"It is more likely than not that a weapon of mass destruction will be used someplace in the world prior to the end of year 2013," the commission's chairman, former Senator Bob Graham, told journalists in Washington on December 3.
"We also found that it was more likely that that weapon would be biological than nuclear."
"Were one to map terrorism and the weapons of mass destruction today, all roads would intersect in Pakistan," the report says.
Not being "a pussy" and going for all-out war with a fully-erect sense of machismo is not a guarantor of success -- the Iraq war is a shining example.Serious question. I am getting tired of being stopped in the street in yonder foreign country and asked how India is such a pussy that it will not do anything to protect its people. What's the standard answer? It always ends in "I would like to go there, but..." on the other party's part.
Kind Maulvi, no one said anything about a war. But what has been the response to the last six events that each every one of these random person in the street of a foreign country counts. Was *EVER* there a responsible, credible response that can be cited? Is there a plan now?Rye wrote:Not being "a pussy" and going for all-out war with a fully-erect sense of machismo is not a guarantor of success -- the Iraq war is a shining example.Serious question. I am getting tired of being stopped in the street in yonder foreign country and asked how India is such a pussy that it will not do anything to protect its people. What's the standard answer? It always ends in "I would like to go there, but..." on the other party's part.
It would be a simple matter if this was a two-person game, but Pakistan is just a cheap whore working for baksheesh and cannot identify Pakistani interests if it came by in a miniskirt and winked at them coyly. So, there are other larger interests at play here that could be using these recent events to gain long-term strategic loss for India, using the Pakistani excuse to get India to make irreversible concessions against its long-term interest. If India is able to get connected to central Asia via Pakistan-occupied Indian territory, that increases India's leverage in the global games of the future several fold, which is exactly why "making India a great power" involves cutting India from Central Asia.Are you saying a few hundred random people a month is cost of the rest living?
good point theire johann.. decapacitating should include the first strike capabilities. imho, if that were to be done, its been one week, and all the blood rush in the artilleries is now reverted to goodness gracious veins.As long as nukes and fissile material are part of the picture, governments will not overtly strike in such a manner. To demand otherwise is pointless fantasy.
There is one option that no one is thinking off!.. the chor can be assassinated silently. final justice/Battling jihadis: India has few options
5 Dec 2008, 0114 hrs IST, Arindam Sen Gupta, TNN
NEW DELHI: Imagine your pocket has been picked. You see the young pickpocket running away but can't chase him down with a sprained ankle. There's
a constable on the other side of the road but he's got a potbelly and you've heard that he is mixed up with criminals. Just then a police officer you know is driving past.
Seeing you're crying yourself silly, he stops and listens to you sympathetically. "I've has been summoned by the boss," he tells you. "If I find the chor on my way, I'll catch him and get back your purse," he adds helpfully. Meanwhile, the constable on the other side has vanished.
It's a wretched situation. You can see the thief and yet can't do anything about it. You only have a number of non-options and this leaves you virtually paralyzed. You curse your luck that the purse contains the month's salary. Now magnify this crime a hundred times over.
It's not just that you've lost your money. It's a matter of your life and security. The killer has already mowed down hundreds and is coming towards you. You may have ways of stopping him but each option will come with scary side effects. You face the same paralysis-inducing dilemma, leading to a sense of helplessness.
That's really the predicament of the government in the wake of the Mumbai carnage — it knows the killers, knows where they were trained, who were the trainers, their links with sections of the ISI, and much more. Yet it doesn't know what to do next.
Let's get into the full story, pieced together after talking to people who are in the thick of it.
The government feels the attack this time was meticulously planned, with the help of top intelligence inputs and professional support. It thinks that it's unlikely the Indian fishing trawler Kuber was hijacked. A well-planned attack mission like this would not depend on the off-chance of hijacking a boat for its success. Rather, the Indian crew of the boat were probably mixed up in smuggling and got sucked into this deadly game. And paid with their lives.
The government knows the attack originated from Pakistan. In fact, the Pakistan government doesn't deny this. Even now when Asif Ali Zardari is telling Larry King that the attackers are "stateless people", he isn't saying they are not Pakistanis. Earlier, foreign minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi, who was in India when the attack took place, told the media he was willing to send the ISI chief for a joint probe, signaling that he believed the attackers were Pakistanis.
When Manmohan Singh called up Zardari and Pakistan PM Gilani, both said the ISI director general Shuja Pasha would be sent to India to help out with the investigations. But by evening, the picture had changed. An ISI spokesman sounded very iffy about Pasha's visit. "Let the government tell us and we'll see," he said.
In short, the ISI was telling the civilian government to get off. Meanwhile, the Pakistan army sounded a warning about an Indian military build-up along the border. Newspapers close to the army, like Pakistan Observer and Frontier Post, and TV channel Geo, played up this alleged build-up. Suddenly, the popular mood was turning — from a sense of outrage at the Mumbai killings to alarm about a possible Indian attack.
Why did the Pakistan army do this? First, to deflect attention from the Mumbai attack into which the ISI was being dragged (ISI and the army are very close after Pakistan army chief Kayani hand-picked Lt Gen Pasha as the ISI boss). Second, it was signaling to the world that the civilian government didn't matter; what mattered was the army.
The third reason is that it saw in the situation an opportunity to recoup the morale of its soldiers. The US-pressed "war on terror" on Pakistan's western front is believed to have badly sapped the army's morale. Many of the soldiers don't believe in it -- there were as many as 900 desertions last year.
Fourthly, it reckons that by playing the India card, it could win back some of its lost credibility and authority among the people. Musharraf's last months had badly dented the army's standing in Pakistani society and the "war on terror" has eroded its popularity. With Zardari & Co seen as soft on India, the army was now sensing an opportunity of staging a comeback.
In fact, one estimate in New Delhi is that the Mumbai carnage, and the expected backlash from India, is aimed at a larger goal — to set the scene for an army coup. Top officials, however, discount the possibility -- at least for now, although they don't discount that the army is pushing to carve out its independent space and a bigger stake.
That's where India's dilemma comes in. If it were to flex its muscle, mass its soldiers along the border and tell Islamabad that it means business — as many people, incensed with the repeated terrorist attacks, would like the government to do -- it could be playing into the Pakistan army's hand.
New Delhi knows that the Americans have more levers on Pakistan than it has. But it doesn't know how much pressure the US was willing to exert on Islamabad. While there is an overlap of interest with India now (six American were, after all, killed in the attack), US's bigger interest is in forcing Pakistan's hand in the fight against al Qaida and the Taliban.
So, when Condoleezza Rice came over on Wednesday, she said all the right words but, in concrete terms, promised to press Pakistan on one thing — to ask for a ban on Lashkar-e-Taiba's political wing, Jamaat-ud-Dawa. The Dawa is not an underground organization like Lashkar, although it recruits people for terror, as it did with captured Mumbai attacker, Ajmal Amir Kasav.
India is also uncertain of the implication of getting the US and others involved in the standoff. It fears that could lead to the internationalizing of the Kashmir dispute. Everyone loves a good crisis, and all of them were looking to get something out for themselves from it if they could get their finger in the pie. That's India's second dilemma — it knows only the US can deliver but it doesn't know if it's a good idea to press it for help beyond a point.
Ask any top government official and he or she will say, "We want outcome, not statements." But they don't really know how to secure that outcome. Should it turn to the doubtful constable — in this case, the Pakistan army — for help? Not really. Should it insist with the friendly officer — in this case, the US — to make his boss wait and catch the thief first? It's of no use, he won't.
So, India waits staring at the various non-options, waiting for a bright idea to strike it. Meanwhile, the thief is at the safe distance, from where he is now thumbing his nose at you.
Johann,Johann wrote:Attempting to decapitate the Pakistani military leadership is an exciting idea, but no government anywhere in the world would do it. Not even the ones derided or lauded for acting before thinking like the Americans and Israelis.
As long as nukes and fissile material are part of the picture, governments will not overtly strike in such a manner. To demand otherwise is pointless fantasy.
John Snow wrote:ramana garu here it is.
Privately, Indian officials have told some US interlocutors that India’s nuclear weapons are "assuredly secure" with its survivability and a chain of command ensured.
So why would Pakistan push the losing button? The answer lies in a chilling exchange related in a recent article in the journal Atlantic Monthly that is being circulated widely in the South Asia circuit.
....
Did you see the map on this web site?
Yeah... I'm extremely pissed off at these Western media. They should at least follow what Google Maps do.surinder wrote:Did you see the map on this web site?
The Pakistanis have been crowing about the validation of their deterrent since Kargil. The international attacks on the AQ Khan network subdued their nuclear rhetoric, but did not fundamentally change the nuclear equation in the subcontinent.surinder wrote:Johann,Johann wrote:Attempting to decapitate the Pakistani military leadership is an exciting idea, but no government anywhere in the world would do it. Not even the ones derided or lauded for acting before thinking like the Americans and Israelis.
As long as nukes and fissile material are part of the picture, governments will not overtly strike in such a manner. To demand otherwise is pointless fantasy.
That means the TSPians are right: our nuukes have given us parity and will prevent Indiea from ever launchingattacks again. What youa re describing means that there cannot be any waar.
I have lodged a complaint with BBC website. Lets see if they make the changes.surinder wrote:Did you see the map on this web site?
But show where? Doordarshan? Its we who go to BBC to get news. Is there any Indian news agency where the world comes for news?SaiK wrote:Lets do the same..
show USA map without Texas or California. Show Brit map without Scotland.
"There cannot be a war", is right. There was no need.That means the TSPians are right: our nuukes have given us parity and will prevent Indiea from ever launchingattacks again. What youa re describing means that there cannot be any waar.
If you keep doing what you did yesterday, why do you expect different results tomorrow?
This does gladden my heart!John Snow wrote:ramana garu here it is.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/arti ... 387267.cmsThere is no future here, and we need to start over. So many people think this. Have you been to the villages of Pakistan, the interior? There is nothing but dire poverty and pain. The children have no education; there is nothing to look forward to. Go into the villages, see the poverty. There is no drinking water. Small children without shoes walk miles for a drink of water. I go to the villages and I want to cry. My children have no future. None of the children of Pakistan have a future. We are surrounded by nothing but war and suffering. Millions should die away."
N,Johann:
Responding to your post. We agree that the Pakistani central military establishment has to destroyed, for there to be peace and quiet, and a hope for progress in Pakistan. The divergence is here:
1. You are stating the present thinking, which is that the way to civilize Pakistan is to support the civilian establishment, so that they will take on BOTH the Army and the "Taliban" in the west. If I read the projected sequence right, it is:
a. Bolster the H&D of the civilian leaders by suitable Photo Oppotunities and World Bank Loans.
b. They will then move to consolidate power by appointing THEIR chamchas at the top of the Army.
c. They will clean out the ISI of the "rogue terrorists" (as someone pointed out, distinct from the "official terrorists").
d. With the Army under their control and the ISI at their beck and call, they will win a famous victory over the Taliban and allow US/NATO supplies to move unhindered across Waziristan.
e. With the Army and ISI under control, they will move to change the curricula at the madarssas, and stop the AK-47 training and Islamist lobotomy parts of the curricula.
There's a problem with this scenario, obviously, if you look at Pakistani history. Liaquat Ali Khan, shot dead. Mujibur Rahman, jailed, then shot. ZBhutto, hanged. BBhutto, exiled. Nawaz Sharif, tossed out in coup, imprisoned, exiled.
Where is the evidence that Zardari is going to succeed? What in the civilian establishment has become stronger rather than weaker?
OTOH, time is NOT on the side of the civilian BandAid Plan. The madarssas are churning out 10,000? 17000? "graduates" a year. Unemployment (except in the terrorist enterprise) is rising, the economy is tanking. The Paki passport does not command the love it commanded once in the US.
Even in Londonistan, love for Pakis and "Kashmiris" is not exactly running high. Nor in France, nor in Italy.
ndeed, the social and charitable organization that many analysts and security officials contend is the parent group of Lashkar-e-Taiba invited reporters to its headquarters not far from Lahore, the main city in Punjab province. The move appeared designed to show that the center isn't linked to any militant activity, following rumors that it may be a possible target for any Indian retaliatory action.
Officials of Jamaat-ud-Dawa -- which roughly translates as Party of Preachers -- deny any link with Lashkar-e-Taiba or to terrorism.
"You can see what we do here," Abdullah Muntazir, a young spokesman for Jamaat-ud-Dawa, told a group of journalists at a 75-acre complex that houses a university, two schools and a hospital. Young students learn science and math in well-equipped classrooms.
Pakistan put Jamaat-ud-Dawa on a list of terrorist organizations in 2003 after the U.S. placed it on its terror watch list. But Pakistan has never affected its activities.
Jamaat-ud-Dawa's posters along the road to Lahore exhort Muslims to join jihad. The group publishes several magazines and runs a Web site, which contains reports of "Indian atrocities." Analysts and security officials say it continues to recruit fighters for Lashkar-e-Taiba, which is still operating in Kashmir, the disputed border region between Pakistan and India. Last month Jamaat held a series of jihad rallies across the country that attracted hundreds of thousands.
Mr. Muntazir contended that the attacks in Mumbai might have been carried out by "those victimized by Hindus. "They are killing Muslims, Christians and other religious minorities," he said. "It could be the reaction to that."
Absolutely nothing in my response to N deals with that issue.John Snow wrote:so per Johann
IM will take cudgels on behalf of TSP
Indian politicians would do jack**** because they don't get votes for it.Shreeman wrote:hi folks: didn't quite get an answer. what do you tell someone you don't know (a passer by, co-worker, etc), who doesn't necessarily follow or understand world politics, but has three days of coverage of the massacre?
India can't do jack-**** because ____________________________.
What is it?