Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 2011

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 18 Nov 2011 09:22

http://www.dawn.com/2011/11/17/hairy-tales.html
( Madam Mazari lost her dress)

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 18 Nov 2011 09:23

The whole HH /MI saga seems to be a diversion - but diversion from what? It is that time of the year when machinery needs yearly oiling - Color revolutions are done, Swine Flu is already boring, seasonal sinus testing (spring season) in Arab land are done, it is scandal gate in Pak. US wanting to try out Imran; Mushy already backing Imran saying he is one of the best in Pak - WTF?

Amazing that we all fall for it everytime.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 18 Nov 2011 09:34

SSridhar wrote:But, GoI went far beyond all that, from Havana, Yekaterinburg, SeS, Thimphu and now Addu. If the intention was for having talks merely for 'namesake', where was the need for implicating ourselves in Balochaistan, liberalizing visas, allowing TSP banks to open here, offering PTA, withdrawing objection to EU's GSP+ concession to Pakistan etc ? What has TSP done to merit such friendliness ? If words are to remain as mere words, we should not see any actions, aren't we ? Trade under terrorism is not an option for us.

SS ji,

Hardly anything to disagree but having tried that and if we still have to be innovative and encourage dependencies, and considering extranalities, what can we do?

If we can counter cheeni moves, we can still sustain black/white relationship with pukes. If we can develop a capability to scuttle all cheeni investment in pak at a time and place of our choosing, we can still maintain black/white relationship with pukes and yet deter massive cheeni buildup. However, If we are saying no engagement, it needs to be complimented with blocking those moves else we paint overselves into corner. What are suggestions towards that?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 18 Nov 2011 09:44

SSridhar:

Don't forget the biggest concession (surrender) of all: 26/11 == Samjotha

partha · Post by **partha** » 18 Nov 2011 09:45

"Jesus Christ" - among the words / phrases in the PTA ban list. So much for secularism in Pakistan.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Nov 2011 10:15

Satya_anveshi wrote:
shiv wrote:But it is necessary for us to ask if any wisdom is there.
Is this really necessary to ask? Given that there are so many parties with competing stakes should we really be the one shunning to derive any value out of those or encouraging agents of change?

Even if we start from Zero (assuming there is no one currently exist in Pak who is willing to do business with India), should we still stop trying? What does that achieve us knowing that there are people with huge bank balance ready to take advantage making situation go worse to super worse? What does that do to SAARC as it is pak is shifting to SCO?

It is necessary to ask because no one who wants peace with Pakistan must be let off without asking the terms of an agreement for peace with Pakistan. No agreement with Pakistan should be allowed without India gaining every bit of mileage possible. And even if such agreement is reached it should be reached over the objections of Indians who oppose such a deal and who will be ready to fight and damage Pakistan and Pakistaniyat of they should one again fail to meet their side of any "bargain".

India has no plan for Pakistan and it irritates me no end to see the likes of Karnad saying "Hey we have china problem. Let's ignore Pakistan". What problem will be conjured up in 20 years by someone else who says "Let's now ignore China, we have some other problem to think about no"

In 2010 I attended a talk by Pillai the home secretary and asked him at question time what India would do to demand that Pakistan amend their textbooks and their inculcation of hate in their schools. He said "Nothing". It is not the job of the Indian government to demand that Pakistanis stop educating their children to hate Hindus. He too was taking the line that Pakistan was not the problem. But Naxals were.

But tell me. If the Indian government does not even see what the problem is. If the Indian government does not recognize that millions of Pakis have been educated to hate India, how can I trust that government and its apologists to reach any "agreement" with Pakistan?

It is absolutely necessary to ask what the government is thinking, if it is thinking at all.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 18 Nov 2011 10:29

shiv wrote:
Satya_anveshi wrote:quote="shiv"]But it is necessary for us to ask if any wisdom is there./quote]

Is this really necessary to ask? Given that there are so many parties with competing stakes should we really be the one shunning to derive any value out of those or encouraging agents of change?

Even if we start from Zero (assuming there is no one currently exist in Pak who is willing to do business with India), should we still stop trying? What does that achieve us knowing that there are people with huge bank balance ready to take advantage making situation go worse to super worse? What does that do to SAARC as it is pak is shifting to SCO?
It is necessary to ask because no one who wants peace with Pakistan must be let off without asking the terms of an agreement for peace with Pakistan. No agreement with Pakistan should be allowed without India gaining every bit of mileage possible. And even if such agreement is reached it should be reached over the objections of Indians who oppose such a deal and who will be ready to fight and damage Pakistan and Pakistaniyat of they should one again fail to meet their side of any "bargain".

India has no plan for Pakistan and it irritates me no end to see the likes of Karnad saying "Hey we have china problem. Let's ignore Pakistan". What problem will be conjured up in 20 years by someone else who says "Let's now ignore China, we have some other problem to think about no"

In 2010 I attended a talk by Pillai the home secretary and asked him at question time what India would do to demand that Pakistan amend their textbooks and their inculcation of hate in their schools. He said "Nothing". It is not the job of the Indian government to demand that Pakistanis stop educating their children to hate Hindus. He too was taking the line that Pakistan was not the problem. But Naxals were.

But tell me. If the Indian government does not even see what the problem is. If the Indian government does not recognize that millions of Pakis have been educated to hate India, how can I trust that government and its apologists to reach any "agreement" with Pakistan?

It is absolutely necessary to ask what the government is thinking, if it is thinking at all.

The level Pakistan has descended to, I think we should pay Pakistan that playing music, speaking non-arabic languages, women education is haram. We need a Taliban rules to be implemented in Pakjab and Karachi with no exemption to the elite,for their elite and Indian elite to learn they are playing with fire.

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 18 Nov 2011 11:08

Folks, this may be entirely too rudimentary and simple for me to ask, a kindergarten to grade 1 or 2 level curosity not yet satisfied, so I ask for due consideration in your response(s). Q: Is there some over riding national concern why the Indian Republic aka Bharat Ganrajya, cannot reduce all its policies towards the paki to an entirely passive, reactionary mode? That is to say, a paki policy null set totally devoid of initiative. Were the paki not to take any action aimed at India, India would have nothing to say, do or otherwise react to the paki's action. For all practical purposes, India would reduce its actions concerning the paki as an extension of its reactions to the weather. Absent bad weather needing action, India would not have any action - national, regional or local - that would be attributable to "the weather" Ditto, the paki. It seems to me that India needs to dial down its paki centric actions and initiatives to a bare minimum in order for the paki to procede downwards to its natural fate of drowning in its own vomit, ala Sikandar the great. India needs to step out of the way and let it happen. Just one caveat - when in doubt, say no. what say? is that good/indiferrant/bad policy towards the paki for the people of the Ganrajya? Ans: ?

Vikas · Post by **Vikas** » 18 Nov 2011 11:13

^Aha! Even in Talibaan rule, there will be Elite and there will be playing music, women, parties and alcohol. Only the participants would change.
Unfortunately Pakis can never become pure breed Afghans or Arabs or Iranis howsomuch they try.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 18 Nov 2011 11:14

shiv wrote: the likes of Karnad saying "Hey we have china problem. Let's ignore Pakistan". What problem will be conjured up in 20 years by someone else who says "Let's now ignore China, we have some other problem to think about no"

At least Indian Army does not think so. They talk about possible war on both front, at least in recent memory. There are plans to strengthen Army by giving importance to the neglected front on China, albeit slowly to our discomfort. So I am sure IA would not be taken in by such talks. China would show its true colours in few years time as it believes in arrogance of a Bully. It can only recognize strength of opponent. The moment it thinks opposition is weak it would try to dominate them.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 Nov 2011 11:19

Satya_anveshi, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is called insanity.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 18 Nov 2011 11:26

shiv wrote:It is necessary to ask because no one who wants peace with Pakistan must be let off without asking the terms of an agreement for peace with Pakistan. No agreement with Pakistan should be allowed without India gaining every bit of mileage possible. And even if such agreement is reached it should be reached over the objections of Indians who oppose such a deal and who will be ready to fight and damage Pakistan and Pakistaniyat of they should one again fail to meet their side of any "bargain".

India has no plan for Pakistan and it irritates me no end to see the likes of Karnad saying "Hey we have china problem. Let's ignore Pakistan". What problem will be conjured up in 20 years by someone else who says "Let's now ignore China, we have some other problem to think about no"

In 2010 I attended a talk by Pillai the home secretary and asked him at question time what India would do to demand that Pakistan amend their textbooks and their inculcation of hate in their schools. He said "Nothing". It is not the job of the Indian government to demand that Pakistanis stop educating their children to hate Hindus. He too was taking the line that Pakistan was not the problem. But Naxals were.

But tell me. If the Indian government does not even see what the problem is. If the Indian government does not recognize that millions of Pakis have been educated to hate India, how can I trust that government and its apologists to reach any "agreement" with Pakistan?

It is absolutely necessary to ask what the government is thinking, if it is thinking at all.

Just to clear up something so we don't confuse my position:
I am not in agreement with a stance that says "we have a china prob, let's ignore pak" (if that is what is said by shri karnad). More than half of cheen problem is via pak so we cannot ignore it. Infact my suggestion is to try developing multiple leverages while keeping the current working ones intact or even strengthen.

It is just that we seem to be coming across as a perfect victims of "plausible deniability" strategy of some elements in pileofsheetstan or even of that of entire establishment with no effective counter strategy.
Terrorist attacks happen->India considers actions (cost benefit skewed against action)->"international community" weighs in and talks about dangers of escalation->we back down-> come across as losers;
Proactive and reactive covert measures are high risk / high involvement but have their place in the overall scheme of things.
But can we also have other rings of safety or interests developed that provide us with leverages - kind of have them do the "cost benefit analysis" of their actions? If the “cost” in their cost-benefit analysis is less than the cost in our “cost benefit” analysis and buys us some deterrence, is it not a better move all things remain same?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 18 Nov 2011 11:32

A_Gupta wrote:Satya_anveshi, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is called insanity.

Agreed. If we are doing the same thing under the same circumstances. Should we let pak go totally cheena way and make situation super bad to super worse? do nothing other than status quo - strategic disengagement with 180 million people who have more issues to fight between themselves than 1B+ of us do?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 Nov 2011 11:33

http://www.sananews.net/english/2011/11 ... of-arrest/

Haqqani fun.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 18 Nov 2011 11:34

O-mee-allah!

Because Pee-Meeshra now finally comes out in the open, and says he ain't no western-stooge, and he ain't no commie-stooge, but is, for sure, for khair, for alham-du-lilly-la, a worshipper (and d1ck-sucker) of a Kashmiri Pandit by the name of LaLa-e-Illama Iqbal.

Mishra: Islam Offers a Third Way in Pakistan, Tunisia

Please note that there is a zero nanometer worth of gap between Pee-Mishra writing here, and this latest from yesterday from the Prophet-e-New, Zaid Hamid, speaking at a Nazaria-e-toilet gathering in Isloo yesterday.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 18 Nov 2011 11:35

Satya_anveshi wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:Satya_anveshi, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is called insanity.
Agreed. If we are doing the same thing under the same circumstances. Should we let pak go totally cheena way and make situation super bad to super worse? do nothing other than status quo - strategic disengagement with 180 million people who have more issues to fight between themselves than 1B+ of us do?

Sometimes you have to kill the patient to save him. In this case, India risks giving a further lease of life to the very coterie that is the threat to India.

menon s · Post by **menon s** » 18 Nov 2011 11:49

Peace is too delicate an option to be just left in the hands of the politicians and Security people, give us businessmen a chance!
The following are excerpts from the meetings held between the business communities of Pakistan and India, when Mr.Makhdoom came over to meet Mr. Anand Sharma.
http://majydaziz.blogspot.com

Mr Anand Sharma stated that the visit of the Pakistani delegation is truly a “defining one and that we have talked in an environment of freshness and frankness. Let us resolve to change the paradigm. Our relations are historic with centuries of partnership in food, culture, arts, and even Sufism.” He further added that “ASEAN has become a region of vibrant economic activity and growth and is emerging as the largest integrated economic force. My question then is, why not then SAARC?” He very frankly said that “India and Pakistan’s relationship has been turbulent and marked by events that should never have happened. We are neighbors and we have to co-exist in peace, love, and harmony. We have not overcome the baggage of history, of deprivation, of poverty, etc. The benefits of progress should percolate down to all citizens, especially the youth. This is the guiding and motivating principle. The world is watching what is happening in New Delhi and Islamabad and whatever happens would resonant not only here but in capitals in many countries of the world.”

Makhdoom Amin Fahim began his speech by stating that “I am finding it difficult to differentiate between the Indian and Pakistani businessmen sitting here.” He said that in his opinion, “composite dialogue has resumed and that trade will influence politics as trade flourishes in times of peace and cooperation.” He further stated that “we lost the semi-final in Mohali but we won the friendship match since the atmosphere of fear and distrust has reduced considerably.”

The highlight of the interactive session was the presence of Mr Arun Jaitley, the leader of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha and former Commerce and Industry Minister, Mr Jaitley also griped about the volume of indirect trade between the two countries and said that it is more than direct trade and adds to the cost and inefficiencies. He hoped that the land route for trade would soon commence once the infrastructure is in place and was of the view that it would be cost effective and would result in increased trade. He ended his speech by advising businessmen to “reform and be competitive and play the role of sheet anchor in ushering peace and prosperity in the region.”

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 18 Nov 2011 12:06

Haqqani will be fool hardy to go to Pakistan now. He is sure to be arrested.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 18 Nov 2011 12:15

Parsuram ji, this might suggest some tangential answers.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1197208

menon s · Post by **menon s** » 18 Nov 2011 12:18

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/fp_u ... Policy.PDF

The transcript of Mullem Memo is here, makes interesting read though.

" The new security team, will dismantle section S of ISI, which is in charge of relations with the Taliban and haqqani factions, and will dramatically improve the ground situation in Afghanistan"

Kiyani you have become a laughing stock in front of your own people.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 18 Nov 2011 12:38

menon s wrote:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/fp_u ... Policy.PDF

The transcript of Mullem Memo is here, makes interesting read though.

" The new security team, will dismantle section S of ISI, which is in charge of relations with the Taliban and haqqani factions, and will dramatically improve the ground situation in Afghanistan"

Kiyani you have become a laughing stock in front of your own people.

Whereas factions running anti-India operations are left untouched??? SO there is Good Terror and Bad Terror eh?

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Nov 2011 14:17

^^ Well, US took care of her interests by doing some dramabaazi and some amount of carrot/stick.

What did Desh do other than start pappi-jhappi all over again as if earlier attacks never happened for TSP to even think of changing policy towards us?

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 18 Nov 2011 14:18

i dont think the pappi-jhappi is coming out of nowhere, it is an orchestrated policy between the US and India
good cop bad cop

sum · Post by **sum** » 18 Nov 2011 14:25

^^ But the results seem to be slanting towards the bad cop ( like shutting anti-US groups etc) while the "good cop" seems to be left holding the bowl ( yet again)?

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Nov 2011 14:30

Satya_anveshi wrote:If we can counter cheeni moves, we can still sustain black/white relationship with pukes. If we can develop a capability to scuttle all cheeni investment in pak at a time and place of our choosing, we can still maintain black/white relationship with pukes and yet deter massive cheeni buildup. However, If we are saying no engagement, it needs to be complimented with blocking those moves else we paint ourselves into corner. What are suggestions towards that?

Satya_anveshi saheb, let me make myself very clear. I am convinced just like most others here (I hope) that redeeming Pakistan is impossible any longer. They are moving towards the state of 'toxic corpse' (which seems the politically correct description these days). They have also dug up their own grave. So, everything is ready for the burial, bar the death itself. Some helping hand will be needed, after the death, to carefully nudge the 'toxic corpse' into the dug-up grave and cover it with cement & steel that even the MOP bunker-burster could not as much as shake. This later part is a very tall order and that is where our energies must be spent (along with other stakeholder nations). Let us not fritter our time and efforts away on hopes of 'turning around' Pakistan in its present shape, form and content. This means that we do not prolong the agony of Pakistan on the death bed. As a man of compassion, I advocate Euthanasia for Pakistan. I have no specific do's and don'ts as far as Pakistan is concerned. However, whatever means are used, there should be convergence on the end-result. If going to bed with a corpse-like Pakistan will hasten its death, I am all for even that. But, let us be clear about this 'ray of hope' in Indo-Pak relations. There is no such ray.

China is heartless. It is unnecessarily prolonging the pain of Pakistan by just about keeping it alive, mostly by offering pious hopes (of Diamar-Basha, Gwadar, Silk Road, Kashgar, Urumqi etc). The China-Pakistan nexus has its own trajectory irrespective of what we do or don't do with Pakistan. We can never influence that unless India-PRC relationships improve dramatically and that is most unlikely to happen.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 18 Nov 2011 14:33

I think thay Karnad was not ignoring Pak,but focussing atention on China,since so many Indians have a fixation the Paki problem .Remember a former COAS,Gen Roddy I think it was,who said some time ago that "Pak is an irritant,China the threat",or words to that effect.

The jihadis and beardie fundoos are having such a ball with Pak's laws and social strictures,that it will become almost impossible to say anuthing except "AoA" and phrases ike that.Simple odinary conversation will be almost impossible with such religious correctness,with the Sharia the measure of all things.Pak has descened into the abyss,it will henceforth drill down even further in search of new depths of depravity to discover.All India has to do is to build our "Great Fence",like the GW of China,or the Berlin Wall,and wait for Pak to collapse.The refugees as I said earlier can float downstream and travel by dhow to Dubai and the desert sands of Arabia! Perhaps Gen.Bandicoot,who is so desperate to return and "lead his people" as he told the BBC recently,can do the honours as a latter day prophet Moosa looking for the promised land.

PS:SS,"euthanasia " is too good for Pak.However,if you are speaking metaphorically,then I agree with you.Perhaps we should send Mayawathi as an ambassador of goodwill to educate the Pakis on how to chop up their motheaten state of Jinnah's into smaller more manageable tribal entities ,where "each to his own" will satisfy the lot.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 18 Nov 2011 14:34

parsuram · Post by **parsuram** » 18 Nov 2011 15:53

Rudradev wrote:Parsuram ji, this might suggest some tangential answers.

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 8#p1197208

Rudra Ji: That is an interesting and provocative discussion. I am a little disappointed, I must say, at the lack of innovation and imagination. That doctrine of racing to the nearest Baloch border has been around a long time. It will give us no permanent gains unless the aggression is followed up with more aggressive policy of a long term presence among secessionist Baloch supporting us. Frankly, I am asking if a truly comprehensive policy of "benign neglect" can be successful against the paki. That, coupled with a calibrated reactive policy of well publicized escalatory responses with clear red lines. In a nut shell, we are going to leave the paki alone, undisturbed from our side. If the paki is proactive in its interactions with us, we will react in the manner I stated - escalatory ladder with well defined red lines. Fundamentally, we have no intention of attacking the paki, of promoting this or other actions within its borders, among the pakis. At least if the rest of the rational world accepts that we have no aggressive designs on the miserable paki, then the monkey of all conflicts will be on the paki's back, where it belongs. As to where our escalatory ladder will lead, at the top of it would be the prc - we should make it clear that we would retaliate to a paki nuke by nuking the prc, not by dirtying up our own neighborhood with fallout. The prc should understand in crystal clear terms that if the paki persists in climbing the ladder to the point of a nuclear attack, south east china will be the target of our retaliatory nukes - all areas some what north of HK and extending west to the Tibet border - places like Chengdu, in the industrial heartland, to showcase urban centers like HK & Canton on the coast, within a range of about 1200 st. miles from Lido (Q: our missiles cover this?). That should keep the paki nukes contained, and give us a variety of options including hot pursuit. But again, all that need not happen if the paki minds its own business and leaves us alone, just as we would do. In a nutshell, this would be a policy of Benign Neglect with small and big sticks, aimed appropriately. Added to that strong positive engagement with other neighbors, particularly Mynmar, Nepal, Afghanistan and Sri Lanka, most, that is, except Beedi, with whom we would actively pursue conflict resolution requiring repatriation of illegal Beedi immigrants in India. In short, I think such an approach to its neighbors, particularly the paki and prc taken together from a security perspective in addition to separate policies towards the two based on bilateral relations. I could write more on such a passive-aggressive package of Foreign Policy options that will suit India just right, given the situation it finds itself in at this time, and by posting the question as I did, I am hoping to get input from forum members along these lines.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 18 Nov 2011 15:57

Suicide bomber blows himself up in Karachi

Two days back five terrorists were killed in the Seaview beach area when they blew up a Suzuki van they were travelling in after being chased by police.

Things are not that quiet in Karachi as we are made to believe.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 18 Nov 2011 16:14

Aditya_V wrote:
menon s wrote:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/fp_u ... Policy.PDF
The transcript of Mullem Memo is here, makes interesting read though.
Kiyani you have become a laughing stock in front of your own people.
Whereas factions running anti-India operations are left untouched??? SO there is Good Terror and Bad Terror eh?

If it was a fake, it reminds one of the audacious phone call that Omar Sheikh made from his jail cell to Zardari mimicking Pranab Mukherjee. That such subversion could be done at the highest levels, shows the bankruptcy of Pakistan. That also puts in question the security of nuclear weapons.

Anindya · Post by **Anindya** » 18 Nov 2011 16:48

Pakistan bans 'monkey crotch', 'Jesus Christ' and obscene words in text messages

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 18 Nov 2011 17:15

Anindya wrote:Pakistan bans 'monkey crotch', 'Jesus Christ' and obscene words in text messages

Here's the list of Erdoo / pakjabi words that have been banned. Benis worthy!! Rinse, soak, spin, repeat and enjoy. Der List.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 18 Nov 2011 17:20

anupmisra wrote:Here's the list of Erdoo / pakjabi words that have been banned. Benis worthy!! Rinse, soak, spin, repeat and enjoy. Der List.

I wasn't aware that Punjabi has such diversity - The one with the "maindak" was good.

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 18 Nov 2011 17:38

It looks like the Pakistani Army is having their asses handed to them by the Taliban in South Waziristan (Video)

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=43b_1321496997

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 18 Nov 2011 17:57

Philip wrote:I think thay Karnad was not ignoring Pak,but focussing atention on China,since so many Indians have a fixation the Paki problem .Remember a former COAS,Gen Roddy I think it was,who said some time ago that "Pak is an irritant,China the threat",or words to that effect.

.

Maybe he should try saying "Pakistan is an irritant" to the terror victims in India.
These folks have not found a solution to the "minor irritant" that is Pakistan but talk of "bigger threats" from the North east - a bunch of megalomaniacs living in cuckoo land.
What 3 decades now? The only thing that got better is the sophistication and implementation of the attacks from the inbred-islamic fundoos. All that in front of their bloody faces .

I wonder what these guys were thinking when the Kasab et al were co-ordinating with their masterminds in TSP. Were they thinking "China is a bigger threat...let me switch off the TV and take a well earned rest!! " then?
"China is a bigger threat" is a convenient escape hatch for those who have failed miserably with TSP. They have not shown any policy success wrt TSP and that gives an indication of what one can expect from them.

gakakkad · Post by **gakakkad** » 18 Nov 2011 17:58

any one remembers dilberts elbonia ?

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 18 Nov 2011 18:29

Neela:

Good points. BK's pathetic formulation shows the utter helplessness and bankruptcy of India's TSP policy. My strategy would be as follows:

1) India's mantra should be no normalization, no talks, until TSP delivers on terror, and issue benchmarks: hand over of Hafeez, Dawood, Lakhvi, and other assorted scum. Bare diplomatic relations at best

2) Clean India's mess up including corruption and communal excesses if any, weed out the traitors etc, but by God, none of this artificial, cowardly, self-flagellating "Hindu terrorism" as way of trying to impress TSP and the world with India's so called bogus secularism

3) Ask the top brass of India's armed forces to come up with a plan, like cold start or its variant, that should TSP undertake another provocative terror attack, the response must be swift with the sole aim of punishing TSP. Not the kind of response India is at best capable today, i.e., a bloody costly war turning nuclear that will allow the whites to step in, and impose their order, but a response to humiliate TSP, hold up India's higher moral ground and buttress the fact that India is the victim and TSP is the vile perpetrators, and don't allow, the whites, TSP, and Indian traitors to do an equal equal. This equal equal diabolical dynamic that is set in motion whenever TSP attacks is disgusting and shows India to be not even a self respecting nation, let alone an emerging power.

4) After 1, 2, and 3 are in place, I would consider BK's prescription that India must use its soft power to make TSP crumble from inside, and then we are in a position to take on China. Till then, its India TSP equal equal in a "South Asia" box. And in this formulation, its TSP that wins, and it suits the whites just fine.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 18 Nov 2011 18:30

The only thing, after perusing all the above, is that we face a bigger threat. No matter what "pundits" say, whatever be their ilk, is that at the end of their speeches one has to come to one's own conclusion.

Before '71 we had a two front danger. Then a one front. Now it is back to a two front. Not that the chini front had gone away during those years. It lay dormant because the Chini wanted to be left in peace. So he could concentrate on making money, creating his MIC and watching us, in the hope that we would never rise.

Now that we are rising, the dormant front has become a bigger danger. The only concern for me is that the politicians who matter should be of the same view as ours, that "pundits" should be allowed to speak but at the end of it all the right decision comes with one's individual analytical skills.

That is why, I am a bit relieved that AK did make a comment a few days back on the MFN status, implying that it did not mean we had to lower our guard and our defence abilities should grow.

Just 2 pice.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Nov 2011 19:48

A_Gupta wrote:Satya_anveshi, doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is called insanity.

- er it's called medical research as well.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 18 Nov 2011 20:08

Satya_anveshi wrote: Just to clear up something so we don't confuse my position:
I am not in agreement with a stance that says "we have a china prob, let's ignore pak" (if that is what is said by shri karnad). More than half of cheen problem is via pak so we cannot ignore it. Infact my suggestion is to try developing multiple leverages while keeping the current working ones intact or even strengthen.

It is just that we seem to be coming across as a perfect victims of "plausible deniability" strategy of some elements in pileofsheetstan or even of that of entire establishment with no effective counter strategy.
Terrorist attacks happen->India considers actions (cost benefit skewed against action)->"international community" weighs in and talks about dangers of escalation->we back down-> come across as losers;
Proactive and reactive covert measures are high risk / high involvement but have their place in the overall scheme of things.
But can we also have other rings of safety or interests developed that provide us with leverages - kind of have them do the "cost benefit analysis" of their actions? If the “cost” in their cost-benefit analysis is less than the cost in our “cost benefit” analysis and buys us some deterrence, is it not a better move all things remain same?

My reading (of news posted on here and other sources) suggest that the GoI plan for Pakistan is at least in part based on "hope". By that I mean that the recent overtures and going soft on Pakistan is based on an assessment (and GoI understanding) that Pakistan is in deep shit. The NSA does not say things like "multiple power centers" working in countries like the USA or even KSA or Denmark. No one in the USA or India or anywhere else really knows which way Pakistan will fall. Like Uneven Cohen's predictions of multiple futures of Pakistan based on different developments, it seems to me that the GoI is (possibly with some US wink and nod) hoping for a moderate faction to strengthen its hold on Pakistan if those so called moderate factions are given leverage and support. So far so good. i might even agree with GoI and Karnad in some ways.

But let me point out the confounding factors in the above policy of hope:
1. The off chance that a military coup will take place, resetting Pakistan to square -1. My current belief is that the US is a key player here in discouraging the Paki military from doing this. but before anyone gets and great puff of pride at the mighty USA's clout - I am referring to the possibility that the US wil keep supplying the Paki military with anti-India goodies to keep them out of power.
2. The actual power of the "moderates" whom India is talking to may be minimal and some of them ay be closet islamists who are merely buying time. India seems to think that this is not much of a problem.

So my view is that the GoI is welcome to try new avenues but needs to pressurize Pakistan on a whole lot of areas apart from terrorism. Pakistan needs to be openly told about its treatment of minorities and its bigoted education system. I believe that open military threats against Pakistan sound like fun to me, but I think Pakis are well aware of how badly they will be mauled, so I am not demanding military threats.

I am given to understand that the reason GoI does not threaten Pakistan and warn Pakistan about its multiple transgressions is to "stabilize" Pakistan and feel "less paranoid" about India. Why on earth should India, the aggrieved party appear less threatening to Pakistan? How on earth can a 1.1 billion strong India that is readying to take on China if need be appear "weak" to a paranoid state? And in the midst of all this we are still not telling them in firm words to bugger off when they talk about Kashmir. Even Gilani, "a man of peace" has said that the "Kashmir issue" will continue to be raked up. Wtf is going on? The government of India has no policy. None whatsoever. We know that and this non policy is getting support on here only because Karnad has been bought off. Karnad may have an agenda of his own but I will speak about that in the other thread.