India-US relations: News and Discussions III

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 05 Oct 2016 10:39

^^^From what I know, the petition is "archived" and is closed (not accepting more signatures) but it has done what it wanted to do. It did get WH attention and a reply is expected in 60 days or so. (It got much more than required 100,000 signatures ..)( "Some technical issues with some of the signatures which needed to be looked into. Some [ signatures] could potentially be removed if there is evidence of fraud” - the signatures ought to be of US citizens only ) It is consistent with the terms of of petition -- nothing new. Of course, it is a big H&D to some people and I am sure it will be spun into some newspaper stories...

Meanwhile, as if one cannot guess the Pakiness of Pakis they have submitted an == petition to declare India as "terrorist" state with lot's of signatures coming from IP address from Pak..

(One can't even make such things up they were asking pakistanis to sign it

), where there is real problem with fraud..

BTW total signature is a record! (600,000+ or about 2x times any previous one), it is interesting to note that after the petition was closed, count increased by 50,00 next day most likely because more "verified" signatures were added in the tally.

We will see but I sure hope the whole civilized world isolate terroristan.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 05 Oct 2016 20:29

There is one petition for declaring India a terrorist state. And another for a Sikh state.

GShankar · Post by **GShankar** » 05 Oct 2016 20:38

Last I checked, that Indian petition had around 4.5k votes. Was happy that only so many pakis had balls.

salaam · Post by **salaam** » 05 Oct 2016 21:00

If there are indeed such petitions. Kindly do the following:
- Don't name them.
- Don't discuss them.
- Don't link them.

chanakyaa · Post by **chanakyaa** » 05 Oct 2016 23:01

This petition business is so silly and demeaning. All you need is 100k signatures for POTUS to talk about it, as if anyone gives effing damn. If we can put one up against Slamabad, they can do the same against us. There are enough India haters out there for the goal of reaching 100k signatures. India does not need a stamp of approval from anyone, especially those who supported Slamabad for decades.

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 06 Oct 2016 01:23

POTUS does not talk. It only guarantees a response from white house. which could be anything cursory like, we will look into it or we have to go by our strategic interests blah blah

Raja Bose · Post by **Raja Bose** » 06 Oct 2016 02:33

Looking at massa's response to Indian surgical strikes, one thing is crystal clear. If GoI has the tatte to do what it just did, massa won't squeak one bit coz doing so will make it look like a terrorist sponsor and hypocrite. Not that massa is not one but this is all about public perception. People wring their hands when Modi gives massa defence or business deals but don't forget its a 2-way street in terms of dependency. The stronger the dependency, the more massa's tattes get squeezed in our favour and any desi isabgol induced tatti paani at Tatta Pani are ignored. The simple deal is this, India must fight its own fight. That's what strong powers do. They don't dhoti shiver on what will the world think/log kya kahenge and put forth idiotic gyan like - if we attack, they can retaliate too (no $hit Sherlock!). They go out and do what they think is right. That's what massa does, that's what Russia does, that's what even 2-bit powers like UK or Franco do. Rest of the world can go whine and scream and then accept the new reality. That's what Modi did which the Congoons in their 60+ years of Raj failed to do.

anishns · Post by **anishns** » 06 Oct 2016 07:32

RB

Raja Bose wrote:
...desi isabgol induced tatti paani at Tatta Pani are ignored.

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 06 Oct 2016 18:38

Any US practicing lawyers here?

How America can help India inflict pain on Pakistan
http://www.dailyo.in/politics/surgical- ... 13263.html

For Pakistan's army, the terrorists it breeds are expendable. India's surgical strike last week killed scores of jihadis assembled at launch pads in the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK).

The strike caused the Pakistani army international humiliation. But till Pakistan's top generals feel the pain, they will not change. Terrorism against India will not stop.

There is now a new path to inflict that pain. The US Congress has just passed into law the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).

The Act will allow relatives of American victims of the 9/11 terror attack 15 years ago to directly sue Saudi Arabia for any role it may have played in the 9/11 plot.

The development represents a dramatic change from what transpired in December 2012. Relatives of US citizens killed in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack in November 2008 had sued general Shuja Pasha, then head of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), in a federal court in New York.

The US administration, however, told the court that Pasha had immunity from prosecution for the Mumbai attack because "the ISI was part of a foreign state within the meaning of the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act (FSIA)."

There was outrage at this decision among the kin of US citizens who died in the Mumbai attack. But the UPA government did not file a protest with the US government and the ISI's Pasha escaped prosecution.

Not for much longer. Depending on the interpretation of the newly-legislated JASTA, Pasha, Gen Parvez Kayani and even Gen Pervez Musharraf, who were all allegedly complicit in planning the Mumbai attack from 2006 onwards, could face prosecution.

There are other precedents for prosecuting political and military leaders for war crimes - and state-sponsored terrorism against citizens of another country qualifies as a war crime.

In March 2016, the Serbian strongman Radovan Karadzic was found guilty of war crimes in Srebrencia by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) and sentenced to 40 years in prison.

Earlier Slobodan Milosevic, the former president of Serbia, was prosecuted by the ICTY and kept in a prison cell in the Hague. He died in March 2006 before a verdict could be reached in his trial for war crimes and genocide in the Balkans.

Genocide

The Pakistani army and the ISI have been responsible for waging an undeclared war on India through proxy terrorism for decades. They have been accused of genocide in Balochistan.

Surgical strikes and other measures are necessary to impose a cost for such acts of state terrorism.

But the generals in Rawalpindi who mastermind the terror war on India do not pay a price. And unless they do, proxy terrorism from Pakistan will not end. It may pause, but not stop.

A first step in prosecuting Pakistan's top generals - including Musharraf, Kayani, Pasha and Raheel Sharif - is for the Indian government to implead itself in a fresh case in the US under the new Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act along with the relatives of US citizens killed in the November 2008 Mumbai terror attack.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 06 Oct 2016 20:36

vijayk wrote:Any US practicing lawyers here?

How America can help India inflict pain on Pakistan
http://www.dailyo.in/politics/surgical- ... 13263.html

For Pakistan's army, the terrorists it breeds are expendable. India's surgical strike last week killed scores of jihadis assembled at launch pads in the Pakistan Occupied Kashmir (POK).

The strike caused the Pakistani army international humiliation. But till Pakistan's top generals feel the pain, they will not change. Terrorism against India will not stop.

There is now a new path to inflict that pain. The US Congress has just passed into law the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA).

The Act will allow relatives of American victims of the 9/11 terror attack 15 years ago to directly sue Saudi Arabia for any role it may have played in the 9/11 plot.

Uncle gave shelter to pro pak pro kashmir groups including Pak agencies to operate in US to lobby against India, use media and create global noise. They arrested the Fai in 2011 even after India has agreement with US on defense and political agreement.
Indians lost many lives from 1993 to 2011 when Pak was gathering support with Uncle help

srin · Post by **srin** » 06 Oct 2016 20:48

Can we sue US Govt for employing and then protecting David Headley ? And also for supporting Hurriyat during the Robin Raphael times ....

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 06 Oct 2016 21:05

IIUC, JASTA is for terrorist acts against Americans on American soil

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 07 Oct 2016 00:46

new call center activity in India.......

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/06/news/in ... index.html

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 07 Oct 2016 00:47

Speaking of which, TSJ, when are you going to post your tax returns for us to look at?

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 07 Oct 2016 01:03

Cosmo_R wrote:IIUC, JASTA is for terrorist acts against Americans on American soil

well..did not jihadis linked to pakistan carry out attacks against americans on american soil

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 07 Oct 2016 01:06

Rudradev wrote:Speaking of which, TSJ, when are you going to post your tax returns for us to look at?

why, did you want me to buy a walmart debit card and it to ya?

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 07 Oct 2016 01:45

Gus wrote:
Cosmo_R wrote:IIUC, JASTA is for terrorist acts against Americans on American soil
well..did not jihadis linked to pakistan carry out attacks against americans on american soil

Harder since the pakis in question were citizens or PR. OTOH, if paki citizens attacked a US embassy/consulate anywhere...

Bheeshma · Post by **Bheeshma** » 07 Oct 2016 01:52

http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/201 ... -forecast/

Nate silver is pretty much given the election to Hillary. What do you think will be the effect on US paki relationship. Obama has no liking for pakis but hillary may have her own agendas with her advisors.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 07 Oct 2016 02:54

TSJones wrote:new call center activity in India.......

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/06/news/in ... index.html

I too have gotten these calls, some times they got spooked and hangup too early but some were stupid enough to stay on line for longer time for us to trap them. I have gotten the authorities involved (our attorney general in the beginning was sort of dismissive but I filed every incident with as much data/ip tracing as possible and suggested that they also work with Indian authorities as some of the calls were originated from there -- and some information those idiots gave out before they hung up)..

Nice to see some action taken. Though I think it is so easy to catch these guys that they should have been put out of business (and in Jail) long ago.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 07 Oct 2016 03:05

Meanwhile WSJ oped (Posting excerpts -- it may require subscription) --
A More Assertive India Is Good for the West

http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-more-asse ... -1475770060

The Wall Street Journal

A More Assertive India Is Good for the West
Washington should welcome New Delhi’s military strikes on terrorists in Kashmir.

By SADANAND DHUME
Oct. 6, 2016 12:07 p.m. ET

India last week turned nearly two decades of Pakistan policy on its head. By announcing attacks on terrorist “launch pads”—final staging posts for militants before they cross over from the Pakistan-controlled part of Kashmir to the Indian side—New Delhi signaled a new pugnaciousness in response to terrorism from across the border, such as the Sept. 18 attack that killed 19 Indian soldiers at a Kashmir border camp.

In another departure from the past, the U.S. appeared to back India rather than reflexively call for restraint on both sides. A White House statement following a phone conversation between National Security Adviser Susan Rice and her Indian counterpart, Ajit Doval, “strongly condemned the Sept. 18 cross-border attack” and urged Pakistan to “take effective action” against terrorist groups, including Jaish-e-Mohammad and Lashkar-e-Taiba.

The Obama administration is right to welcome—or at least accept—India’s new toughness. In the short run, an India that no longer turns the other cheek to violence by Pakistan-based terrorist groups may worry those who fear instability in the subcontinent. Over time, however, an India that stands up to terrorism is more likely to anchor South Asian stability than one that ducks the problem. It will also make a more reliable partner against both radical Islam and Chinese hegemony in Asia.

The Indian army says it conducted “surgical strikes” against terrorists at “launch pads along the line of control,” the de facto border between the Indian and Pakistani parts of Kashmir. The senior military official who briefed reporters added that the strikes had caused “significant casualties” to “the terrorists and those who are trying to support them,” an allusion to the Pakistani army.

Precise details of the operation remain a mystery. The government has already quashed an overzealous media’s more lurid speculation, including claims of a helicopter-borne raid modeled on the 2011 U.S. killing of Osama bin Laden. Some anonymous sources paint a more plausible picture: small teams of Indian special forces crossed on foot up to 3 kilometers inside Pakistan-controlled territory in several places, and killed an unspecified number of likely terrorists.

For its part, Pakistan says India killed two of its soldiers, but Islamabad emphatically denies any raid on territory it controls. On Saturday the Pakistani military took reporters to the line of control to speak with villagers who denied seeing any Indian soldiers cross over.

No matter which side you believe—and few serious analysts doubt the broad contours of India’s official claim—the Modi government’s decision to go public is significant. Instead of treating the line of control as a de facto border, as it has for decades, India is showing a willingness to openly breach it for counterterrorism operations. It correctly reckons that, unlike in the past, international pressure to prevent escalation between the nuclear-armed neighbors will fall primarily on Pakistan.

In terms of messaging, the strikes appeared designed to fulfill somewhat contradictory purposes. For a domestic audience they suggest boldness and embellish Mr. Modi’s muscular image. (The Indian media’s penchant for chest-thumping exaggeration didn’t hurt.)

For the international community, India underscores a sense of responsibility and continued restraint. New Delhi has framed its attack as a limited, pre-emptive strike against terrorists. By confining its actions to the disputed territory of Kashmir, not targeting regular Pakistani troops and not using air power, India arguably bent over backward to ensure that it delivered its message while minimizing the risk of escalation.

Indeed, though the cross-border strikes predictably garnered most of the headlines, Mr. Modi has placed diplomacy at the heart of his response to the Sept. 18 attack. Next month’s scheduled South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation meeting in Islamabad collapsed when Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Bhutan joined India in pulling out. Bangladesh and Afghanistan, in particular, share India’s displeasure with Pakistan’s role in fomenting Islamist radicalism in their countries.

India also said it would move to use its share of rivers from a 56-year- old water treaty with Pakistan more effectively, a veiled threat, albeit one with few immediate consequences. Meanwhile New Delhi is considering rescinding the “most favored nation” trade status it granted Pakistan 20 years ago, on the grounds that Islamabad is yet to reciprocate the gesture.

Pakistan won’t abandon its support for jihadist groups overnight, but at least India has begun to raise the costs of that support. Over time, this may force the Pakistani army to reconsider its policies. And if Washington wants New Delhi to play a more active role in East Asia, it can hardly expect elected Indian governments to ignore their most pressing security concerns at home.

Mr. Modi has rejigged the old calculus that made stability in South Asia largely India’s responsibility. If the gamble pays off by eroding Pakistani support for jihadists, it will make South Asia a safer region and India a more valuable partner for the West.

Mr. Dhume is a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a columnist for WSJ.com.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 07 Oct 2016 03:25

Amber G. wrote:
TSJones wrote:new call center activity in India.......

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/06/news/in ... index.html
I too have gotten these calls, some times they got spooked and hangup too early but some were stupid enough to stay on line for longer time for us to trap them. I have gotten the authorities involved (our attorney general in the beginning was sort of dismissive but I filed every incident with as much data/ip tracing as possible and suggested that they also work with Indian authorities as some of the calls were originated from there -- and some information those idiots gave out before they hung up)..

Nice to see some action taken. Though I think it is so easy to catch these guys that they should have been put out of business (and in Jail) long ago.

criminals in some of these countries run these scams and nobody ever does anything about it, like Nigeria and Russia.

Bheeshma · Post by **Bheeshma** » 07 Oct 2016 03:35

Don't expect anyone from Axact (or ISI-dawood) to be punished either. Just some eye wash for the rest of the world.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 07 Oct 2016 05:03

Some people run call centers, others run foundations.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2016 10:33

Some interesting points in here. No idea how reliable.

How US diplomacy put brakes on India-Pakistan escalation after 'surgical strikes'

Example:

She apparently made it clear that if the Democrats won the presidential election, then India could expect the continuation of the current administration's policy towards Pakistan and Islamabad's promotion of UN designated terrorist groups - that is, the Haqqani network, the Jaish-e-Muhammad, Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Lashkar-e-Tayyeba. However, if the Republicans won, she warned that then India would have to wait for the new administration to take over in January and for the emergence of Donald Trump's policy towards the region.

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 07 Oct 2016 11:02

I am not sure anyone in India is in the mood to listen any rubbish from khanland. Of course khanland always this kind of dreams about their diplomatic abilities. Almost every one thinks GOP may be more friendly ( in relative terms) with India than Billary with her all records. Further, there is little time between Nov to Jan 2017. So far two months of so-called Dom help to us we need to control ourselves? Someone had few drinks and wrote this.

LokeshC · Post by **LokeshC** » 07 Oct 2016 11:03

There is a chance that it may or maynot rain, inside or outside Bengaluru, Kerala.

Arjun · Post by **Arjun** » 07 Oct 2016 11:37

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 729952.cms

Hope the Indian govt is not brain-dead enough to actually believe that US Democrat administration would take any concrete measures against Pakistan, esp if Hillary takes over the reins.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2016 16:52

Self deleted. Wrong thread.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Oct 2016 16:56

Arjun wrote:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 729952.cms

Hope the Indian govt is not brain-dead enough to actually believe that US Democrat administration would take any concrete measures against Pakistan, esp if Hillary takes over the reins.

They never did when OBL was caught in pakistan or when their own troops were getting killed in AfPak by Pakistan trained Taliban , It is an illusion that US would declare Pak a terrorist state for sake of India or acts of terrorism commited against India

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2016 16:59

Self deleted. Wrong thread.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Oct 2016 17:15

Peace in war-torn Afghanistan only via Kashmir, Pakistan tells US

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 07 Oct 2016 17:20

I really doubt that any nation's diplomat is going to tell another country: "your actions have the power to influence our elections". Bharat Bhushan perhaps prematurely sampled stuff that is on the ballot to be legalized in several US states.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2016 17:41

Arjun wrote:
US says does not support declaring Pakistan a 'terrorist state'

Hope the Indian govt is not brain-dead enough to actually believe that US Democrat administration would take any concrete measures against Pakistan, esp if Hillary takes over the reins.

items:

1) this GoI is totally diff, even by very high Indian standards. No expert on India even dreamt of Modi acting so decisively

2) the US is not monolithic. There are those, even among the armed forces and their families, that have wondered, for a very, very long time about this topic: why is our nation supporting another that kills so many of our young. A year ago Kirby would not have been asked that question perhaps

3) even Hillary has come to conclude that the yahoos can get their hands on nukes. She will have little choice if her Intel concludes that the chances are rather high that it can happen.

4) even the rabid among us, on both sides, have changed color. So, something has happed that had changed the old equation

Yagnasri · Post by **Yagnasri** » 07 Oct 2016 17:44

Austin wrote:Peace in war-torn Afghanistan only via Kashmir, Pakistan tells US

So what is new.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 07 Oct 2016 20:30

NRao wrote:Some interesting points in here. No idea how reliable.

How US diplomacy put brakes on India-Pakistan escalation after 'surgical strikes'

Nothing interesting but the height of delusion and self importance, which I thought was the hall mark of TSP. To suggest that what does or does not do, TSP terror killing us SDREs, even crosses anyone's mind and can influence US election: from Trump (of all people) or Hillary or their millions of voters is the height of delusion. If one were to cite 1 millions issues in minds of the US voters, TSP terror against India will not figure even as the 1 millionth issue.

Also, I don't buy this canard that US will not support India's attack on TSP. Many times before, prior to India's latest surgical attack, this canard was used to justify inaction. No doubt US will not support a dismemberment of their munna, but were India to raise the stakes, and effectively cite the number of terrorist attacks against India as the reason, club it with global war on terror, then sure, US will intervene, but the bar will have been set so high that ensuing climb-down would have to involve TSP abandoning terror as an instrument of state policy. reason for US's wishy washy position now is that it wants both India and TSP to be its good munnas and serve its interests, and it has no interests in taking sides.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 07 Oct 2016 20:30

CRamS wrote:
NRao wrote:Some interesting points in here. No idea how reliable.

How US diplomacy put brakes on India-Pakistan escalation after 'surgical strikes'

Nothing interesting but the height of delusion and self importance, which I thought was the hall mark of TSP. To suggest that what India does or does not do, TSP terror killing us SDREs, even crosses anyone's mind and can influence US election: from Trump (of all people) or Hillary or their millions of voters is the height of delusion. If one were to cite 1 millions issues in minds of the US voters, TSP terror against India will not figure even as the 1 millionth issue.

Also, I don't buy this canard that US will not support India's attack on TSP. Many times before, prior to India's latest surgical attack, this canard was used to justify inaction. No doubt US will not support a dismemberment of their munna, but were India to raise the stakes, and effectively cite the number of terrorist attacks against India as the reason, club it with global war on terror, then sure, US will intervene, but the bar will have been set so high that ensuing climb-down would have to involve TSP abandoning terror as an instrument of state policy. reason for US's wishy washy position now is that it wants both India and TSP to be its good munnas and serve its interests, and it has no interests in taking sides.

Cosmo_R · Post by **Cosmo_R** » 07 Oct 2016 20:42

A_Gupta wrote:I really doubt that any nation's diplomat is going to tell another country: "your actions have the power to influence our elections". Bharat Bhushan perhaps prematurely sampled stuff that is on the ballot to be legalized in several US states.

Exactly. It's all a great pretense about 'insider knowledge'. BB is not a credible source.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 07 Oct 2016 21:32

Yagnasri wrote:
Austin wrote:Peace in war-torn Afghanistan only via Kashmir, Pakistan tells US
So what is new.

Follow up for you.

Called a thief and liar over Kashmir, Pakistan representatives threaten US with new Russia-China tie-up

HIGHLIGHTS
Pak special envoys were harangued and humiliated by Baloch, Sindhi, and Gilgit-Baltistani activists in Washington DC

Pak threatened the US with abandoning it for Russia, China, and Iran

Syed also derided President Obama, calling him a ''guest'' at the White House for the next few months

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 07 Oct 2016 22:39

NRao wrote:
Arjun wrote:
US says does not support declaring Pakistan a 'terrorist state'

Hope the Indian govt is not brain-dead enough to actually believe that US Democrat administration would take any concrete measures against Pakistan, esp if Hillary takes over the reins.
items:

1) this GoI is totally diff, even by very high Indian standards. No expert on India even dreamt of Modi acting so decisively

2) the US is not monolithic. There are those, even among the armed forces and their families, that have wondered, for a very, very long time about this topic: why is our nation supporting another that kills so many of our young. A year ago Kirby would not have been asked that question perhaps

3) even Hillary has come to conclude that the yahoos can get their hands on nukes. She will have little choice if her Intel concludes that the chances are rather high that it can happen.

4) even the rabid among us, on both sides, have changed color. So, something has happed that had changed the old equation

US has state policy of supporting and pampering Pakistan diplomatically and financially , this is spread across all administration , thinking that US would any time brand Pakistan is as delusional as US would brand Saudis as epicentre of Wahhabi terrorism.

I can jst home no one in GOI is delusional to believe this else they must be smoking something potent.

Wait for few days and SD would state terror attack in India and Pakistan as equal equal

GShankar · Post by **GShankar** » 07 Oct 2016 22:45

ramana wrote:Some people run call centers, others run foundations.

And Bank(s)!