts...

American objectives are also more complex than "box India in South Asia"...There is also an emerging china issue that Us has to confront, and India is a key variable there...There is an Afghnaistan issue where Pak needs to be on the "right" side as well..and there is an overriding concern with Pak as well - a potentially failing state with nukes...

Nation states dont deal with each other on black and white terms...It is for us to get the best deal possible ourselves...Like we did with the Nuclear deal - that is a real game changer...Americans are not giving one to the Pakis, are they? So the reality is a bit more complex..

ajaytripathi · Post by **ajaytripathi** » 16 Feb 2011 12:07

Rahat likely to be slapped with a fine

Those caught smuggling foreign currency in violation of India’s Foreign Exchange Management Act (Fema) have known to have stayed in detention for weeks. In India, Fema violation is a civil offence and Rahat could be in serious trouble if the case is taken up by the Indian authorities under money laundering laws instead of Fema.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/119610/raha ... th-a-fine/

ajaytripathi · Post by **ajaytripathi** » 16 Feb 2011 12:12

Inspite of kid glove treatment to pakistani singer this is what we get. Hatred towards Indians has seeped so deep that even bending laws to favour pakistani criminals evokes a negative response.

A lesson for Rahat Fateh Ali Khan
By Letter
Published: February 15, 2011

ISLAMABAD: This is with reference to the drama surrounding the detention, and eventual release, of Rahat Fateh Ali Khan at New Delhi airport. Perhaps this harrowing incident will make him understand the Indian psyche better. This isn’t the first time that something like this has happened with Pakistani talent in India. Take the case of Pakistani cricketers who did wonders in the IPL and then they were not taken the next year. Also, look at how they have treated Adnan Sami Khan.
Behzad Akhtar

http://tribune.com.pk/story/119364/a-le ... -ali-khan/

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 16 Feb 2011 12:13

somnath:

You are wordsmithing and spinning. If US really wanted, and prima facie, one were to accept US thesis that TSP is a failing state, and nukes could fall into the hands of extremists, it could do a lot more. I mean just the other day, US itself issued a report that TSP is expnading its nukes. And you really think if TSP were posing a threat to US and west, they would sit by idly and let a failing state with extremists expand its nuke arsenal? (That TSP has got some chutzpah to demand a nuke deal like the one India has is another matter). Give me a break. TSP and its nukes are primarily nurtured as a pressure point on India. Just think for a moment. If TSP's nukes are out of the way, imagine how uppity India will get. India will demand parity with P-5 as nuke weapon state, that it is a democracy, it has fool proof safe gaurds etc. Not that US will not be able to counter all of India's claims (India has a lot of faultlines that US can exploit) but its a heck a lot more difficult than to harness TSP's nuke blackmail with the simple "nuclear flashpoint" pressure on India.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 16 Feb 2011 12:18

What "half-decent" conventional armaments are there with Pakistan today which are not gifted by US?
Its front line artillery, air planes, helicopters, radars are all given by US for free.

Only a blind man will not see them, but alas...

In the list of problems from Pak that India has to face, it comes pretty low

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 12:20

CRamS wrote:If US really wanted, and prima facie, one were to accept US thesis that TSP is a failing state, and nukes could fall into the hands of extremists, it could do a lot more. I mean just the other day, US itself issued a report that TSP is expnading its nukes.

And why exactly should the US want that? Its Afghanistan mission is dependent on Pak, for vaious reasons...Even otherwise, Pak is the only "reliable" US proxy in the Central Asian periphery, important as a hedge against Russia...So why exactly should US "want" to doom Pak?

On the other hand, even if it did, what is its capability to carry out something? The comparative politico-military gap vis-a-vis Iran is much higher..And Iran doesnt even have a weapon...And there is a willing proxy in Israel to help it execute its bidding...US still cant do much against Iran, barring appealing all and sundry for greater sanctions...

CRamS wrote:If TSP's nukes are out of the way, imagine how uppity India will get.

Precisely my point! The red lines are not a couple of F16 squadrons...The red lines are the nukes...

BTW, India's demands on nuclear status, or anything else is quite aside of Pak...Its got nothing to do with Pak at all..

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 16 Feb 2011 12:28

shiv:

I have read Tufail's accounts of the F-16s and also Ceaser's report on acig. The PAF did not have more than a handful of air-worthy modern warplanes. And one of the two pilots operating from Skardu lost it after his F-16 was painted by an IAF Mig29 (the late Guarav Chibber perhaps); a result of very little air-time or combat training over the past decade. So much for the Fiza Ya and her great American weapons.

And how did TSPA's fire-finder radars (a legacy from the Afghan war) alter the course of the Kargil war? The question to ask is why did the IAF not knock out those guns which were within a minute or two of flying time from the LOC and whose approximate location was reasonably well known.

With due respect sir, you are dredging at the bottom of the barrel if that is the best you can come up with.

I am in complete agreement that TSP was allowed to box much higher than its weight-class. Instead of

our time would be better spent in understanding WHY it happened and more importantly WHAT India could have done to prevent. But it seems it is more convenient to continue harping on WHAT happened, instead of WHY.

You are the dada here; you set the tone of discourse here. Please put it to better use.

CRamS: If the US had so much influence with the TSP would it be running from post to pillar to get that CIA agent freed? I admire your motivation and the efforts you make to raise attention to the double-speak which permeates the so called intellectual circles in the US. OTOH, however, I often find too much vitriol clouding your judgement. And India can demand anything she wants; it will get only what it can negotiate.

ravi_ku: And all those US weapons mean what? If tomorrow TSP disband its Army and just operate a missile force/strategic bombers armed with nukes, will anything change?

Karna_A and somnath: Thanks for providing a perspective of the bigger picture in a more effective manner.

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 16 Feb 2011 12:29

Once again why is there pressure on India by USA not to conduct business with Iran?
How would USA react if India sells couple of 100 BRAHMOS to Iran especially if those BRAHMOS are used in a small flare up against USA/NATO ?

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 12:33

^^^Why only India? US is asking everyone to shun Iran..thats pretty much the limit of what it can do!