West Asia News and Discussions (YEMEN, gulf)

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 06 Apr 2015 02:37

shiv wrote: This "nuclear cover" business makes me laugh as I recall the sophistry of the west in the use of the term "ally". For the European/Christian/North Atlantic "West" - an ally means that the ally will_definitely_join any war that a nation fights. For them "ally" means family. One's own blood. But any other non European nation that is an "ally" is expected to join European/US wars, but those European countries will not join wars started by non-European allies.

Starting wars is an imprecise term. The US has very clearly stated it's position vis-a-vis Japan/China. It has fought in S. Korea and continues to protect it today which is hardly a european ally.

So Pakistan, as an "ally" did not get the US to join in its war with India even as Pakistan joined every war that the US wanted it to join. Arabs have allied with the US but have never got the West to fight Israel. They have, on the other hand fought alongside the West in the wars that the West wanted to fight.

Pretty much all of it is not fact. The US and Pakistan were allies via SEATO and CENTO. Both were clearly against communist aggression. The US was in no way obligated to join Pakistan's war against India. That much was made clear. That they even thought that Pakistan would join them in any anti-communist wars was absurd to begin with. Plenty within successive US administrations doubted it too. And Pakistan of course refused to after claiming "our army can be yours if you want it". The Arabs have allied with the US for dollars, to secure their own kingdoms from revolutionary Iran and not to fight Israel.

India has no business protecting Iran with nuclear cover. We look after ourselves, period. Expect nothing and give nothing. No one is on our side. Only we can be on our side.

India hasn't formed any internal consensus on being an arbiter of war and peace in our backyard. But that will eventually come about. Coming up with claims like no one is on our side is short sighted. It is our job to figure out, articulate our world view and then go about implementing it by forming our own alliances. It will have to be around Indian military strength and access to our markets. We're beginning to do that in the east with Vietnam. Having to deal with opposing blocs and possibly giving them all something but leaving none of them completely satisfied is just the way it goes. If India doesn't do that in it's own backyard, others will.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 06 Apr 2015 02:39

JE Menon wrote:What does "nuclear protection" mean anyway? Think about it like this

If a nuke-less Britain is about to be nuked by Russia, does anyone seriously think the US will nuke Russia and risk its entire homeland. Britain is smaller than many, if not most, US states... Plus, how does a comprehensively nuked Britain, Russia AND US benefit anyone?

I'm sure there's something in here that I don't completely get. The US did shield a nuke-less Germany against Soviet aggression. I doubt it wouldn't do that today if required.

sanjaykumar · Post by **sanjaykumar** » 06 Apr 2015 02:39

Indians are Iran's people?

Masternation fantasies.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Apr 2015 02:49

ldev wrote:
RamaY wrote: Faced with a Sunni Bum & Israeli bum, Iran can & should turn to Bharat for nuclear protection!
And what do the Iranians think about that proposition!! They believe that they will protect India, as according to them the Indian subcontinent is meant to be part of their Persian empire!!

Nothing wrong in Iran having a vision.

First they have to define "Persia". Is Persia an Islamic empire or not?

If it is an Islamic empire, then they first have to survive in their fight against Saudi Arabia.

If it is a Hindu empire and when such an empire includes all the territory from Turkey to China, then India too can be part of that empire. Who cares if the capital of such a Hindu empire be in the house of Pasupatinatha or Viswanatha or Mahakala (Mecca)?

Tuvaluan · Post by **Tuvaluan** » 06 Apr 2015 03:30

Last I heard, Iran is being run a bunch of shiite clerics, and the zoroastrian population is somewhere between 0% and 0%, so I am just going to take a wild stab in the dark and not just say "Persia" does not exist, but Iran is not going to regress to a persian empire not involving islam any time soon. The USA already tried that stunt with Shahenshah in the 50s-70s and got their gonads handed to them on a platter by Khomeini in 1978.

As for India becoming part of this Turko-Iranian-Indian-Chinese empire...uh, what now brown cow...who cares, just pass that joint around, bro.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 06 Apr 2015 06:36

UlanBatori wrote:I seem to remember seeing yesterday an item saying "(KSA) pledges to Protect Mecca and Medina!"
Wonder why. Isn't that like POTUS Dubya saying "USA pledges to Protect Disneyland and Six Flags!" as the US proceeds to Liberate, say, Grenada?
What are they shivering in their jalabyas for, hain? The Houthis don't have a single airplane nor any hope of surviving in their own cities, much less invade KSA!
Or... are they thinking of ISIS?

The Houthis HAD airplanes. They took over the Al-Anad airbase and other remember. The fellas also tried to take put Hadi from his (p)residential palace. That's when KSA intervened and all this hungama happened. Its a different story that they don't have any functional planes anymore. all of them have been neutered in the air strikes, I believe. Such a way of assets and toys.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Apr 2015 06:41

KrishnaK wrote:
JE Menon wrote:What does "nuclear protection" mean anyway? Think about it like this

If a nuke-less Britain is about to be nuked by Russia, does anyone seriously think the US will nuke Russia and risk its entire homeland. Britain is smaller than many, if not most, US states... Plus, how does a comprehensively nuked Britain, Russia AND US benefit anyone?
I'm sure there's something in here that I don't completely get. The US did shield a nuke-less Germany against Soviet aggression. I doubt it wouldn't do that today if required.

They pretended to shield Germany but spent a lot of time inventing nukes that would work locally against Soviet tanks without much fallout or global escalation. These attempts were failures. Neutron bombs do produce plenty of fallout and could not be guaranteed to prevent escalation. That is what got US nukes kicked out of Germany. Only Poodlestan keeps them now I think.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Apr 2015 06:52

JE Menon wrote:What does "nuclear protection" mean anyway? Think about it like this

If a nuke-less Britain is about to be nuked by Russia, does anyone seriously think the US will nuke Russia and risk its entire homeland. Britain is smaller than many, if not most, US states... Plus, how does a comprehensively nuked Britain, Russia AND US benefit anyone?

JEM forget nuclear cover and look at the question of who will join a conventional war for an ally. I think nuclear cover for a non European ally is fake-ular cover

I get the feeling that "Allies" in Europe through the late 19th and early 20th centuries were based on blood relations among monarchs so that fighting for allies was fighting for one's kith and kin. Combine this with the fact that European monarchies were feudal in which each feudal lord who was the vassal of the monarch owned the people in his land (by law) and could order the men to pick up arms and fight for the king. In Europe - WW 1 saw so many dead that this system began to collapse - but the US continued the system of helping some of its European kin though WW 1 and 2. Even the US took sides only because slanteye Japanese joined the war on Germany's side so there was a good oriental enemy to kill.

Even today Pakistan is called an "ally" but the US does not lift a finger to help its ally against India. But the ally is required to do everything to help America, for which it gets paid. The word here is ally but the relationship is mercenary/prostitute. On the other hand it is instructive to see how the US ganged up with Britain in the Falklands, and later Britain ganged up with the US to bomb Libya (after the Pan Am Lockerbie bombing) and more recently all of them joined each others wars in Kosove, Afghanistan and Iraq.

There is a White anglo-saxon Christian version of "ally" that is separate from other allies. Their concept of ally is different and has been honed by centuries of alliances and wars in Europe. We easterners don't work that way. Maybe it is a good way to work but I think a racist element is essential for people to gang up like this. Just my view

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Apr 2015 06:57

Soothi Arabia has been against Yemen and the Houthis for ages. So why do they need Sunni Paki troops now? I think it has nothing to do with going and fighting inside Yemen. It is all about keeping Yemen's problems within Yemen and preventing it from spreading into Soothia

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Apr 2015 07:35

I see two logical fallacies.

1/ Nuclear protection-umbrella is oxymoron because the protector wouldn't venture into a nuclear war for the sake of protected.

We don't know the answer because this thing didn't happen, yet, in human history. Then isn't it in India's interest to follow the current international traditions and offer a nuclear umbrella to Iran? Unlike in Germany or other NATO member's examples, the proposal never suggested moving any nuclear weapons to Iran. It proposes that India's Agni V missiles have enough range to cover Iran's potential threats from Indian territory itself.

All this proposal offers to Iran is a PAD based nuclear cover to Tehran.

The cookie will crumble the way it is meant to crumble and we all are sure it won't be India who will crumble the cookie anyways.

2/ Iran will never accept any such thing. And the proof is "Iran's Persia empire".

Let's assume Iran's Persian imperial vision is plausible and probable. Then wouldn't it be in Iran's interests to take an offer from India, thus save its H&D because Bharat will be part of the Persian empire anyways?

Did anyone predict Iran will take American offer and postpone or slowdown its nuclear ambitions? Did anyone predict US will go ahead with Iran talks despite of Israeli opposition?

In summary, given the fact that "we don't know what we don't know" isn't it in Indian Interests to think out of the box and propose "assertive" foreign policy ideas to extend its geopolitical interests?

Isn't it about time that we grow indifferent to Pakistan and look beyond?

Thanks,

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Apr 2015 07:53

Yes BRF in 2013 predicted Iran will take up US offer in this forum.
The West Germans were not sure of US umbrella ir what not and demanded and got US troops as tripwire forces against Soviet Union to ensure its invoked.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Apr 2015 07:56

India has thought beyond TSP and has agreement to place IAF in Iran in case of next war.
Iran is just getting out of its shackles and needs to think it over what role it wants to play.
First clean up Yemen and Syria.

partha · Post by **partha** » 06 Apr 2015 07:59

ramana wrote:India has thought beyond TSP and has agreement to place IAF in Iran in case of next war.

ramanaji, could you please provide a reference?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 06 Apr 2015 08:07

partha wrote:
ramana wrote:India has thought beyond TSP and has agreement to place IAF in Iran in case of next war.
ramanaji, could you please provide a reference?

http://old.cacianalyst.org/?q=node/902

partha · Post by **partha** » 06 Apr 2015 08:08

^
Thanks.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 06 Apr 2015 08:17

Partha you could google once you got the info. Links are so 90s!

partha · Post by **partha** » 06 Apr 2015 08:24

ramana wrote:Partha you could google once you got the info. Links are so 90s!

400% agree but that info doesn't show up easily on Google. It's possible I didn't search right.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 06 Apr 2015 09:36

partha wrote:
ramana wrote:Partha you could google once you got the info. Links are so 90s!
400% agree but that info doesn't show up easily on Google. It's possible I didn't search right.

Take FWIW
http://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/defau ... 0rev_0.pdf

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 06 Apr 2015 10:52

RamaY wrote:http://old.cacianalyst.org/?q=node/902

These equations might have changed a lot in the past 10 years. Iran is a much bigger power with renewed regional ambitions. They may have different plans now.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 06 Apr 2015 11:02

>>>militant named Abu Anas Al-Libi

A tongue in cheek (no pun intended) but probably most accurate translation of that would be:

Father of the Libyan oiseaule.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 06 Apr 2015 11:04

Once the nukes start flying, it's anybody's guess who will do what treaty or no treaty.

Don't forget that the holocaust only became an issue after WW2, not during it. Millions of deaths, per se, is not an issue when your country's life is on the line. Deterrence works until it doesn't ... We just haven't come to that pass. Yet.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 06 Apr 2015 11:11

>> Then isn't it in India's interest to follow the current international traditions and offer a nuclear umbrella to Iran?

Sure, but why Iran or why only Iran? And what do we do with their offer of the same? On the other hand we could offer to Iran, Saudi, Pakistan and Israel. Or just keep quiet, sit with a total mofo of a second strike capability against everyone, and tell everyone: make in India. Come, let's do business. Only. Mind it.

Looks like government is going for latter.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 06 Apr 2015 11:26

The nuclear triad will be active by the end of Modi's first term, IIRC. Right?

Bhurishrava · Post by **Bhurishrava** » 06 Apr 2015 11:54

Their concept of ally is different and has been honed by centuries of alliances and wars in Europe. We easterners don't work that way. Maybe it is a good way to work but I think a racist element is essential for people to gang up like this. Just my view

This is not unique to America or its white christian allies.
Sunnis gang up against Shias. Shias attempting the same.

Its only Indians who have successfully cut themselves off from other dharmic states. Despite the fact that buddhist Thailand invoked a `look west` policy in response to india`s `look east` policy we have been dragging our feet rather than engaging closely with that state.
Combodia which has large number of hindu temples votes for China in ASEAN.

With `secular` Congress in power for the major part, we supported Palestine and Egypt and Yugoslavia and Cuba. The discourse here at BR is about Yemen but not about the martial law/dictatorial law in Thailand. Sad.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 06 Apr 2015 12:17

Tuvaluan wrote:Last I heard, Iran is being run a bunch of shiite clerics, and the zoroastrian population is somewhere between 0% and 0%, so I am just going to take a wild stab in the dark and not just say "Persia" does not exist, but Iran is not going to regress to a persian empire not involving islam any time soon. The USA already tried that stunt with Shahenshah in the 50s-70s and got their gonads handed to them on a platter by Khomeini in 1978.

As for India becoming part of this Turko-Iranian-Indian-Chinese empire...uh, what now brown cow...who cares, just pass that joint around, bro.

The wapo article cited reads like a Saudi-Israeli interests planted propagandu authored by ex-CIA wallah to sow FUD about the nuke deal. One Iranian ex-national security guy's speech, along with blanket assertion by author that Iranian elite think like this onlee. We would be naive to buy the article wholesale as factual statement about what Iran wants in life.

Anyone with half a political brain knows that Iran has its own ambitions, there are all sorts of factions and schools of thought, and the idea of any engagement with Iran is to take into account all factions. The article cited provides no new information or insight, it is just maya only to provide cover for the yagnam that will be done to scuttle the deal.

Luckily in this case nothing really goes of our father whether this deal goes through or not, so we can just take articles like this as learning opportunities to practice deconstructing the propagandu that is when it is employed against us by these same actors and their Indian chelas.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 06 Apr 2015 12:51

http://swarajyamag.com/world/not-just-saudi-vs-houthis/

Not my title, and there's a correction due as I've told them ex president Saleh is not a Sunni but other than that, all as written. View, share, moment at will...

My title was: "Arabia Felix - Not So Happy Anymore" - Which I kind of liked - but I guess they thought it too obscure for general public.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 07 Apr 2015 07:22

Bhurishrava wrote: Its only Indians who have successfully cut themselves off from other dharmic states. Despite the fact that buddhist Thailand invoked a `look west` policy in response to india`s `look east` policy we have been dragging our feet rather than engaging closely with that state.
Combodia which has large number of hindu temples votes for China in ASEAN.

Bears repeating. Please look East, Act East.

I think Cambodia felt let down by India, but can't locate the OpEd that let me to think so.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 07 Apr 2015 07:31

JE Menon wrote:>> Then isn't it in India's interest to follow the current international traditions and offer a nuclear umbrella to Iran?

Sure, but why Iran or why only Iran? And what do we do with their offer of the same? On the other hand we could offer to Iran, Saudi, Pakistan and Israel. Or just keep quiet, sit with a total mofo of a second strike capability against everyone, and tell everyone: make in India. Come, let's do business. Only. Mind it.

Looks like government is going for latter.

alright shutting up for now!

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 07 Apr 2015 09:45

the current bloodletting in the islamic world could be seen as a periodic 'reset' that nature imposes when the forces of adharma grow too high, so vast number are killed off in internal squabbles like periodically the asuras would gain control over some booty like a apsara but fight down to the last asura over who gets to own her!

europe went through it in middle ages and WW1 & 2.

islam just is not setup to bring forth a sustainable nation state in modern era. underpinnings of oil and political repression keep the edifice up.

kmkraoind · Post by **kmkraoind** » 07 Apr 2015 10:52

Actually GoI/MEA had issued warnings and evacuation notices to all Indians in Yeman, yet they choose to stay there, necessitating expensive evacuation operations. Since its a semi-battle zone, even GoI want to assess the situation and actively lent a helping hand in evacuating miniscule (5K) number of Indians.

Even in Iraq too, nurses got advanced warnings, yet GoI took great pains in evacuating them. On returning to here, some of these buggers want go back to battle zones again. Why such idiotic madness?

Then, what happens if there are dire situations in KSA or UAE, where evacuation numbers will run in lakhs.

IMO, GoI should come up a policy on evacuation notices and impose monetary fines/prison terms or at least block listing their passports for 2-5 years for high-headed people who takes such warnings with laughter. Why other taxpayers needs to put up expensive evacuations bills for these persons who take evacuation notices lightly?

schinnas · Post by **schinnas** » 07 Apr 2015 11:14

kmkraoind wrote: IMO, GoI should come up a policy on evacuation notices and impose monetary fines/prison terms or at least block listing their passports for 2-5 years for high-headed people who takes such warnings with laughter. Why other taxpayers needs to put up expensive evacuations bills for these persons who take evacuation notices lightly?

Agreed overall on encouraging our expats to heed warnings. At the same time, a large chunk of our expat population in the gulf are manual laborers and at low paying jobs. Most of them need the salary to maintain their families in India. We should also deal with it in a humanitarian perspective.

Despite employing multiple planes and ships, we could move at best 1000 people a day to India. While it would work for Yemen where there were hardly 5000 Indians, it would not be a feasible option for KSA where about 2.4 million (over 24 lakh) Indians are estimated to be working. The only option in such cases would be to establish extra large size camps in neighboring countries that can house lakhs of people at a time and help transfer our citizens from war zone to these camps. However transfer from the camp to India should be charged to ensure that no body takes undue advantage of governments rescue efforts.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 07 Apr 2015 13:25

Fascinating article on FP: Dangerous Liaisons: A Pakistan-Saudi Alliance

Makes for an interesting read.

Notable sequences:

When Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif departed for Riyadh at the beginning of March, few eyebrows were raised in Pakistan. The Pakistani premier was simply going to meet the newly crowned king and catch up with old friends in the royal court. There were murmurs of Saudis wanting Pakistani help to control Iranian influence in the region, but the honorable prime minister played hard to get and gave a tenuous no to Pakistan’s patrons in Riyadh. After receiving a $1.5 billion “friendly grant” from Saudi Arabia at the beginning of his term, Sharif was playing hard to get. The prime minister managed to receive the $1.5 billion without ever publicly committing to Saudi’s regional interests.

The Qatari emir soon made his way to Islamabad, talking about billions of dollars of investments and boosting trade ties with Pakistan. As the emir departed, a tanker carrying Qatari liquefied natural gas (LNG), the first such shipment, arrived, signaling the beginning of a deal estimated to be worth $22 billion. With this deal, something was brewing, but it was hard to read the signals coming out of Islamabad.

It was only when the Saudis announced the formation of a coalition and the initiation of airstrikes in Yemen against the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels that the pieces of the puzzle fell into place: Pakistan delayed making a decision and extracted a better deal from its patrons, and was now en route to getting embroiled in yet another regional conflict that would involve the extravagant use of proxies.

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Apr 2015 13:55

Saudi Arabia seeks jets, ships, troops from Pakistan: Asif

But Pakistan is now caught between a rock and a hard place. They always go to the Saudis with outstretched hands when they need money, but now are trying their best to wriggle out of the Saudi request. The Iranian foreign minister is visiting Pakistan this week to put pressure from the other side in this Yemen conflict. The Saudis will not forget this if Pakistan refuses. Interesting times.

Mushahid urges Pakistan to bring Iran, Saudi Arabia to negotiation table

“This is not a sectarian conflict. Any attempt to give it a sectarian colour would be a misstatement of facts. This is a tribal struggle for power which has now unfortunately become a regional proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia,” said Senator Mushahid Hussain Syed.

Hussain said that the Saudis have been Pakistan’s brothers, that there was currently no threat to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina, or any other area of Saudi Arabia.

“It is not in the national interest to send our troops outside Pakistan. Unless and until we settle our own house in order, we should avoid becoming part of any other conflict,” he said.

He said that Pakistan has historically played a critical role in uniting Iran and Saudi Arabia, and that the country has also played the part of a mediator in resolving conflicts in the Muslim world.

“We have never got entangled in proxy wars or civil wars in the Muslim world. Yemen is like Afghanistan – it’s an un-winnable war. There will be no winners in this conflict,” he warned.

Hussain said Pakistan should ask China to push the UN Security Council to bring a ceasefire leading to elections in Yemen.

He said that Pakistan and Turkey should also host leaders of both Saudi Arabia and Iran and try to resolve the conflict that is fast changing into a regional proxy war. “We should give the right advice to our friends, whether in Riyadh or Tehran,” he said.

He said that if the country decides to step into ‘this mess’, there may be a fallout in Pakistan as well. “If we have to make mistakes, let us not repeat our past mistakes again,” he said.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 07 Apr 2015 15:28

Every party, country, establishment is thinking only about how best to milk the party which is most interested in change or even status quo and is asking for support for ensuring it.

Saudis and to a lesser extent Bahrainis, Kuwaitis, Qataris, Emiratis would be milked maximum by Pakistan and Egypt.

Pakistan lives only on rent from providing downhill skiing faujis for conflict zones, and is quite knowledgeable in how to extract maximum rent. Even all the "liberal" Pakis writing in English-speaking newspapers would play their part in jacking up the rent.

I think now would be a good time for India to demand Pakistan to return Professor Sahib and to ratchet up some LoC firing and exchanges on the high seas among the navies. If Pakistan wants to eat, then there should be more "mil-baant ke khana"! Saudis should also pay up to India to keep it quiet on Pakiland's eastern front!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 07 Apr 2015 18:11

RajeshA wrote:
I think now would be a good time for India to demand Pakistan to return Professor Sahib and to ratchet up some LoC firing and exchanges on the high seas among the navies. If Pakistan wants to eat, then there should be more "mil-baant ke khana"! Saudis should also pay up to India to keep it quiet on Pakiland's eastern front!

That would be just the excuse Pakis are looking for to keep troops and materiel from going to KSA. Crapistani army is overstretched. They cannot make an open ended commitment. This is the time to encourage allow them to get involved in KSA/Yemen and after they do that we ratchet up the pressure.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 07 Apr 2015 18:20

The biggest problem is that. I / WE don't even know if Pak can / will accept to that commitment. Imran Khan has already stopped putting up his tamasha and started getting serious. Pak oppsn and its nascent civil society doesn't want involvement in Yemen.

If we look at Yemens past, no big power has been able to go in and walk out a. in a jiffy b. with head held high c. not learnt amusing and humiliating lessons. Check all 3 actually.

If Pak had any sense, they will send only mil assets absent ground troops to KSA. If they had no sense, they will still send only mil assets absent ground troops to KSA.

Its a Hobson's choice. Anything more and they have hell to pay for. And I think the chicken are, well and truly, coming home to roost. This will create more problems though.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 07 Apr 2015 19:22

JE Menon wrote:http://swarajyamag.com/world/not-just-saudi-vs-houthis/

Not my title, and there's a correction due as I've told them ex president Saleh is not a Sunni but other than that, all as written. View, share, moment at will...

My title was: "Arabia Felix - Not So Happy Anymore" - Which I kind of liked - but I guess they thought it too obscure for general public.

Masterly analysis JE. My compliments.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 07 Apr 2015 19:27

kmkraoind wrote:Actually GoI/MEA had issued warnings and evacuation notices to all Indians in Yeman, yet they choose to stay there, necessitating expensive evacuation operations. Since its a semi-battle zone, even GoI want to assess the situation and actively lent a helping hand in evacuating miniscule (5K) number of Indians.

Even in Iraq too, nurses got advanced warnings, yet GoI took great pains in evacuating them. On returning to here, some of these buggers want go back to battle zones again. Why such idiotic madness?

Then, what happens if there are dire situations in KSA or UAE, where evacuation numbers will run in lakhs.

IMO, GoI should come up a policy on evacuation notices and impose monetary fines/prison terms or at least block listing their passports for 2-5 years for high-headed people who takes such warnings with laughter. Why other taxpayers needs to put up expensive evacuations bills for these persons who take evacuation notices lightly?

I agree with you but not with the harsh approach. There should be some sort of insurance fund maintained by GOI for rescues like this and citizens working in danger zones should be asked to pay their share of the premium.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 07 Apr 2015 21:17

Tx KLNM

ldev · Post by **ldev** » 07 Apr 2015 22:07

Great write up JEM.

And this photograph in the writeup of the 3 Saudi border guards is truly inspired!! The size of their mid sections makes them prime candidates for 10 km jogs!!