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

Suraj · Post by **Suraj** » 09 Sep 2011 11:29

How do the Chinese intend to prosecute war without catastrophic damage to their economic engine ? This isn't 1962, or even 1967 or 1985, when two essentially hermit nations started shooting. China is the world's largest trader today. It doesn't even have to be some 'flatten Beijing/Shanghai' capability on our part - the threat to disrupt their supply chains significantly and counter value retaliation that takes out the likes of Yangshan or Yantian port would make them pause.

Yes, they've significant benefits if they play the cards really right, but they also have exponentially greater potential for losses if we maintain an unpredictable placatory/antagonistic policy against them that always keeps them wondering just how violently we'll lash out in retaliation if they strike, because we don't have to reach out 3000kms to cause them grievous economic harm.

What I'm trying to indicate here is an asymmetric nature of this - it takes extraordinary planning and a huge dollop of fortune to do it in a beneficial way for them, but carries with it the risk of things going massively pear-shaped for them if things deviate from plan. By default, they're extremely meticulous and order driven, while our chaotic system provides us a straightforward means to blow hot and cold repeatedly, enough to make them fear just how wildly we might retaliate. A month of lost exports costs us $25 billion but costs them $130 billion...

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 09 Sep 2011 11:34

Pakistan bans bin Laden home visits ahead of 9/11

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 09 Sep 2011 11:54

shiv wrote:The days of overt live nuclear testing are over.

That is a incorrect statement, the correct statement is that P-5 having completed their overt testing needs have created a environment of extreme difficulty for new comers (unless they are coopted like Pakistan) -- in that scenario -- it is difficult -- to carry out overt tests.

However choosing the right moment, and right level of brazen-ness, a test can indeed be carried out, as per technical needs.

If the people who build it are able to say that it has a 99 % probability of yielding 25 kt, 90% probability of yielding at least 50kt and only a 60% probability of yielding 200 kt it would still have to be used if it came to that.

If it came to that we may all have to die rather than submit or <insert your favorite rhetorical rant here>. The whole point is to not let it come to that.

In any case if it was going to be used against Chinese city it would not be military planners planning specific goals. It would be a bunch of desperate people throwing whatever they have for whatever effect it can give them.

Fascinating, I thought it was basics of deterrence, that is what the large nuclear devices have always been for.

Let us remind ourselves what our second strike doctrine says -- I dont see any "military planning doctrine there"! Do anyone?

The WHOLE point is to remind others we can inflict 10x the pain that anyone else can inflict on us. So no one gets any ideas.

Some times the basics have to be remembered.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Sep 2011 12:06

Jinnah's Pakistan - a TFT Blog

You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State. "

While these are admirable sentiments, perhaps we can be forgiven for pointing out the glaring contradiction here. If a citizen's religion is not the business of the state, how does one explain the creation of Pakistan as a separate state? If it were not differences in religion with the Hindus and other religious communities of India, what else was it that motivated the Muslim League to demand Pakistan?

Allow me go one step further and remind the reader of the many occasions on which Mr Jinnah invoked Islamic rhetoric in his various speeches to justify the idea of Pakistan. With apologies beforehand, allow me to recall that it was the same Mr Jinnah who would not accept his daughter marrying a non-Muslim man, even though he himself had married a non-Muslim woman. One is reminded of the typical mindset of the contemporary Pakistani Muslim father or brother.

For years, Mr Jinnah brilliantly argued for federal autonomy in Muslim-majority provinces...until Partition happened and the Pashtuns, Bengalis, Baloch and other nationalities within Pakistan demanded the same autonomy. For years, Mr Jinnah pointed out the distinct cultural identity of South Asian Muslims...until Partition happened and Bengalis asked for their language to be given the status of a national language. Urdu and Urdu alone, Mr Jinnah firmly reminded them.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Sep 2011 12:58

State-run PTV's Islamist Agenda

But last night I was flicking between channels and saw PTV National. The screen was divided into three horizontal strips as a visual accompaniment to Arabic recitations from the Quran. The top strip had the verses in Urdu, the bottom strip had them in English and the middle strip showed shots of what I assumed was Saudi Arabia: a bridge, a flyover, a big building, a clocktower. But no, it couldn't be Saudi Arabia. That looked like L. A. And there, over there, was the Citibank tower in New York. That was definitely Chicago. But then the whole picture clicked together and I thought to myself, with true horror: Oh no they didn't. The pictures changed with the verses: at different points they showed men at Umra praying to the Ka'aba and the Hilton hotel in the background. When the feature spoke of Unbelievers, the-apostates-whom-Allah-shall-forever-burn-in-the-fires-of-Hell-for-Verily-they-are-the-blind, there flashed a familiar scene of Times Square. Not a generic white city, no. This was Times Square. (Anyone who remembers wannabe terrorist Faisal Shehzad will hopefully share my alarm; had he succeeded in his badly thought-out, utterly amateur attempt to destroy Time Square that day, I would have been one of the wounded or dead.) Slowly, deliberately, methodically, this went on for half an hour. Footage of beaches and skin, of American buildings and British streets accompanied by a voiceover about the difference between the believers and unbelievers.

It was, in other words, a state-run TV channel broadcasting sublimated messages of anti-western propaganda and justifying it with the Quran. That is neither a diatribe nor an accusation. That is a fact.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Sep 2011 13:05

^^^ pakistan's mission is khilafat
USSR - tick
USA - tick
PRC - planned

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 09 Sep 2011 14:56

http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=8658&Cat=13

Zardari said the PML-N chief should adopt a positive attitude and stop criticising the military because the people were already frustrated due to political confrontations, adding: “Heaven forbid the day that we cannot even invite each other to our jail cells”.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Sep 2011 15:09

Sanku wrote: Some times the basics have to be remembered.

And here are the basics. IMO
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1160958

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Sep 2011 15:39

Hina Rabbani Khar, from TFT Nuggets

Hina Khar slapped Pakistan on the face!

Daily Nawa-e-Waqt reported that many spiritual leaders and religious luminaries of Pakistan had complained that Muslim Hina Khar had done disservice to Pakistan by shaking hands with Indian Hindu foreign minister SM Krishna. They said national honour (qaumi gairat) had been violated {a la Niloufer Bakhtiar in Musharraf's cabinet} and its face had been slapped (tamancha) by her un-Islamic act.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 09 Sep 2011 16:40

Teresita C. Schaffer Interview

habal · Post by **habal** » 09 Sep 2011 17:07

SSridhar wrote:Hina Rabbani Khar, from TFT Nuggets
Hina Khar slapped Pakistan on the face!

Daily Nawa-e-Waqt reported that many spiritual leaders and religious luminaries of Pakistan had complained that Muslim Hina Khar had done disservice to Pakistan by shaking hands with Indian Hindu foreign minister SM Krishna. They said national honour (qaumi gairat) had been violated {a la Niloufer Bakhtiar in Musharraf's cabinet} and its face had been slapped (tamancha) by her un-Islamic act.

IMO this has become a sort of 'national stunt' by Pakistan to increase the mileage of it's foreign policy through some obscure shakehand by Rabbani Cor. And a mere handshake is turned into an earth-moving event. If each interaction between a kafir man and a pakistani motorma is turned into a big event then both parties benefit, for the motoram it is such a big favor she has bestowed upon the kafir and for the 'national honour' waley it is renewing the lines and a warning to those lesser priviliged on the peril of such interaction. Both RAPE and Jihadi stand to benefit.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 09 Sep 2011 17:49

A_Gupta wrote:Read the original cable here:
http://wikileaks.org/cable/2006/04/06ISLAMABAD5767.html

The cable talks about a March 8, 2006 meeting:

Malik's early March arrival in Pakistan coincided with press reports and rumors circulating in Islamabad that the ISI had summoned the leaders of the Kashmiri militancy
for a March 8 meeting in which the GOP thanked the militants for their struggle, but then told them to lay down their arms and give the bilateral peace process a chance.

A closer reading suggests that the ISI told the Kashmiri militants to behave themselves during the Pugwash conference.

The Pugwash conference:
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 006_pg7_45

PS: curious, the cable says "In between highly-publicized addresses to the Pugwash Conference (March 7-8, Islamabad)", while the above news-item says "The conference has been organised by Pugwash, a European think-tank engaged in finding solution to contentious issues in South Asia, at Islamabad from March 10 to 12" - which is correct?

PPS: Cable is wrong
http://www.pugwash.org/reports/rc/rclist.htm

Pugwash Workshop on Prospects for Self-Governance in Jammu and Kashmir, and the Present Status of Cooperation and Communication across the Line of Control, 10-12 March 2006, Islamabad, Pakistan, including a meeting of conference participants with Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf

PPPS: Pugwash situation in 2011
http://www.kashmirawareness.org/Article/View/6576

The non- inclusion of separatist leaders this time has ended the optimism related to Pugwash.

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 09 Sep 2011 18:16

In this article, a new term is introduced "the pakistanization of Al-Qaeda", which is an upgrade of the term "Talibanization of Pakistan". I believe this may be an important event in Pakiland's life cycle.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MI10Df01.html

The general notion that al-Qaeda is getting stronger even after the decade-long "war on terror", can be gauged from the fact that Pakistan, despite being a key US ally during all those years, is undergoing a radical change, moving from the phase of Talibanization of its society to the Pakistanization of al-Qaeda.

Many of the key Pakistani jihadi organizations, which are both anti-American and anti-state, have already joined hands with al-Qaeda to let loose a reign of terror across Pakistan. The meteoric rise of the Taliban militia in Pakistan, especially after 9/11, has literally pushed the Pakistani state to the brink of civil war, claiming over 35,000 lives in terrorism-related incidents between 2001 and 2011.

Terrorism experts believe that the Pakistanization of al-Qaeda is rooted in decades of collaboration between elements of the Pakistani military and the intelligence establishment and extremist jihadi movements that birthed and nurtured al-Qaeda, which has evolved significantly over the years from a close-knit group of Arab Afghans to a trans-national Islamic global insurgency, dominated by more and more Pakistani militants.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Sep 2011 18:42

Guddu wrote:In this article, a new term is introduced "the pakistanization of Al-Qaeda", which is an upgrade of the term "Talibanization of Pakistan". I believe this may be an important event in Pakiland's life cycle.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/MI10Df01.html

This is the most natural evolution. The PA, the ISI, the retired army officers, and the Pakistani clergy and Islamist leaders had played a significant role in mentoring the AQ and the Taliban. Most of the leaders of jihadi tanzeems such as HuJI, LeT, JeM, SSP were comrades-in-arms with OBL or his friends, after all. After the AQ and the Taliban coalesced subsequent to the US invasion of Afghanistan, they had to survive in Pakistan and in safehouses provided by the PA and these tanzeems. Many Arabic-speaking AQ fighters married Pakistani women and settled down all over the country. The Pakistani influence was therefore tremendous. Later, AQ even appointed Ilyas Kashmiri as their Operations chief. With the attrition of most Arab fighters and leaders due to deaths in Iraq, Afghanistan, Af-Pak, and renditions, Pakistanis stood a good chance of swamping AQ and they have done that. The largest component within AQAM today is the Pakistanis, of the Pakistani or the Punjabi Taliban persuasion. Anyway, in modern Islamist world, the Egyptian Syed Qutb and the Pakistani Mawdudi are the two towering personalities.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 09 Sep 2011 18:44

Stephen Tankel on LeT
http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?o ... Itemid=197

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 09 Sep 2011 18:50

I fail to understand the basis for this continued discussion on the chinese going to war against India, with or without pakis riding shot gun. The entire concept makes no sense, least of all economically. Even strategically, it will be a disaster for the chinese. This thread is for discussing paki terrorists and the criminal paki state. Let's try and focus on that. Is there any indication thus far that the pakis are behind the Delhi attack, for instance? BR has done an outstanding job since even before 9/11 in pointing out the paki role in almost every terrorist act in the world. I recall that this site was almost alone in sending out the message. It took a lot of effort on part of a lot of people here (not me, but I know the names) to painstakingly document the evidence and put it out there. This site has the potential for being a focal point that people hi and lo will look at, to check on paki related terrorist leads or chatter on the web. I'm sure it has a serious credible presence already, and that is why I make the comments on any hypothetical India-china war. We need mor posts like this one from Guddu

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Sep 2011 18:55

parsuram, the chinese do not want an overt war with india, but a proxy war involving pakistani elements is desireable and beneficial for the PRC - as long as it stays under control

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 09 Sep 2011 19:05

Lalmohan- That has been ongoing since '64. That is not what I commented on.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 09 Sep 2011 19:16

Guddu, What that terms means is Al Q is now taking over the kabila.

habal · Post by **habal** » 09 Sep 2011 19:18

Bharat Karnad amongst a few others have been trying to shift focus away from Pakistan towards China. It seems almost like they are part of US track II as it conveniently dovetails with US foreign policy. Secondly just as FAS and others try to undermine Indian nuclear weapon crediblity, the likes of Bharat Karnad do so even more subtly and while seeming to be within the jingo camp.

sanjeevpunj · Post by **sanjeevpunj** » 09 Sep 2011 19:21

+1 These are the ones who want "inaction" to continue ruling India.

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 09 Sep 2011 19:40

"Y I Patel" Islam is India's heritage, and it can be India's sword to use

"Avinash R" Islam is NOT our heritage, its an religion with roots in arabia.

"ArmenT" Saar ji, it has become part of India's heritage, whether you like it or not.

Ten of thousands of Pakistani Christians are fleeing to India from their Islamic heritage.

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... term-visas

Can you explain to me why? Do you want to live under the same heritage?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 09 Sep 2011 19:42

for pakistan; pakistan = islam and islam = pakistan
for india; islam = islam, pakistan = pakistan who incidentally happen to be mostly islamic

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 09 Sep 2011 19:49

habal wrote:Bharat Karnad amongst a few others have been trying to shift focus away from Pakistan towards China. It seems almost like they are part of US track II as it conveniently dovetails with US foreign policy. Secondly just as FAS and others try to undermine Indian nuclear weapon crediblity, the likes of Bharat Karnad do so even more subtly and while seeming to be within the jingo camp.

Why do you not rebut his arguments, without retorting to a character assassination and motivations, entirely unreasonable.

habal · Post by **habal** » 09 Sep 2011 19:51

It is a possibility. In strategy one shouldn't trust anyone completely.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 09 Sep 2011 20:10

habal wrote:It is a possibility. In strategy one shouldn't trust anyone completely.

Forget strategy, assume I do not know what that word means in the context. You are alluding to the credibility of a person here. The question is, are your doubts based on credible reasoning?

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 09 Sep 2011 20:29

YI Patel: Please do not heap any "islamic heritage" on Indians. No thanks. In case you are unaware of it, whatever "islamic heritage" was loitering in India up and left for paki stan and Bangaldesh. They are welcome to it. The clear understandind regarding Indian who are muslims (christian & jews, etc too) are Indians first anything else later. If not, they can take their hertage and go wherever. India has one unique heritage. It comes from thousands of years of being Indian. Indians do not need some half baked/burnt crisp arabian falsafa to add to what has evolved so gracefully (despite barbaric attempts to destroy it). Before you ask for a green PM, look at what the "islamic heritage wallas" put up in their own paradise.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 09 Sep 2011 21:09

Its funny how we fall into the exclusivist trap - in looking at problems.

I fail to see why we have to do a lungi dance about BK ji raising apocalyptic fears "solely" about China, and B.Raman ji doing a matching "go soft" on Pakistaniat! Why do we have to look at onlee PRC or onlee Pakistaniat and not look at both of them simultaneously as a continuum of threat? People demanding that we look at onlee one of them while going soft on the other are deliberately or unknowingly pushing a view - as if these are two different "problems" altogether! Sometimes Goebbelsianism has an auto-feedback effect, when even if "separation" of targets are done out of "tactical cool" in the public propaganda domain - the decision-movers themselves gradually come under the influence of their own propaganda.

A request to all who feel a repeat of the endless cycles of debates between "Islam" as Indian/Indian heritage and as Foreign/hostile, is so important - please take it to an appropriate GDF thread. The arguments on both sides have converged to well known sets. There is perhaps value in rehashing them - but is good cannon fodder for any attitude that wants to protect the mullahcracy as a future hedge ["what if they win after all! saving the skin is first priority - to h*** with culture/identity/land/people/family"] under various formal excuses.

Another thing about the discussions on "no rashtryia weakness" : its really intriguing to see that such a "weak" and powerless "rashtra" which is apparently sooo dependent on uncle Sam that it can onlee mumble and squeak whenever bashing of TSP comes up as an issue - dares to challenge the very same "powers" on the sooo important question of Libyan campaign and protecting Qaddafi! Or are we claiming that the western campaign against Libya is a sham - and Indian rashtra is still onlee following orders of the west in protesting against action of the west?

No! we must not connect the dots - must not see the common pattern of the issues on which India dares to challenge others, or remain silent, weakness or strength - that is always, always about protecting entities connected to Islamism and Islam. What is common between Qaddafi and Pakistaniat and Owaisi and the Ulema council?

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 09 Sep 2011 21:36

parsuram wrote:I fail to understand the basis for this continued discussion on the chinese going to war against India, with or without pakis riding shot gun. The entire concept makes no sense, least of all economically. Even strategically, it will be a disaster for the chinese. This thread is for discussing paki terrorists and the criminal paki state. Let's try and focus on that.

Personally, I believe that there's a continuum of threat, and that if we're serious about analysing it, there's no rational basis to distribute into discrete parcels (Pakistani terrorism vs. Pak-China proliferation vs. two-front war with Pak and China.) These are not discrete phenomena and I'm not sure if it serves our interest to treat them as if they were. If admins request I can take the two-front discussion to some other, more appropriate thread and leave the TSP thread for only the material you describe.

However, in my view, the trend on BRF has been towards too much parceling, with too little connecting of the dots and attempting to construct a bigger picture. Yes, connecting of the dots is risky and leads to speculation that may or may not be well founded, but we should at least attempt to construct and discuss scenarios in their entirety. Instead, we have hundreds of threads, all with some valuable information (just on China there is PRC thread, Managing Chinese Threat, US-India-China, US-China Roles in Pakistan, plus other information/analysis that turns up in single posts in the nuke proliferation/mil/economy threads and slips under the radar just because hardly anyone has the time to read all the discussions on so many threads.)

Parsuram-ji, if I'm not wrong, we didn't have this many threads on BRF back in the day... Strategic Issues forum had maybe a single page index that held all the discussions! I really think this sort of extreme diversification has only increased the SNR, all things considered. Everything is "OT" in one thread or the other, so no "T" is completely explored.

JMT.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Sep 2011 21:59

brihaspati wrote: No! we must not connect the dots - must not see the common pattern of the issues on which India dares to challenge others, or remain silent, weakness or strength - that is always, always about protecting entities connected to Islamism and Islam. What is common between Qaddafi and Pakistaniat and Owaisi and the Ulema council?

Well long ago I had written a description of how India is a "pale green" partially Islamic country. Need to dig that up and post it. Ah here it is:

Make a list of countries in the world in which non Muslims are regularly killed by Muslims in the name of Islam.

Make a list of countries in which non Muslim citizens have been driven out of their homes by Muslims.

Make a list of countries in which Muslims are allowed to practice sharia. Include in that list all countries in which sharia like practices are constitutionally allowed,

Make a list of countries that crack down mercilessly on anyone who is thought to insult Islam even if freedom of speech allows lampooning or ridiculing of non Islamic faiths.

Make a list of countries in the world where womens rights are trampled on and the political and judicial system weigh heavily in favor of sharia like discrimination of women.

Check how many Islamic countries make it to the list. Check where India makes it to the list.

And still - still India is accused of being full of bigots who are against Islam and are out to kill Muslims.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 09 Sep 2011 22:23

Kanson and Suraj, will reply to your posts on the Karnad thread. Shiv, hope that is ok by you. The whole two-front war discussion I brought up was a hypothesis to partially explain Karnad's surprising new posture w.r.t. Pakistan, so it is relevant in that sense.

Y I Patel · Post by **Y I Patel** » 09 Sep 2011 22:42

The post of modern India's Prime Minister is undoubtedly the most powerful post in the country, but especially as other democratic institutions mature, it becomes a post that is proscribed by constitutional contraints and the reality of a diverse polity whose interests keep evolving over time.

One innovation that India has come up with is to have an arrangement where this post serves as the administrative front for a confederacy of interests or personalities. I am, of course, refering to PM Vajpayee and RSS. (Remember Govindacharya's "Mukhauta" remark?) This arrangement was copied quite successfully by Congress, with MMS and SG. Setting aside the deeply entrenched corruption and blatant dynastic ambition that tarnishes this model, it had one great virtue - it worked, and was acceptable to the polity at large. If we strip off the external furnishings, the basic structure for an idealized version of the model requires (a) a disinterested, political core (the rajyaguru) and (b) a patriotic Indian with a proven track record of administrative capability and incorruptibility to be the administrative lead. Such a model can work, and work well, especially if India is willing to compromise on human imperfections and ideological purity.

A Muslim minority person can become part (b) of above. Is it a Pakistan specific PM? Maybe. But after there is no Pakistan, there is no need for a Pakistan specific PM. The idea is to have a leader who brings the most to the table insolving the highest priority problem. Once that problem is addressed, it is quite possible that someone else will have greater potential to tackle the next big issue. And again, the idea is not that only one issue gets taken up at a time; it is that one issue gets top priority at a given point in time.

There are almost 400 million muslims in India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. In other words, there are 400 million muslims in India's core. They were not born in Arabia even if they follow a culture that was. So yes, with all its warts, and even given the reality that it was imposed with the might of arms, Islam is part of India's heritage.

If you made it thus far, thanks! This goes against the grain of a nation and a civilization that now calls itself independent after a millenium of strife. It is repetitious for those of you who have gone over the same ground before on BRF. I did not travel that path with you at that time, and this is my way of catching up

Peace!

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 09 Sep 2011 23:00

From The News - Opinion Piece(posting in full). TSP is the primary exporter of terrorism in India and this TSPian editor has sage advice on what India, the victim country, needs to do rather than looking inward to cleaning their own house.

Terror in Delhi

Friday, September 09, 2011

Only days before the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks, militants have struck the Delhi High Court, providing a grim reminder that extremists remain committed to their activities across the globe. As investigating agencies try to crack the case, initial suspicions have fallen on the Bangladesh-based terror group Harkat-ul-Jihad al-Islami (HuJI) that has claimed responsibility for the attack via an email in which it has demanded that Afzal Guru’s death sentence be repealed immediately. HuJI’s hand is already suspected in this July’s Mumbai blasts and in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack at the Chabad House in Colaba. Afzal Guru was awarded the death sentence in 2004 for his role in the 2001 attack on the Indian parliament. An independent Jammu and Kashmir MLA has submitted a resolution seeking clemency for Guru while a petition seeking a life imprisonment term, over the death penalty, is pending with President Pratibha Patil. The home ministry has reportedly recommended that the petition be rejected. In this light, it would not be far-fetched to say that terrorists have decided to systematically target courts that have passed verdicts against terrorism.

The blasts have baffled many in India, not least because they took place barely a kilometre from parliament, which is in session at present. A minor explosion had taken place at almost the same spot this May, highlighting the need for security cameras. Yet security was not increased and no CCTV cameras were installed outside the nine gates of the building. It is clear that militants are exploiting weaknesses in India’s security apparatus. At a time when the public mood is already soured by months of anti-corruption protests, the government needs to secure itself against further criticisms of carelessness. It is clear that India needs a comprehensive plan to fight terrorism, including schemes to deradicalise society, transform local policing and carry out aggressive intelligence work. It is also hoped that India will act maturely and understand the need to set its own house in order rather than create unnecessary acrimony by pointing fingers outwards.{The editor needs to remind his readers that India points the finger at TSP and not in some general outward direction.}

negi · Post by **negi** » 09 Sep 2011 23:45

Nothing is more greener than Gobar; so who wants to be our green PM, again ?

kumarn · Post by **kumarn** » 09 Sep 2011 23:54

Isn't MMS already our first green PM considering that he wants the first right of resources for the greens.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Sep 2011 00:11

brihaspati wrote:Its funny how we fall into the exclusivist trap - in looking at problems.

I fail to see why we have to do a lungi dance about BK ji raising apocalyptic fears "solely" about China, and B.Raman ji doing a matching "go soft" on Pakistaniat! Why do we have to look at onlee PRC or onlee Pakistaniat and not look at both of them simultaneously as a continuum of threat? People demanding that we look at onlee one of them while going soft on the other are deliberately or unknowingly pushing a view - as if these are two different "problems" altogether!

brihaspati garu,

there is a hard connection between these two nodes. But around these nodes there are many things, which can help in weakening the connection, so that this connection does not take both the nodes together into a war between them and India.

Should we start to look at both of them as a homogeneous mass, we would lose the ability to exploit the fractures.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 10 Sep 2011 00:15

A_Gupta wrote:Stephen Tankel on LeT
http://www.asiasentinel.com/index.php?o ... Itemid=197

I read his book. Not bad. Sad that we do not have, or at least I do not know of Indian authors with such works.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Sep 2011 00:58

Published on Sep 09, 2011
ANP leaders being paid by US to win polls: Altaf: Dawn

Code: Select all

http://www.dawn.com/2011/09/09/mqm-chief-altaf-hussain-addresses-supporters.html

Altaf Hussain MQM Press Conference 9th September 2011 -1

Accusations and more accusations!

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 10 Sep 2011 00:58

RajeshA wrote:
brihaspati wrote:Its funny how we fall into the exclusivist trap - in looking at problems.

I fail to see why we have to do a lungi dance about BK ji raising apocalyptic fears "solely" about China, and B.Raman ji doing a matching "go soft" on Pakistaniat! Why do we have to look at onlee PRC or onlee Pakistaniat and not look at both of them simultaneously as a continuum of threat? People demanding that we look at onlee one of them while going soft on the other are deliberately or unknowingly pushing a view - as if these are two different "problems" altogether!
brihaspati garu,

there is a hard connection between these two nodes. But around these nodes there are many things, which can help in weakening the connection, so that this connection does not take both the nodes together into a war between them and India.

Should we start to look at both of them as a homogeneous mass, we would lose the ability to exploit the fractures.

There are very cogent arguements put forward by old-time gurus such as Rudradev and Shridhar regarding a Sino-Pakistani attack on India. However, perhaps they are missing one important element in this scenario, which is Russia. Russia has been:
1. Humiliated by the Chinese (particularly in their Afghan adventure where the Chinese provided covert support to the West and the jihadis) and overtaken by the Chinese who showed the world how to make "scientific" socialism work to make their country an economic superpower. A proud country, Russia is now terrified of a future where they fade into insignificance, and their one-time pupil rules Asia.
2. Russia has performed more nuclear weapon tests than any other nation in the world. They have working 50 megaton thermonuclear bombs, and tiny subkiloton suitcase bombs. Furthermore, they have working MIRV ICBM missiles to throw these bombs a long distance.
3. They have evidently decided that India is to Russia what the UK was to the USA, in that they are supposedly helping India with India's nuclear submarines, share their Glonass GPS only with India etc. They expect their pound of flesh (or dollars in return) but that is how the world operates. England made their last payment on the Marshall plan debt to the USA only recently.
4. Therefore, if their is any dhoti-shivering about unproven nuclear bombs, this should not be a worry. With the right amount of incentive, India can buy proven designs from Russia, as Pakistan bought their bomb design from China. USA has uttered not a peep since India has been touted as USA's "strategic partner", about the help that Russia has been providing to India.
5. Regarding the "buddy-buddy" facade that Russia and China put up, this is strictly tactical. Russia and Germany signed the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact before WWII, where Russia got land, and Germany got raw materials from Russia for their war machine, so as to circumvent the post-WWI sanctions of the Allies. The relationship was totally artificial - Hitler detested communists, Russia hated fascists. and they had fought each other through their proxies in the Spanish civil war just a few years earlier.
Russia knows that they will also be a loser if China does a 1962 humiliation on India, because then China will be top alpha dog in Asia, a very worrying thought for Russia.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 10 Sep 2011 01:09

Pakistan Scores Another “Own Goal” In China

Code: Select all

It gets harder and harder to speak of a unified Pakistani government pursuing a single set of policies.  It looks more and more as if we have a group of uncoordinated, mutually competitive free lancers and rogue actors that no one controls.
China wants a Pakistan option, but incidents like this cannot be ignored.  The Uighur uprising threatens China’s security at home and if Pakistan is unwilling or unable to control the activity of these groups in China itself, it cannot be considered a reliable partner by anyone when it comes to the future of Central Asia.Americans, I suppose, should welcome this latest evidence that Pakistan is as incompetent an enemy as it is unreliable a friend, but the spectacle of what could be a rich and important country wrecking its prospects and plunging its population into misery and conflict is too appalling to applaud.  This is nothing, nothing like what Jinnah had in mind.