Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Feb. 12, 2011

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 16 Feb 2011 12:33

excuses, excuses , more excuses, and defensive of US - all done by Indians only.

politically incorrect , in BR speak it is http://sites.google.com/site/brfdiction ... ary/m/mutu but The only word I get in my mind is http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... use+nigger

Why should Indians care what US needs Pakistan for (all those excuses)? All Indians should care is that US is helping Pakistan bleed India.

I possibly can never understand the khujli of Indians to defend the actions of US, even when it was clearly the prime mover behind many anti-Indian activities.

Do any people ever hear any US/UK channels trying to rationalize russian/any countries support to Iran?? But we have this khujli, God knows when this syndrome will be cured.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 16 Feb 2011 12:37

I am against the whole line of thinking above. Anyone ... let me state it again... anyone who supplies arms (may it be pistols aur aansoo gas) to Pakistan, acts against India. period.

I am amazed that some knowledgable posters here are OK with it.

Also, on the other hand people who feel that Pakistan is a state proped up by China and US are also dead wrong. It is a state proped by it's own people and priorities...

US uses her as a whore. China as a local mafia.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 12:37

^^^Ok, so the US is big, bad, ugly...It does all sorts of abominable things, only to India...Thats ceteris paribus..What next? Some more of "US is big, bad and ugly......"?!

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 16 Feb 2011 12:43

somnath wrote:^^^Ok, so the US is big, bad, ugly...It does all sorts of abominable things, only to India...Thats ceteris paribus..What next? Some more of "US is big, bad and ugly......"?!

Then the next question is how do we cut down its influence in Pak.

See when you have made the above statement, you have freed yourselves from being tied to US objectives like going after Al qaeda and so on. Supporting those activities when removed gives a completely different set of options - unavailable when we are tied to US objectives.

When Pakistan and US fight, say over Davis, instead of taking sides with US/Pakistan, as Shiv said, we should egg them on with a first class ticket and handy popcorn ofcourse. Instead of seeing issues of Davis for US positions, we can start seeing which position will be more beneficial to India.

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 16 Feb 2011 12:46

Perhaps some enlightened posters can educate 'why' IT(the 'flawed' Indo-US relationship) happened,What India could have done,What India should now.

I think we need to know the alternate view.Even Dr MMS is cognisant and perhaps sympathetic of the alternate view.I am genuinely interested if somnathji,KarnaAji and Vikramji can articulate their views in some other thread.Obviously they will not agree on everything.We need a 'liberal-capitalist' critique(for the want of a better word) on Indo-US relations.Perhaps they will oblige.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 12:47

^ Probably in a different thread.

Sri · Post by **Sri** » 16 Feb 2011 12:49

Somanth Ji. Not the US... Anyone.... who supplies arms and ammunition to Pkaistan, does so in full knowlrdge that India is Pakistan's ultimate enemy.

Now US may be supplying arms to other nations too, I don't care.

It does all sorts of abominable things, only to India.

No I never said that. US might do things that it feels might be in in it's own interest and some of those things may be against India's interest. I m sure there are very many countires who feel vertain parts of US policy determentle to thier own interest.

I am not in any way calling US Big bad and ugly overall. But there are aspects of it's policy which put my country, it's armed forces and it's people in danger. And I am dead against it.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 16 Feb 2011 12:50

VikasRaina wrote:Once again why is there pressure on India by USA not to conduct business with Iran?
How would USA react if India sells couple of 100 BRAHMOS to Iran especially if those BRAHMOS are used in a small flare up against USA/NATO ?

Equal-equal between Iran-TSP AND USA-India? Precisely the kind of thinking our Menons and Nehru had. Sitting on some high-funda moralistic plane with no connection with reality.

It does not take a lot of genius: India needs to identify where her interests lie, and make sure it gets a quid-pro-quo which more than compensates her for any concessions she makes; if she choses to make them at all. That should be the approach to any issue not just Iran-US-India. IIRC, India did tell the US that commercial ties with Iran will continue as usual.

ravi_ku: I was just waiting for the those DIE/MUTU and other BR terms to be thrown in. I had actually written a line about these terms in my original post but chose to leave them out. It did not take long did it. The intellectual brilliance you display in resorting to those terms certainly bodes for a bright future.

The choice is simple: You can either

about reality or you can try and INFLUENCE and SHAPE it. You can not exert influence if you do not understand the dynamics of the situation. And this summary refusal to even discuss those dynamics does not lend well to any understanding which can be used to exert influence.

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 16 Feb 2011 12:55

LAHORE – The nation will observe Eid Milad-un-Nabi today (Wednesday) to celebrate the birth of Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) with religious reverence and fervour.
The day will begin with a 31-gun salute at the federal capital and 21-gun salute at all the provincial capitals while special prayers will be offered for the security, solidarity and prosperity of the country in particular and Mulsim Ummah in general.

Maybe 10 more Gun-salutes from the TTP, 9 Gun-salutes from the BLA and 1 loud Zardari-fart will attain magical number and add char-e-chand to the dua for pakistan in particular and Ummah in general.

partha · Post by **partha** » 16 Feb 2011 13:05

abhishek_sharma wrote:Facing the music

http://www.indianexpress.com/news/Facin ... sic/750427

Pakistani singer Rahat Fateh Ali Khan was detained at Delhi airport after his 15-member troupe was found to have over $100,000 in their possession, undeclared to customs authorities. He was grilled for over 20 hours by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, his manager’s and relatives’ homes were raided, and his passport has been impounded until the issue is resolved. He was initially even denied consular service. He has now got a conditional release, but the incident has shown up the inherent overkill in these cases. Carrying undeclared cash of this kind is a garden-variety civil law infringement, and one that comes — and should come — with strong financial penalties.

And while the law does give the authorities the option to detain the offender, must it be used as a matter of course, even when there is little chance of the offender fleeing the law?

But it is not as though Khan, as a foreign citizen, is being singled out for flouting excise law. This is a longstanding pattern at our airports — in mid-2009, businesswoman Sheetal Mafatlal was arrested for carrying more jewellery than is allowed, and the incident was turned into a tidy parable about the moral bankruptcy of wealth. Before her, it was Pune builder Avinash Bhosale and former managing director of Escorts, Anil Nanda, who were hauled up for carrying undeclared high-value items including a diamond-studded watch. Evading customs is an infraction, it costs the state, and it must come with hefty penalties. But it doesn’t need to be turned into theatre, an opportunity for a little official swagger and lessons in civic responsibility.

We need to examine whether acts like this need to be answered with such brutal shaming. All crimes are not created equal — and while Rahat Fateh Ali Khan’s detention was backed up by provisions in the Customs Act and the Foreign Exchange Management Act, perhaps application of the rule-book itself needs a rethink.

This is Indian Express editorial and not some opinion piece by a social scientist from JNU. It is sickening. It is reported that "high diplomatic pressure" was the reason for pathe ali khan's release. I wonder what "high pressure" did baksheesh dependent Pakistan put on India? Most probably Pakistan threatened to cancel the upcoming talks

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 16 Feb 2011 13:06

Vikram S,

My issue was this. You were not discussing in the direction you have talked about. You were giving excuses for US past behavior.

For example your entire post, which had

There is a basic premise that Unkil's arms are responsible for TSP aggression, when apart from 1965 that is not the case. What did Unkil provide to enable Kargil or 11/26? We all know it is the nukes but you refuse to consider that.

was a pure and simple defence of US actions. It was nothing else.

I brought those words for specifically that. We do not need to defend US actions in any way.

To influence and shape events for our benefit, we need to
i) know our objectives
ii) understand which levers of others to bend.

Now where in this requires defence of others' actions is beyond me. Where in the present discussion, have you talked about actual push of weakening US-Pak relationship?

P.S: It is a pisko exercise from Shiv, which we easily fall into. This pisko exercise brings out MUTUs out of closet. See would you come to rescue of say A raja, Laloo or others like them after many repeated accusations. No, but you had to come out for US. I had myself fallen to Shiv for such things, but after 2-3 days they helped me to understand myself and my positions better.

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 16 Feb 2011 13:07

I wonder what "high pressure" did baksheesh dependent Pakistan put on India? Most probably Pakistan threatened to cancel the upcoming talks :rotfl

^^^

GOI/ Kangress must have been scared to death by this threat. Diggy the piggy might have had an emotional attack.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 13:09

partha wrote: This is Indian Express editorial and not some opinion piece by a social scientist from JNU.

These days Indian Express Editorial is like (or far worse than) The Hindu.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 13:19

One of the things that successive governments (PVNR onwards) have tried to do is to de-hyphenate US relationship vis a vis India and Pak..More we obsess over every F16 supplied to Pak, more we hyphenate the relationship...

The US needs Pak for a set of its own objectives..It has historically needed Pak for a set of, again its own objectives...Our dynamics with the US has a wider, more global canvas..Pak is an important part of the canvas, but it does not, and should not dominate the canvas...

Really the time has come for India to work "with" the US on sorting out Pak..As C Raja Mohan puts it, both the US and India realise how painfully low their respective leverage is with the Pak establishment...US cannot deliver what Pak wants it to, but needs a bunch of things from it...India too cant deliver on the "key issues", but has enormous problems with Pak...One of the intersecting spaces of Indo-US interests vis a vis Pak is really on Paki nukes...Both of us have apprehensions around them, for different reasons...

Even if Pak gets some US arms for free, the sheer numbers brought to bear by India will always be decisive in the conventional domain...(In high performance aircraft for example, India would have a 5:1 or 4:1 kind of advantage, and a couple of more F16s dont make a material difference)..therefore crying "betrayal" everytime there is an F16 contract only brings our level down to that of the Pakis...

How can a joint Indo-US move on Pak happen? Its complex, and there are no obvious answers...It will have to be a mix of ostensible carrots (F16s, talks?), some sticks (Congressional approval for every dollop of funding to Pak), covert missions - the results are not known...Look at North Korea...Just by having a suspected nuke it is able to defy the US and the rest of the world...Pak is a tougher nut...It is only when those discussions happen that we can get some ideas of what is possible..right now, we dont know...But that does not mean that we start "US is big bad and ugly...down with US perfidy" every time there is a new flash - it makes no sense, and frankly, only generates deja vu and ennui...

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 13:22

Kerry, Obama play good cop-bad cop to free 'diplomat' Davis from Pak clutches

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 507788.cms

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 16 Feb 2011 13:23

Somnath,

Then the dehyphenation should also apply to how we view US-Pak relationship.

In that criticism of perfidy of US with Pak, should not stop India from other things.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 16 Feb 2011 13:29

Both of these are quid-pro-quo for Davis? -

NATO chief Petraeus to leave post by end of year: Report - http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 506142.cms

Pakistan to get $3.1 billion in US aid in 2012 - http://www.hindustantimes.com/Pakistan- ... 62580.aspx

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 13:30

Not Petraeus, but they surely got more aid due to the Davis affair.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 16 Feb 2011 13:56

ravi_ku wrote:Vikram S,

My issue was this. You were not discussing in the direction you have talked about. You were giving excuses for US past behavior.

For example your entire post, which had
There is a basic premise that Unkil's arms are responsible for TSP aggression, when apart from 1965 that is not the case. What did Unkil provide to enable Kargil or 11/26? We all know it is the nukes but you refuse to consider that.
was a pure and simple defence of US actions. It was nothing else.

How can questioning one person's deliberate and repeated attempts to ignore the role of the Chipanda be a "pure and simple defence of US actions"? As Karna put it, pointing out the Bofors standing in front of you does not mean that the AK-47 does not matter. But ignoring the Bofors and

about the AK47 is definitely selective amnesia.

I brought those words for specifically that. We do not need to defend US actions in any way.

To influence and shape events for our benefit, we need to
i) know our objectives
ii) understand which levers of others to bend.

Now where in this requires defence of others' actions is beyond me. Where in the present discussion, have you talked about actual push of weakening US-Pak relationship?

P.S: It is a pisko exercise from Shiv, which we easily fall into. This pisko exercise brings out MUTUs out of closet. See would you come to rescue of say A raja, Laloo or others like them after many repeated accusations. No, but you had to come out for US. I had myself fallen to Shiv for such things, but after 2-3 days they helped me to understand myself and my positions better.

In my first post itself I had stated that this is the last time I will "fall for the bait".

In his own mind shiv has perhaps concluded that the TSP will fall in line if Unkil is no longer a sugar-daddy.

However when questioned about the role of the Chipanda you get absolutely no response from him. I have asked him multiple times, whether he is gamed the situation where Uncle's relationship and influence did not exist in the past or no longer exists in the future. As an expert on RAPE thought process, he is probably in the best position to come up with potential outcomes. But it has always drawn a blank.

It is this selective amnesia which makes me question the motivation behind this pisko exercise. This pisko exercise seems to be borne out of a deep-rooted desire to blame the US for India's perceived strategic weakness. Perhaps this pisko exercise is designed to find converts (like you) to his hypothesis. However the hypothesis so far has been protected from any serious scrutiny. And any attempts at scrutiny are halted by these MUTU/DIE labels. shiv seems to have taken a leaf from the mullahs he has studied so well; Like they rally the faithfools by the "Islam Khatrain me hain" call, all shiv needs to do is label anyone who questions his hypothesis as a MUTUs and then any scrutiny of his hypothesis ends, as the converts like you rush to the rescue.

Unfortunately as the dada of BR, it also forces the group-think into a direction which is disconnected from reality and blatantly ignores the Bofors/the elephant in the room: ChiPanda.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 16 Feb 2011 14:00

I think we are very close to a flame war.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 14:36

Karna_A wrote:
Deliberately leaving out Chipanda from the above discussion and only focussing on a self selected peripheral issues is a self defeating argument.

Leaving out the perfidity of Chipanda in arms to TSP discussion is like leaving out devilish TSP machinations from Kashmir valley discussion.

Patience Sir. Patience. The way the "conversation" goes on this thread there is a convenient sidelining of what is inconvenient and a loud highlighting of that which is convenient.

I have stated time and again that a discussion of Chinese actions is a separate issue that I will get to - after getting past the initial hurdle of takleef caused to many by pointing out the US's perfidy. I think I am getting there. The US has continuously supplied lethal arms to Pakistan to India's detriment and continues to do so. You will hear it again from me loudly on here when the next tranche of F-16 blosk 52s arrive in Pakistan, Davis or no Davis. That is s problem for India. Among other problems. The China topic will come. I hope you are not one of the deluded people who thinks the US has been innocent? All sorts of interesting things emerge when the uncomfortable truth is told and not sidelined after a brief nod.

If the US's actions for 60 years can be sidelined with a brief nod I can only imagine the sort of analytical not-attention China is going to get.

Narad · Post by **Narad** » 16 Feb 2011 14:38

Raymond Davis does not enjoy blanket immunity: Qureshi

He said that for him Pakistan’s sovereignty and dignity were most important and that if need be he would apprise the people of Pakistan of more facts.
.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 14:49

somnath wrote:
If the US has supported Pak in the past (and present), it has been to achieve its own objectives...Why are you/we so surprised at that? There is little merit in shouting blue murder at that...The objective should be to see what we can do to change US behaviour..

Shouting blue murder has merits too. The shouting calls attention to the murder which has hitherto been passed off as a harmless act of bottom pinching.

I am sorry to see you utilizing the useless cliche about why the US helps Pakistan. I will point out yet again that I personally do not give damn as to why the US must help Pakistan. I positively refuse to reach any level of "understanding" of the US's motives for helping Pakistan. I really don't care. After following Pakistan in great detail for decades and after having been anxious about US aid in the 1960s - I now realise that there is no future in trying to "understand" US actions being explained using the same tired and overused story you have given.

The US has to be stopped from arming Pakistan any further. How that is to be done is the question as far as I am concerned. Begging them and "expressing concern" does not help. All US arms exports to Pakistan must end. Let Pakistan become a country that depends on a single supplier - the Chinese.

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 14:54

shiv wrote:You will hear it again from me loudly on here when the next tranche of F-16 blosk 52s arrive in Pakistan, Davis or no Davis.

Shivji, and what exactly will that loud protest achieve, should Indian policy makers were to replicate it? Do you think Kargil, 26/11, Parakram rubicons were set on the basis of whether Pak has 28 F16s or 50? The answer to that question will define your/our attitudes towards Pak, US, China and everyone else..

Even China, there is little merit in crying hoarse over how China is helping Pak...That is a ceteris paribus condition..Question is what are WE doing to chalenge China in that space..Are we for example, creating enough grief for them through Vietnam? Or by slowly resurrecing the Tibet issue? Again, our relationship with China is not blak and white...In a variety of places, our interests do and will coincide, climate change for example..It is only through a continuous process of engagement and learning that we may at some stage arrive at a high level equilibrium of outcomes, maybe not even that...

One fact is true, and there should be no shame is admitting it. We are new to high international politics (and please, let us not have references to Chanakya etc)...Our behaviour over the last 50-60 years have been shaped by a certain set of philosophies and frankly, a third rate "intrinsic power quotient"...Its onyl in the last 10-15 years that we have rectified (or started the process of rectification of) the latter, and we are evolving the former..

finally, dont think there is any need for a "flame war" on this...All of us are on the same side!

vic · Post by **vic** » 16 Feb 2011 15:01

Dipanker wrote:Govt has no funds for railways, NA body told

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan Railways has turned into a shambles because there are no funds available even to repair its out of order locomotives.

You bloody SDRE who knows nothing. All the railway tracks are being blown up and so the only solution is that the engines will be replaced by F-16s and JF-17/J-10s which will be used to pull the train errr.......... fly the trains around. Don't see Hairy Potter, so the Piggie trains will do the "hog"warts train type zooooooooooming around.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 15:14

VikramS wrote: In his own mind shiv has perhaps concluded that the TSP will fall in line if Unkil is no longer a sugar-daddy.

No such guarantees exist unfortunately. Pakistan is not "one entity" that will, as a single unit, "fall in line".

Pakistan's "unity" such as there appears to be is based on the unity and strength of the Pakistani army and establishment. That army and establishment draw sustenance from the USA, and increasingly China.

I believe that the Chinese cannot replace the US exactly, like a spare key to a lock. I am finding it difficult to explain why I say this because I am finding it difficult to get across to people the depth of influence that the US has developed in the world over that past 8-9 decades. China does not have that depth of influence yet. I can only illustrate my thoughts by saying that if the US were to suddenly vanish "poof!" - China would not be able to fill the vacuum. There would be huge gaps in what China fills and those gaps, socially, culturally, in the media and in people perceptions, are going to be occupied by many nations, including India. Not simply China taking the US's place.

So the US's support for Pakistan is unique and overwhelmingly important. But why am I harping on arms aid alone? Simple. The arms aid is substantial and it is tangible and nobody can argue that it has not happened and is not continuing to happen without having their protest blown away by me. Now and in the foreseeable future. Secondly arms are a piskologically fundamental part of human society. Dominance and defeat can be determined by arms. The best and the most civilized can be washed away by the use or arms by the worst and the least civilized. Opposing someone else's arms build up while cheerfully building up our own arms is exactly the attitude we must take. We have to oppose every bullet that the US supplies to Pakistan and not accept it as "part of international diplomacy" International diplomacy is self interest and self interest for us is to see the weakening of the power centers of Pakistan. A weakening of the power enters of Pakistan can come via several different routes. We simply cannot afford to sideline, ignore, forget or give excuses for allowing the existence of even one of many routes that could eventually lead to a weakening of Pakistan's most significant power center. We cannot be wishy washy about what the US is doing. We have to protest and claw and fight the US arms supply to Pakistan, building up support to do that from scratch if necessary and building it up from a slothful population that is unwilling to see the significance of every gun and bullet Pakistan gets from its sponsors.

There is more - much more, about the interrelationship between Pakistani power and US power. But I will post my take on that later. I have tried to state why the arms aid cannot, and should not be ignored with the usual bunch of excuses.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 15:17

somnath wrote: Shivji, and what exactly will that loud protest achieve, should Indian policy makers were to replicate it?

And that is why I am making the loud protest. If my lone protest makes no difference, it won't be for want of my trying. US arms supply to Pakistan has to be opposed. That can be opposed only if there is anger and fervor on hearing every news item about that - and not by a philosophical acceptance of US strength and the sinuous routes of international diplomacy. And a similarly intellectually lazy assumption that if the US goes China will fill the gap exactly.

ManishH · Post by **ManishH** » 16 Feb 2011 15:18

VikramS wrote: Equal-equal between Iran-TSP AND USA-India? Precisely the kind of thinking our Menons and Nehru had. Sitting on some high-funda moralistic plane with no connection with reality.

Well said. US has already done a cost-benefit analysis when it gave the F-16s to Pak. It's childish
to expect our tantrums to affect them. You have to be more subtle to have any chance of disrupting
this.

What GOI can do is spread some FUD. I think there's not enough stories linking Palestine fighters
to Pakistanis. We can start with arranging some captured small arms from Pakistan Ordinance Factory
to appear in hands of Hamas. The Israelli lobby will do our work for us.

My point is the weapons don't need to be sophisticated, but if there's a regular pattern of pakistani arms
appearing in hands of Hamas, KSA opposition, AQAP, Sard army - basically everywhere where USA has interests, it'll begin to wedge the faultlines between USA and Pak.

Sounds like a pie-in-the-sky but it's been done before.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 16 Feb 2011 15:26

ManishH wrote:
My point is the weapons don't need to be sophisticated, but if there's a regular pattern of pakistani arms
appearing in hands of Hamas, KSA opposition, AQAP, Sard army - basically everywhere where USA has interests, it'll begin to wedge the faultlines between USA and Pak.

Sounds like a pie-in-the-sky but it's been done before.

Good thinking. Wedging the faultlines is precisely what started my ranting - although it became a non issue. It may sound like a joke now but I believe it was Advani who egged Nawaz Sharif to test Pakistani nukes and put Pakistan in he same doghouse that India had voluntarily entered. That was a brilliant move. Supporting an anti US viewpoint in Pakistan - such as the Davis issue and egging on Paki maniacs seems like an eminently good method of wedging faultlines. Only it has to be done "seriously". Seriously tongue in cheek that is.

rkirankr · Post by **rkirankr** » 16 Feb 2011 15:38

^ A completedefeat or a significant defeat at any one region in Afghanistan for US , with pak taliban linked to it would be a good starter.
We cannot sit back and offer explanations for why US supports this or that regime. If US wanted, it could have imposed tougher sanctions on TSP and the rapes would have been screaming for food. Just imagine if tomorrow US and pak relations descend to bang bang , will the tallel than mountain stand with pakis ?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Feb 2011 17:08

If the Pakistani army was the size and strength of the Bangladeshi army, how much of a threat would it pose to India?

What enables a hovering-near-bankruptcy Pakistan to afford much more military than Bangladesh?

Why is this enablement of Pakistan something that Indians should live with as a fact of life?

PS: Further, when we insist, e.g., that stores should not sell cigarettes to kids under the age of 18, we are not saying that stores are evil, etc. The framing is not in terms of "good/evil". The US should not be providing aid or arms to what, in its own terms, is the epicenter of global terrorism.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 16 Feb 2011 17:39

Implementing Cold Start, which might be triggered by Mumbai-II, may well initiate a nuclear disaster. Indeed, there is no way to predict how such conflicts will end once they start. Therefore a rational Indian leadership – which one can only hope would exist at that particular time – is unlikely to opt for it. But even in this optimistic scenario, Mumbai-II would likely be a bigger disaster for Pakistan than for India. Yes, Pakistani nukes would be unhurt and unused, but their magic would have evaporated.

The reason is clear: an aggrieved India would campaign – with a high chance of success – for ending all international aid for Pakistan, a trade boycott and stiff sanctions. The world’s fear of loose Pakistani nukes hijacked by Islamist forces would be overcome by the international revulsion of yet another stomach-churning massacre. With little fat to spare in the economy, collapse may happen over weeks rather than months. Bravado in Pakistan would be intense at first but would fast evaporate.

http://www.dawn.com/2011/02/16/herald-e ... yonet.html

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 16 Feb 2011 17:46

abhishek_sharma wrote:Not Petraeus, but they surely got more aid due to the Davis affair.

And a new business is born in pureland - kidnapping foreigners for ransom. Soon to be franchised across the land.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 16 Feb 2011 18:25

My latest copy of Time (or is it Newsweek?) in a cover story bemoans the fact that Obama "lost" a great opportunity in Egypt,to help turn the tide of history,quoting extensively from Bismarck! Unfortunately for all western analysts and "experts",the hard truth that after supporting a tyrant like Mubarak for 30 years,how on earth does any intelligent human being expect suffering Egyptians to have any regard for the US and its president when its has been responsible for propping upo their peerscutor for decades! Secondly,who cares a f*ck about the US,especially Arabs? Americans do not understand the Arab world at all,or want to know anything about it,let alone what Islam is all about.Thus the angst about "losing Egypt",as if Egypt was a colony of the US or some vassal state beholden to the great White (House) Chief in perpetuity.

The author of the piece also rues the fact that the US "lost" another opportunity when there were demos in Iran,as if the US should've helped overthrow the Iranian regime! I posted today western media reports about how an Iraqi defector bullsh*tted about Saddam's (non) existant chemical weapons.These lies were the basis upon which Gen.Colin Powell used to justify waging war against Saddam in international fora.The consequences of this LIE? Over 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians.If this does not constitute a war crime then what does?
The murders,rapes and torture of innocent Iraqis at Abu Ghraib and other concentration camps set up by the US around the world in secret,in "rendition" flights,actually kidnappings,have shocked the conscience of the truly free world and is another shameful addition to the long list in history of man's inhumanity to his fellow human beings.

All over the Middle East,the Gulf,and in the Indian sub-continent in Pakistan in particular,the US has propped up the worst specimens of humanity,who have inflicted their worst evils upon their own people,egged on by the US,as diplomutt Frank Wisner did in Cairo, exhorting Mubarak to stand firm and slaughter his people instead of advising him to quit! When sh*tworms of the US establishment like Wisner behave in such vile manner,as they continue to do across the globe,preserving their selfish interests at the cost of the freedom of the natives,one can only wonder at how moronic so-called expert scribes of Time,Newsweek,etc.,can be to ever imagine that the US has any legitimate role to play in the Middle East or anywhere else on the planet and open-mouthedly stare in shock when the natives overthrow their despotic rulers partners in crime with Uncle Sam!

The slap in the face that the Egytptians gave Obama and his establishment in these recnt tumltuous days in Egypt is a mere "love-bite" in comparison to what Uncle Sam Obama or his successor whoever it may be,is going to get from the people of Pakistan in the future,as inevitably as the sun rises in the east.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 16 Feb 2011 18:29

X-Posted from Managing Pakistan's Failure Thread.

There are three reasons (for the sake of discussion) why the USA supplies arms to Pakistan:

1. Nuclear Blackmail - if the country destabilizes the arms can fall into the hands of anti-American Jihadis.

2. Afghan War - to get Pakistan to cooperate providing logistics and supply routes, and the dog and pony show of GWOT.

3. Keep India Down - there are different takes to it, but one unmistakable dynamic has been, that India more and more turns to USA to keep Pakistan in check, and USA likes it that way.

USA may some day extract itself from the Afghan quagmire or find different supply routes. India may break out of the American containment, develop its own resources within Pakistan, and deal with Pakistan directly, perhaps using the Pushtuns and the Baloch.

But how do you stop Pakistan from conducting nuclear blackmail of the world?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 16 Feb 2011 18:50

RajeshA,

you can safely remove 1 from your list. US gave arms to Pak when it had no nukes, when it was developing nukes and when it has nukes, strongly suggesting that nukes have no role to play in US giving arms to Pak.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 16 Feb 2011 18:55

ravi_ku wrote:RajeshA,

you can safely remove 1 from your list. US gave arms to Pak when it had no nukes, when it was developing nukes and when it has nukes, strongly suggesting that nukes have no role to play in US giving arms to Pak.

I do wonder though, whether in hindsight the Americans still think of Pakistani nukes as benign!

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 19:41

A_Gupta wrote:If the Pakistani army was the size and strength of the Bangladeshi army, how much of a threat would it pose to India

With nukes, pretty almost much as much as it does today, in politico-strategic terms...

somnath · Post by **somnath** » 16 Feb 2011 19:49

shiv wrote:US arms supply to Pakistan has to be opposed. That can be opposed only if there is anger and fervor on hearing every news item about that - and not by a philosophical acceptance of US strength and the sinuous routes of international diplomacy. And a similarly intellectually lazy assumption that if the US goes China will fill the gap exactly.

I had heard the late JN Dixit once say "kootniti ka matlab pangaabaazi nahin hai"...One has to choose one's fights...What you are suggesting used to be our strategy in the bad old days...In one of the earlier Indo-US "strategic dialogues", the two sides were drawing up the agenda, and the Indian side came up with a list of points on US exports of arms to Pak..Henry Kissinger had commented that if that is all there is to discuss, then the "dialogue" is over in half and hour!

Why waste breath over something that does not change strategic equations in any major manner and only brings us down to the level of the Pakis?

The simple fact - From the 1990 standoff, to Kargil, Parakram and 26/11 - >20 years now, it is not Pak's conventional weapons that has imposed "restraint", it is their nuclear arsenal...

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 16 Feb 2011 19:54

RajeshA wrote:
ravi_ku wrote:RajeshA,

you can safely remove 1 from your list. US gave arms to Pak when it had no nukes, when it was developing nukes and when it has nukes, strongly suggesting that nukes have no role to play in US giving arms to Pak.
I do wonder though, whether in hindsight the Americans still think of Pakistani nukes as benign!

They still are giving arms, arent they? Why hindsight??
Americans think even today (forget past) Pakistani nukes are benign.