India is not in top 3 targets. India is outranked by Israel, US and UK.
Added: I assume there are'nt more than 3 nukes unaccounted for till date
Rogue nuke out of Pakistan - article by KS and reactions
-
ReicherRitter
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 07 Apr 2006 16:25
- Location: Germany
I don't believe it is just the nuclear weapons, which has US in Pakistan's clutches.USA is being blackmailed by Pakistan
I believe, Iran holds the keys to almost every equation in Central Asia. USA is dependent on Pakistan for all over-flight rights to Central Asia including to Afghanistan. As long as USA does not get Iran on its side, US would remain dependent on Pakistan.
Once USA gets an amenable government in Iran, then it would have Pakistan, so to speak, cornered from all sides. Iran however does not want to play ball. That is why regime change in Iran is so important.
Once Iran falls into the American pocket, then America can start fashioning a credible strategy to defang Pakistan of its nuclear weapons. Only then can USA (along with India) see to a controlled collapse and disintegration of the Pakistani State.
That applies to AlQ but not to I_ROT. I suspect that during the Afghan phase of GOAT (Global War On Terrorism), when there were reports of proximate security for TSP Crown jewels enough ( 2 ~ 3) were left free for TSP to have freedom of manouver vis vis India.RajGuru wrote:India is not in top 3 targets. India is outranked by Israel, US and UK.
A few things that must be kept in mind.
- Pakistan's nuclear stocks are not static. They continue to produce relatively small but still dangerous amounts of weapons grade fissile material every year.
- Permissible US access (particularly monitoring) to Pakistan reduces nuclear uncertainty. The loss of that kind of access will not in itself directly lead to or represent a worst case scenario. But it will make a lot of people's jobs even more stressful than they already are.
Rudradev,
The Americans are not going to pull out of Afghanistan.
They are doing what they wanted to do in Iraq from the start - to spread the burden to the new government, and to encourage the maximum possible international involvement. In other words to make sure that this does not become in fact and perception a war that is entirely America's responsibility.
The planned reductions in Iraq (US troops are already practically invisible in Baghdad these day outside the Green Zone) will reduce the pressure on military resources elsewhere.
US casualties and troop levels in Afghanistan are not a political issue, nor are they likely to become one. Unless Noam Chomsky is elected President no withdrawal from Iraq will be linked to a withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Pakistan has made itself 'important' with terrorists and nukes, and as long as Pakistan is 'important' in that sort of way, access to Pakistan in the kind of semi-permissible nuclear scenario Donnelly focussed on (and the kind of terrorist scenario that has been playing out over the last few years) will be preserved. Eastern Afghanistan provides that access, and I find it unlikely that it will be surrendered as long as the shadow remains.
- Pakistan's nuclear stocks are not static. They continue to produce relatively small but still dangerous amounts of weapons grade fissile material every year.
- Permissible US access (particularly monitoring) to Pakistan reduces nuclear uncertainty. The loss of that kind of access will not in itself directly lead to or represent a worst case scenario. But it will make a lot of people's jobs even more stressful than they already are.
Rudradev,
The Americans are not going to pull out of Afghanistan.
They are doing what they wanted to do in Iraq from the start - to spread the burden to the new government, and to encourage the maximum possible international involvement. In other words to make sure that this does not become in fact and perception a war that is entirely America's responsibility.
The planned reductions in Iraq (US troops are already practically invisible in Baghdad these day outside the Green Zone) will reduce the pressure on military resources elsewhere.
US casualties and troop levels in Afghanistan are not a political issue, nor are they likely to become one. Unless Noam Chomsky is elected President no withdrawal from Iraq will be linked to a withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Pakistan has made itself 'important' with terrorists and nukes, and as long as Pakistan is 'important' in that sort of way, access to Pakistan in the kind of semi-permissible nuclear scenario Donnelly focussed on (and the kind of terrorist scenario that has been playing out over the last few years) will be preserved. Eastern Afghanistan provides that access, and I find it unlikely that it will be surrendered as long as the shadow remains.
If they are really given that free then I am sure their radiation signature would have been noted too. Unkil is not that stupid to just give them without noting it down. Who knows they might end up in Tel Aviv or Manhattan? It would be leaked through proper channels where it came from when needed. that means they can be put on missiles or fsolas but not on backpaks.ramana wrote:That applies to AlQ but not to I_ROT. I suspect that during the Afghan phase of GOAT (Global War On Terrorism), when there were reports of proximate security for TSP Crown jewels enough ( 2 ~ 3) were left free for TSP to have freedom of manouver vis vis India.RajGuru wrote:India is not in top 3 targets. India is outranked by Israel, US and UK.
Bin Laden's and Zawahiri's actions to date have been those of retiribution i.e. what they regard as just punishment for the actions of the infidels. This is applicable for the Khobar towers, the embassy bombings in East Africa, the USS Cole and 9/11. If they get their hands on even one nuke, they will therefore use it both as retribution for the past actions of their enemies as well as to serve as a warning for the future. It is a very different mindset from that of the Pakistani Army. The PA is using religious dogma to achieve protection for itself. Bin Laden and Zawahiri are embodyments of religious dogma.Omar wrote:[It may sound crazy, but what makes you think so? If Al-Qaeda uses the only nuclear weapon (I assume) in its possession, its ability to blackmail (the kind of which can force policy changes) is gone. How will it force the "infidel crusaders" from the "land of two mosques"? How will it establish a fundamentalist government in KSA? The organisation will be back to square one in its ability to force a soln.
On the issue of the KSA-Pak nuclear nexus: from the KSA/Pakistan viewpoint, Iranian actions serve a useful purpose in bringing the nexus out of the shadows ostensibly as protection against Iran but implicitly as deterrence against the West as well.
Last edited by ldev on 23 May 2006 22:51, edited 1 time in total.
Rajguru wrote:
1) It has failed to check the islamist movements in India -- islamist terrorist groups like SIMI are allowed to functionin parts of India and islamist groups have come to power in Kerala and will probably come to power in other parts of the country in the next decade.
2) These movements will gain in strength and with the encouragement of madrassas by the UPA/left govt, now and in the future, there will a good amount of Indian jihadis in due course.
3) There will be "grievances" created by the "secular" politicians (hindutva politicians trying to fight this phenomenon itself will be a grievance -- head islamists win, tails we lose) in the coming years and these Indian jihadis will be the paki ticket to Plausible deniability.
As ShauryaT mentions, the pakis will use this option in due course --- the cretinous "peace talks" and other such worthless exercises conducted by the dimbulbs in the GoI will only give the pakis enough time to go about with steps 1,2, and 3. Once a nuke is exploded by an *Indian jihadi group*, who will the geniuses in New Delhi target? What kind of proof can they provide to pinpoint the culprit, to justify an attack against pakistan? --- note that dirty nuke capability is now in the reach of KSA, Libya, Iran, and more jihad-oriented states. Xerox Khan's proliferation to the ME provides the pakis with the required amount of deniability to commit a nuke attack on India.
Besides, pakis attacked the Indian parliament, and the bozos in India did not go to war then because the pakis had plausible deniability and Indian "nationalist" BJP leaders did not have the spine to do what was necessary.
So what are the chances that a leftist govt. at the center will take action when Pakis commit a nuke attack with plausible deniability?
ShauryaT wrote:
The US may know the nuke signature of the pakis, but they will not (and are under no obligation) to share this information with India, and if they share such information, it will be misinformation designed to let pakis off the hook.
The US is not a dependable ally in any sense of the word, and especially when it comes to islamist terror -- they are on the side of the islamists, not India.
The pakis are very well versed in creating plausible deniability. Let us look at what the Indian govt. has failed to do so far:Nuclear strike crosses the threshold of all tolerance limits. It is a TOTAL WAR!! Doesnt anyone think that Emergency can be declared during a WAR? It happened in 62, 65 and 71. It was not during kargil as it was a low intensity conflict limited to certain region. Where does the question of gaddis come in Emergency?
1) It has failed to check the islamist movements in India -- islamist terrorist groups like SIMI are allowed to functionin parts of India and islamist groups have come to power in Kerala and will probably come to power in other parts of the country in the next decade.
2) These movements will gain in strength and with the encouragement of madrassas by the UPA/left govt, now and in the future, there will a good amount of Indian jihadis in due course.
3) There will be "grievances" created by the "secular" politicians (hindutva politicians trying to fight this phenomenon itself will be a grievance -- head islamists win, tails we lose) in the coming years and these Indian jihadis will be the paki ticket to Plausible deniability.
As ShauryaT mentions, the pakis will use this option in due course --- the cretinous "peace talks" and other such worthless exercises conducted by the dimbulbs in the GoI will only give the pakis enough time to go about with steps 1,2, and 3. Once a nuke is exploded by an *Indian jihadi group*, who will the geniuses in New Delhi target? What kind of proof can they provide to pinpoint the culprit, to justify an attack against pakistan? --- note that dirty nuke capability is now in the reach of KSA, Libya, Iran, and more jihad-oriented states. Xerox Khan's proliferation to the ME provides the pakis with the required amount of deniability to commit a nuke attack on India.
Besides, pakis attacked the Indian parliament, and the bozos in India did not go to war then because the pakis had plausible deniability and Indian "nationalist" BJP leaders did not have the spine to do what was necessary.
So what are the chances that a leftist govt. at the center will take action when Pakis commit a nuke attack with plausible deniability?
ShauryaT wrote:
Exactly. I agree. Dreaming that pakis will attack the US and leave us alone is just wishful thinking -- being tactically brilliant, they will pick the easiest target for such an attack, and India, with its non existent law and order machinery, is a far easier target than western nations, that have started going after jihadis in their territory, unlike India.What better way to get the Kafirs to their knees than a Nuke slipped under the radar? Think about it, it is the only option they have left and yes they are capable of doing the same.
The US may know the nuke signature of the pakis, but they will not (and are under no obligation) to share this information with India, and if they share such information, it will be misinformation designed to let pakis off the hook.
The US is not a dependable ally in any sense of the word, and especially when it comes to islamist terror -- they are on the side of the islamists, not India.
Now that everyone had his say, lets come back to Kgoan's question_why KS article now? And his prescription of clarifications from the US in Track II diplomacy.
I think its the Donnely paper and Beg brag. For the latter implies that India is a traget no matter what or whoever takes out TSP nukes. So if the US implements its contingency plans India has to be informed to ensure reduced collateral damage.
Also knowing the fragility of the TSP delivery chain how does India not know if the stuff is already inside India?
I think its the Donnely paper and Beg brag. For the latter implies that India is a traget no matter what or whoever takes out TSP nukes. So if the US implements its contingency plans India has to be informed to ensure reduced collateral damage.
Also knowing the fragility of the TSP delivery chain how does India not know if the stuff is already inside India?
I think that needs a clarification.Rye wrote:Rajguru wrote:Rajguru, could you please explain why this is the case? I am not sure this is true.India is not in top 3 targets. India is outranked by Israel, US and UK.
IF the AQ group has the nukes, then that list will be mor eimportant than India.
IF however, Pakistan has to make a decision whom to use a nuke on, then India would be on top of the list.
If push comes to shove the xerox machine operator will die of natural causes. He has value as long as he can deflect the glare away from TSPA. He is a useful stick with which rest of the world can beat the TSPA and in the same coin his reputation is being used by the TSPA with an assortment of lies to make a case for ransom.
Last edited by pran on 24 May 2006 02:11, edited 1 time in total.
-
abhischekcc
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4277
- Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
- Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
- Contact:
Parsuram wrote "The United States, fighting alone, has not won a war against a major power since the Spanish-American war, over a century ago."
That's cool . America is but a paper tiger.
Why then do folks on this board keep blaming America for stopping India from fighting the good fight and taking out the Pakis ?
It is "established" truth here that the Americans are wussies. Just ignore them and take out your mortal enemy - who is bent on destroying you- if folks on this board are to be believed.
What we see instead, looking at India, is this almost perverse desire to embrace the Pakis as long lost brothers - and then blaming America to boot for "tying " your hands.
It is sometimes mildly annoying to see America blamed for :
1) India not fighting Pakistan and destroying the perfidy that is Pakistan
2) India agreeing to walk out of Siachin and Saltoro range in "negotiations" with the Pakis
3) India not testing a ballistic missile
4) India signing a civil nuclear agreement with the US
5) India not being able to play a part in Afghanistan
Heck the lsit could go on
[/quote][quote][/quote]
That's cool . America is but a paper tiger.
Why then do folks on this board keep blaming America for stopping India from fighting the good fight and taking out the Pakis ?
It is "established" truth here that the Americans are wussies. Just ignore them and take out your mortal enemy - who is bent on destroying you- if folks on this board are to be believed.
What we see instead, looking at India, is this almost perverse desire to embrace the Pakis as long lost brothers - and then blaming America to boot for "tying " your hands.
It is sometimes mildly annoying to see America blamed for :
1) India not fighting Pakistan and destroying the perfidy that is Pakistan
2) India agreeing to walk out of Siachin and Saltoro range in "negotiations" with the Pakis
3) India not testing a ballistic missile
4) India signing a civil nuclear agreement with the US
5) India not being able to play a part in Afghanistan
Heck the lsit could go on
[/quote][quote][/quote]
US can tilt the outcome the other side in war between two countries. US has 30 years of close military contact with PA which is an advantage for PA. After the 2002 parakram the war game scenario came up with an outcome of US supporting TSP if a war broke out. This is after Mushy made a decision on 9/13.neilg wrote:
Why then do folks on this board keep blaming America for stopping India from fighting the good fight and taking out the Pakis ?
It is as simple
Neil G: Forgive my impudence, but let me try and put things on BR into a little perspective for you as a newcomer.
The BR spectrum of opinion on the United States is plain for everyone to see. Some people (mostly Americans) consider it to be more "anti-American" than they would like, or not pro-American enough.
The only thing that can be said with any degree of objectivity, is that the spectrum of political opinion on BR, whatever it is, is probably the *least* anti-American (or most pro-American) you will find among Indian foreign policy and security analysts, amateur or professional, anywhere. In other words, this is as pro-American as Indians in general are ever likely to get (barring a few individuals who identify themselves with the US, at least as much or more so than India).
I assure you that whatever conclusions you draw from your observations here are far, far more representative of the spectrum of Indian opinion than anything you would find in those yes/know/don't know polls that everyone cites when they're trying to prove that India just loves George W. Bush. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying that's the way it *IS*.
I think it would really benefit the maturity of the Indo-US discourse, if you folks would just recognize that we are what we are, that we see you as we see you, and that we have our reasons for seeing you that way, which you're better off respecting than trying to diss. Then, when we each know where the other stands, an honest and mutually beneficial dialogue is possible. If you keep trying to convince us that we were wrong all along while you guys have always been simply awesome, and whatever we believe is ignorant propaganda while you can pull the pure and simple truth out of your sleeve and present it for our acceptance if we would only get smart enough to listen... you're just repeating the mistakes that every US administration, including this one, has ever made in its overtures to India.
There are things... big, HUGE things, on which even the most pro-American (or least-anti-American) Indian does not see eye-to-eye with the United States, and for my money, never will. Pakistan is one of them. Russia is another. If the US continues to push Russia to the point of confrontation, I hope D.C. won't labour under any illusions as to which side India is going to come out on... nuclear deal or no nuclear deal.
As we always have through the 60s, 70s and 80s... we will remain strictly non-aligned.
The BR spectrum of opinion on the United States is plain for everyone to see. Some people (mostly Americans) consider it to be more "anti-American" than they would like, or not pro-American enough.
The only thing that can be said with any degree of objectivity, is that the spectrum of political opinion on BR, whatever it is, is probably the *least* anti-American (or most pro-American) you will find among Indian foreign policy and security analysts, amateur or professional, anywhere. In other words, this is as pro-American as Indians in general are ever likely to get (barring a few individuals who identify themselves with the US, at least as much or more so than India).
I assure you that whatever conclusions you draw from your observations here are far, far more representative of the spectrum of Indian opinion than anything you would find in those yes/know/don't know polls that everyone cites when they're trying to prove that India just loves George W. Bush. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, I'm saying that's the way it *IS*.
I think it would really benefit the maturity of the Indo-US discourse, if you folks would just recognize that we are what we are, that we see you as we see you, and that we have our reasons for seeing you that way, which you're better off respecting than trying to diss. Then, when we each know where the other stands, an honest and mutually beneficial dialogue is possible. If you keep trying to convince us that we were wrong all along while you guys have always been simply awesome, and whatever we believe is ignorant propaganda while you can pull the pure and simple truth out of your sleeve and present it for our acceptance if we would only get smart enough to listen... you're just repeating the mistakes that every US administration, including this one, has ever made in its overtures to India.
There are things... big, HUGE things, on which even the most pro-American (or least-anti-American) Indian does not see eye-to-eye with the United States, and for my money, never will. Pakistan is one of them. Russia is another. If the US continues to push Russia to the point of confrontation, I hope D.C. won't labour under any illusions as to which side India is going to come out on... nuclear deal or no nuclear deal.
As we always have through the 60s, 70s and 80s... we will remain strictly non-aligned.
The issue is actually quite simple...It is sometimes mildly annoying to see America blamed for :
1) India not fighting Pakistan and destroying the perfidy that is Pakistan
As far as I know, the Indian government is NOT involved in directly training, funding and arming with sophisticated weapons, groups of people who're involved in killing innocent American citizens, women and children no less, on a day-to-day basis.
The US Govt. on the other hand, has never hesitated in training, funding and arming to the teeth, the terrorist army that kills at least 1500 Indians every year...
The GOI does not fund terrorist squads like the Al-Qaeda or the Hamas, since these squads kill Americans amongst others. However, this restraint has never resulted in the US stopping the flow of arms or money to the terrorist squads, called the TSPA.
We find this mildly annoying too...
Rudradev, Thanks for your civil reply.
I have no trouble understanding what you say. You are one of the most articulate guys on this forum. I may disagree with some views you might have - but I comprehend.
I also understand why the US and Indian world view would be different. I do get the fact that while there are many common interests which will drive India and the US to harmonize their positions on some issues - differences will remain and will have to be managed and finessed. This is geo-politics we are talking about - not charity or kinship.
However, what is hard to comprehend is the behaviour of the Indian establishment towards pakistan and how it is reflected on this discussion forum.
You guys on BRF write reams heaping vitroil on Pakistan. Many of you write reams exposing the evil which is Islamism. Yet your establishment, and a significant percentage even on what appears to be a right-wing "Jingo" board speak about Pakis like they would love to embrace them. The Indian Government has a policy which appears to be one of appeasement and makes no efforts to do anything meaningful about Pakistan's perfidy. It seems to "whine " now and then about cross-border terrorism - but DOES NOTHING to convince the world it is serious. This board mirrors that - by continually whining about the US protecting the Pakis . All this while, every time something happens which folks on this board don't like (as in the rumors about withdrawing from Siachin) - people get into a tizzy and blame the US
They don't blame the Indian Government - just the US. For every frickin thing !!
That is the part I find irrational and incomprehensible.
I don't mean to be offensive or provocative - but really that is the way opinion on this board comes across to an outsider. Offcourse I realize that we are allowed to participate as guests - and the admins can shut us down if they wish - but I expressed my view as clearly and inoffensively as I could - to let you know what I see.
You will notice, I am not even pretending to talk for all non-Indian participants on this board - since that would be kinda presumptous. I only express my perception and pose my own question.
I have no trouble understanding what you say. You are one of the most articulate guys on this forum. I may disagree with some views you might have - but I comprehend.
I also understand why the US and Indian world view would be different. I do get the fact that while there are many common interests which will drive India and the US to harmonize their positions on some issues - differences will remain and will have to be managed and finessed. This is geo-politics we are talking about - not charity or kinship.
However, what is hard to comprehend is the behaviour of the Indian establishment towards pakistan and how it is reflected on this discussion forum.
You guys on BRF write reams heaping vitroil on Pakistan. Many of you write reams exposing the evil which is Islamism. Yet your establishment, and a significant percentage even on what appears to be a right-wing "Jingo" board speak about Pakis like they would love to embrace them. The Indian Government has a policy which appears to be one of appeasement and makes no efforts to do anything meaningful about Pakistan's perfidy. It seems to "whine " now and then about cross-border terrorism - but DOES NOTHING to convince the world it is serious. This board mirrors that - by continually whining about the US protecting the Pakis . All this while, every time something happens which folks on this board don't like (as in the rumors about withdrawing from Siachin) - people get into a tizzy and blame the US
They don't blame the Indian Government - just the US. For every frickin thing !!
That is the part I find irrational and incomprehensible.
I don't mean to be offensive or provocative - but really that is the way opinion on this board comes across to an outsider. Offcourse I realize that we are allowed to participate as guests - and the admins can shut us down if they wish - but I expressed my view as clearly and inoffensively as I could - to let you know what I see.
You will notice, I am not even pretending to talk for all non-Indian participants on this board - since that would be kinda presumptous. I only express my perception and pose my own question.
Last edited by neilg on 24 May 2006 14:20, edited 1 time in total.
Arindam , I can understand why you find US support for Pakistan "mildly annoying" . What I don't understand is why you don't get into a collective rage about :
1) Your Governments seeming "embrace" of Pakistan at every turn
2) Your Nations/ Governments lack of will to do ANYTHING meaningful about Pakistan. Pay the price in blood and treasure. Get it done.
3) Your Governments unwillingness to call Pakistan for what it is.
All I see is rationalization heaped upon rationalization - about why the Indian nation wont do anything.
And then blame the US for this inaction.
Weren't you the guys who invented the concept of Karma?
1) Your Governments seeming "embrace" of Pakistan at every turn
2) Your Nations/ Governments lack of will to do ANYTHING meaningful about Pakistan. Pay the price in blood and treasure. Get it done.
3) Your Governments unwillingness to call Pakistan for what it is.
All I see is rationalization heaped upon rationalization - about why the Indian nation wont do anything.
And then blame the US for this inaction.
Weren't you the guys who invented the concept of Karma?
Last edited by neilg on 24 May 2006 16:47, edited 1 time in total.
-
abhischekcc
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4277
- Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
- Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
- Contact:
Perhaps you have focussed overmuch on our comments about US because you are from there. But we have accussed the Indian govt of bending over for everybody.neilg wrote:You guys on BRF write reams heaping vitroil on Pakistan. Many of you write reams exposing the evil which is Islamism. Yet your establishment, and a significant percentage even on what appears to be a right-wing "Jingo" board speak about Pakis like they would love to embrace them.
The Indian Government has a policy which appears to be one of appeasement and makes no efforts to do anything meaningful about Pakistan's perfidy.
It seems to "whine " now and then about cross-border terrorism - but DOES NOTHING to convince the world it is serious.
This board mirrors that - by continually whining about the US protecting the Pakis . All this while, every time something happens which folks on this board don't like (as in the rumors about withdrawing from Siachin) - people get into a tizzy and blame the US
They don't blame the Indian Government - just the US. For every frickin thing !!
We don't think that only the US is responsible for some of the spineless decisions Indian govt has taken. We recount n number of reasons. Indian commies being Sinophiles and Quislings, this govt depending on the Italina Sonia Gandhi, etc. etc. One member goes on about Nbjprie.
We would all be happy if GoI were a little more aggressive in implementing its foreign policy, and a little less political in its domestic policies. That is the crux of our concerns here.
Last edited by abhischekcc on 24 May 2006 14:44, edited 1 time in total.
Actually nobody will whine if US minds its own business, keeps out of the sub-continent and stops arming rogues states.neilg wrote: What I don't understand is why you don't get into a collective rage about :
Please allow me to refute some of your posts.
Examples?neilg wrote: 1) Your Governments seeming "embrace" of Pakistan at every turn
As said above. Ask your govts. to stay away. Pukis will be taken care of. We'd have done it in 2002 if your busybodies stayed away.neilg wrote: 2) Your Governments lack of will to do ANYTHING meaningful about Pakistan. Pay the price in blood and treasure. Get it done.
Get your facts. India has been the only country that has been drawing attention of everybody of Pakistans misdeed on two counts i.e. nuke proliferation and international terrorism. Beyond that, turning off taps of funding and busting the safe havens in the West is upto your governments.neilg wrote: 3) Your Governments unwillingness to call Pakistan for what it is.
Exactly, Pakistan and the West better start beleiving us. West has already began to reap what it had sowed.neilg wrote:Weren't you the guys who invented the concept of Karma?
Neilg, what do you want India to do?neilg wrote:Arindam , I can understand why you find US support for Pakistan "mildly annoying" . What I don't understand is why you don't get into a collective rage about :
1) Your Governments seeming "embrace" of Pakistan at every turn
2) Your Governments lack of will to do ANYTHING meaningful about Pakistan. Pay the price in blood and treasure. Get it done.
3) Your Governments unwillingness to call Pakistan for what it is.
All I see is rationalization heaped upon rationalization - about why the Indian nation wont do anything.
And then blame the US for this inaction.
Weren't you the guys who invented the concept of Karma?
Invade Pakistan?
When it has nukes?
Please be serious. The Indian Govt is attempting a carrot (engagement) and stick (military build up, exercises etc) policy because its all it can do.
If not for the United States active intervention, even the somnolent, lazy Indian politicians almost settled Pakistans hash.
In 1971, the US threatened India with war or certainly implied as such by trying gunboat diplomacy. Nixon egged on the Chinese to intervene. In the 80's when the Pakistani sponsored Punjab insurgency was fullblown, India and Pak almost went to war. The US again threatened India with sanctions so that its pet poodle Pak would be protected and began an arms pipeline to Pakistan in the 80's- F-16's, TPS-series radars, complete overhaul of the Pak AD system setting up the most comprehensive system of its kind in the region.
In 2002, when India mobilized, again the US intervened- this time, it was nuclear war cited as the reason. Fine. Indian firms get threatened with a travel advisory and loss of business, loads of pressure on Delhi and fear mongering in the world press.
Now basically, why the heck shouldnt India be cut up with the US for the above, especially the fact that its Islamist insurgency supported against the Soviets ultimately spilled over into Kashmir, pushed by the ISI, onetime CIA's blue eyed boy?
If the United States had shut up and stayed out of the fricking region- India would have dealt with Pakistan, DESPITE its own myriad excuses and lack of strategic vision. A bunch of times after 1971, the US has intervened to save its favourite Islamist dawg.
This apart from the fact that every goddamn insurgent in India has some ties to and funding or tacit support from US based pvt orgs, and it took 9/11 for the USG to get off its hypocritical high horse and call these terrorists what they were- from Khalistanis to Pakistani groups, and even today, there are but a handful there on the terrorist list. The rest are political brownie points, to be negotiated with India, or suppressed because poor Mushy will be offended.
How do you think Indians felt when Sikhs were massacred at Chattisinhpora, Bombay was attacked by Pak sponsored criminals, and the US advised us to "talk things over"? And Clinton gives a darn eyewash to the jihadis for that same incident.
Sure- how do you like the Iraq war now? Do you see us Indians doing the same to you as the bodybags come home when fighting against the glorious "mujahideen" and "fidayeen"?
And sure, as an American what should really cut you up, is that the USG still tom toms Pak being an ally and this and that- they are taking your money, sending folks to kill your troops in Afghanistan, still protecting OBL and the top bunch of ppl, and are directly linked to 9/11- but even your commission couldnt talk about that.
Heck, at the end of the day, despite all your power, despite all your emphasis on security- even your strategic establishment has betrayed their country.
So you tell us, are we supposed to ignore Pakistan being propped up by the US all these years and watch as the same mistakes of the past are repeated once again? If your goddam Strat community had had any brains (not that ours was dripping with them either, they couldnt even make their political masters respond consistently), even somnolent India would have ensured that there would be no Islamic country with nukes either by invasion or by splitting Pak into two.
But no- why let India, the darn Commie loving SOBs get too big for their boots, so now sit, along with us and watch a bunch of braying Islamists brandish their nukes, whilst you keep forking a billion $ every year to keep them in fine fettle.
For now, we'll pay as Pak uses all that jazz against us, but in the long run all that conventional largesse just means Paks N budget will get a breather. Thanks so much.
Last edited by JCage on 24 May 2006 16:20, edited 1 time in total.
-
abhischekcc
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4277
- Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
- Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
- Contact:
-
ReicherRitter
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 07 Apr 2006 16:25
- Location: Germany
Hi Neil G, I am probably the Indian, who would identify most closely to the US neo-conservative agenda. But I too have got lots of problems with US Policy.neilg wrote: They don't blame the Indian Government - just the US. For every frickin thing !!
There is lots of blame to go around. There is blame for the GoI, but there is plenty of blame for the US too.
What we know:
1. AQ Khan stole designs for centrifuges in Netherlands. They wanted to go after AQ Khan. CIA said they were already looking into the case, and told to the Dutch to shut up and buzz off. Then CIA lost interest in AQ Khan. Now Pakistan has nuclear weapons.
2. US never really took on China for giving Pakistan all sorts of technology, nuclear or missile. China's Proliferation never really got criticized, and US Laws allows China to import all sorts of civilian nuclear technology and says nothing about their programme, but as far as India is concerned, US has been imposing sanctions on us for the last 32 odd years. That sanctions regime was not just US against India, but rather all countries with the technology were netted. This was the extremes of not living up to US's own non-proliferation obligations.
3. Arming of Pakistani Military.
4. Financing of Jihad against the Soviets, but not fighting the Jihadi culture once the Soviets were booted out. That is US should have disposed of their mines (aka Jihadis) once the war was over (read controlled explosions). Those same Jihadis were sent to India to make trouble.
So if India today feels uneasy with
1. a nuclear-powered militarily strong economically rising China
2. Pakistani Military armed by the US
3. Jihadi exports from Pakistan
4. Pakistani nukes
then it is natural to expect Indians to blame the US. It is another matter, that now India and US now see 1. and 3 to be a common threat. 2. and 4. are still unclear.
So on the one hand you have USA supporting Pakistan during our wars with them, on the other hand you have USA actively, though possibly unintentionally, supporting elements in our neighbourhood not conducive to our security.
As far as long term is concerned, there is a lot of overlap in Indian and American interests, however short-term to mid-term American policy is almost always unhelpful.
neilg - you will get a thousand and one opinions here. Like Americans - Indians are not stopped from thinking or saying anything they feel.
The US (in my opinion) has found it far easier to deal with dictatorships or oligarchies who will do as the US dictates if the leadership is bought off or subdued.
The US has to deal with democracies in a more nuanced fashion and precisely that sort of nuanced dealing is visible in the way the US handles poweful democracies such as Japan and France. The US will have to learn to deal with India in that fashion.
India has been a relative non entity for the US. For too long the US has thought of India as one small piece on the chessboard of the "real" world and that too a "red" commie sympathising piece that has to be "balanced" by the pro-democratic and pro freedom forces of the Islamic world - Pakistan in the case of India. Look at the rhetoric of a President as recent as Reagan and you will find elements of that. After all Osammy was feted by Reagan wasn't he?
The US still knows nothing about India. By that I mean that US universities and think tanks have themselves not sussed India out. They still have "naive" South Asia specialists who approach South Asian issues with a blunt club rather than dissect with a fine needle. Examples of this abound but I will merely quote the examples of two books that I reviweed for BR,one bya think tank and another by Stephen Cohen (the archetypal "South Asia" analyst.)
Both reviews are online and I give you the urls so you can see how an Indian sees the US as dealing with India in an ignorant, impatient and ham fisted fashion - which will not really get the US anywhere.
India is not really an oligarchy. And the Pakistan of today is at least partially the result of the US inheriting the Britsh Empire's geopolitical games and playing them badly because it was too preoccupied with the USSR.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/Volume21/sastry.html
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/Volume14/sastry.html
Just as India needs to move forward and see the US's view - the US too has to learn and improve its own knowledge of Indian thought processes.
The US (in my opinion) has found it far easier to deal with dictatorships or oligarchies who will do as the US dictates if the leadership is bought off or subdued.
The US has to deal with democracies in a more nuanced fashion and precisely that sort of nuanced dealing is visible in the way the US handles poweful democracies such as Japan and France. The US will have to learn to deal with India in that fashion.
India has been a relative non entity for the US. For too long the US has thought of India as one small piece on the chessboard of the "real" world and that too a "red" commie sympathising piece that has to be "balanced" by the pro-democratic and pro freedom forces of the Islamic world - Pakistan in the case of India. Look at the rhetoric of a President as recent as Reagan and you will find elements of that. After all Osammy was feted by Reagan wasn't he?
The US still knows nothing about India. By that I mean that US universities and think tanks have themselves not sussed India out. They still have "naive" South Asia specialists who approach South Asian issues with a blunt club rather than dissect with a fine needle. Examples of this abound but I will merely quote the examples of two books that I reviweed for BR,one bya think tank and another by Stephen Cohen (the archetypal "South Asia" analyst.)
Both reviews are online and I give you the urls so you can see how an Indian sees the US as dealing with India in an ignorant, impatient and ham fisted fashion - which will not really get the US anywhere.
India is not really an oligarchy. And the Pakistan of today is at least partially the result of the US inheriting the Britsh Empire's geopolitical games and playing them badly because it was too preoccupied with the USSR.
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/Volume21/sastry.html
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/Volume14/sastry.html
Just as India needs to move forward and see the US's view - the US too has to learn and improve its own knowledge of Indian thought processes.
-
ReicherRitter
- BRFite -Trainee
- Posts: 5
- Joined: 07 Apr 2006 16:25
- Location: Germany
I just don't get it! Why two??JCage wrote:even somnolent India would have ensured that there would be no Islamic country with nukes either by invasion or by splitting Pak into two.
Unless you are implying that Pakistan is some sort of amoeba, which splits every few decades in TWO halves. I protest. This is assuming Pakistan works according to the laws of mitosis. Just one example (West Pakistan <-> East Pakistan) is not sufficient for such a theory.
I am however of the view that Pakistan has reached in its evolution cycle the stage, where it can dare to do a Meiosis or even a Meiosis PLUS. That is, Pakistan could even acheive splitting into four parts, or four haploids (rooted in hapless, I think), if not more.
So I think we should not underrate Pakistan's Potential here.
Shiv,
I am a bit of an Indophille and hope don't come across as "ham-fisted" .
One of the posters above exemplifies the problem I am trying to solve.
When did India, the land which invented the concept of karma (which by my reading of the Bhagwad Gita is not so much the simplified "sow - reap" example cited above - as it is "Perform your duty with no fear or concern for consequence" ) become the land of "non-karma" and the land of "here's my laundry list of excuses why we won't act in our interest . And here's what we will whine about blaming the US for our woes.
I don't defend the cynical foreign policy of past American Presidents.
Sure it contributed to the growth of jihadi islam in general and pakistan in particular.
I happen to believe - and I know many on this board will disagree- that GW Bush is a radical President. What he is attempting in fighting jihadi islam was unthinkable 10 years ago. I am sure if Clinton or Gore were President at the time of the 9/11 attacks they would have shot off a few ineffectual missilles and let go. This guy is hanging in there in the face of some acerbic opposition at home and cynical posturing by some allies. While he is following a tactic (co-opting pakistan and pressuring it to change) that might not work in the lonfg run - he is certainly not ill-intentioned towards India in the manner Nixon may have been. On the contrary he is probably the most India friendly President - ever - in my opinion.
Ironically, it was during Nixon's hostile administration that India found the courage to act in its own interest - DESPITE enormous pressure and at a time when India was infinitely weaker. Didn't see too many excuses then. Just a firm resolve to get as much done as it could.
The point really is that if India were seen as defending its interests and willing to pay a price doing it - it would be far more convincing than by its keeping up the "whine" act.
Finally, I don't speak for the US Government. Just an interested, curious guy who happens to be passing by and is interested in and likes India
I am a bit of an Indophille and hope don't come across as "ham-fisted" .
One of the posters above exemplifies the problem I am trying to solve.
When did India, the land which invented the concept of karma (which by my reading of the Bhagwad Gita is not so much the simplified "sow - reap" example cited above - as it is "Perform your duty with no fear or concern for consequence" ) become the land of "non-karma" and the land of "here's my laundry list of excuses why we won't act in our interest . And here's what we will whine about blaming the US for our woes.
I don't defend the cynical foreign policy of past American Presidents.
Sure it contributed to the growth of jihadi islam in general and pakistan in particular.
I happen to believe - and I know many on this board will disagree- that GW Bush is a radical President. What he is attempting in fighting jihadi islam was unthinkable 10 years ago. I am sure if Clinton or Gore were President at the time of the 9/11 attacks they would have shot off a few ineffectual missilles and let go. This guy is hanging in there in the face of some acerbic opposition at home and cynical posturing by some allies. While he is following a tactic (co-opting pakistan and pressuring it to change) that might not work in the lonfg run - he is certainly not ill-intentioned towards India in the manner Nixon may have been. On the contrary he is probably the most India friendly President - ever - in my opinion.
Ironically, it was during Nixon's hostile administration that India found the courage to act in its own interest - DESPITE enormous pressure and at a time when India was infinitely weaker. Didn't see too many excuses then. Just a firm resolve to get as much done as it could.
The point really is that if India were seen as defending its interests and willing to pay a price doing it - it would be far more convincing than by its keeping up the "whine" act.
Finally, I don't speak for the US Government. Just an interested, curious guy who happens to be passing by and is interested in and likes India
-
abhischekcc
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4277
- Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
- Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
- Contact:
What the Bhagwad Gita refers to is Karma Yog, not Karma itself.neilg wrote:which by my reading of the Bhagwad Gita is not so much the simplified "sow - reap" example cited above - as it is "Perform your duty with no fear or concern for consequence"
The law of Karma does indeed say "You become what you do" - a very delicate way of saying - "You get what you deserve, and you deserve what you get". Action-reaction.
Karma Yog, OTOH, is an injunction, not a law of nature. It is specifically meant to break the chain of action-reaction that Law of Karma postulates. In that sense - it is the anti-thesis of the Law of Karma.
Law of Karma states the reason for the binding, Karma Yog instructs how to break that bondage.
One word answer - Buddhism.When did India, the land which invented the concept of karma (which by my reading of the Bhagwad Gita is not so much the simplified "sow - reap" example cited above - as it is "Perform your duty with no fear or concern for consequence" ) become the land of "non-karma"
If you want a full answer, then this forum is not the right place. Discussing religion is banned here, unless done under a 'different' heading.
Don't worry, we will fix ourselves soon. We are still smarting from a thousand year battle. Give us just a few more years. We are almost mended.and the land of "here's my laundry list of excuses why we won't act in our interest
Not you personally, but just as you don't personally represent a distillation of US policy over 50 years - individual postors here do not necesarily represent or reflect reasons why India the nation ends up making the moves it makes.neilg wrote: hope don't come across as "ham-fisted" .
A lot of people would like to see India behave in all sorts of different ways, and at least a proportion of those people will look out for someone or something to blame.
I am myself surprised at some of the opinions here - but it's all about opinions. The board does not reflect "Indian policy". The board and people who post on here are mostly exchanging information and learning.
The board can never really respresent "all of India" as in being able to reflect the choices of a billion people - because the board itself is a distillation of a particular class of Indian - mainly English speaking Indians who are largely more well off and better educated than the "average" Indian.
Any differences that you may find between reality and board opinion can only be explained in this manner. You would have to look at why less educated, non English speaking voters of India would prevail upon their elected representatives to push India towards the behavior it actually displays rather than the behavior desired by people on this board. If India has not destroyed Pakistan till now - it is less a failure of board sentiment and more a manifestation of voter sentiment in India. But believe me nobody is trying harder than some on this board to change some of those sentiments.
Last edited by shiv on 24 May 2006 17:31, edited 1 time in total.
Neilg,
India won its independence using non violence. For the first two decades, India blundered along, the war with China woke India up. Even so, the view persisted in India that Pak was but an estranged brother and would be brought to its senses (all that Gandhian non violence bit hits the brain rather hard).
Finally, after the attack by Pak in 65, and their genocide in Bangladesh in 71, India's Indira Gandhi - and remember India got its independence in 47, all establishments are still led by the visionary leader syndrome (which we Indians now call Congress-ism after the party that led India for well nigh 4 decades, Nehru, IG and RG)...well Indira decided enough is enough and being made of sterner stuff than her dad vivisected Pak.
This led to the US firmly emerging as Paks de facto guardian, by the 80's IG got assassinated, and her son - a political novice takes over. He wants ties with the US and is rebuffed beyond a point. Hes followed by another series of Prime Ministers..basically, *even* when despite all these ins and outs, any political leader finally found the spine to take on Pak- the US would emerge to "tone things down".
Note, I am not making excuses for Indias own somnolence- it should have had far more spine than it did, but what is truly maddening is how when it finally did move to act, the US would intervene time and again to protect its poor li'l Pakistan.
And this was enough to raise the stakes beyond a point the Indian Govt was willing to pay. India is a large nation with large problems, there was always something else to do when the price to be paid, became too high.
The problem is that India being in its first half century of independence has been too visionary leader driven, with its establishment unable to stand up for itself and determine a coherent policy to be implemented, and with the assassination of IG, it became all too easy for the US to up the stakes for action to a point where lame duck PMs would back off.
Add to this the complete usage of every arrow in the US quiver to hamstring Indias nuke program after the 74 test. The oeriodic threat of international censure, via the UN and all sorts of rigmarole.
BTW, in the 80's Israel offered to take out Kahuta, if all the IAF did- offer staging airbases. India pondered this over. Meanwhile the US leaked the plan to the Pakis, and they threatened to strike BARC, with their F-16's, and the usual diplomatic and economic pressure applied.
Basically, your goddam strat community- for who knows what darn reason- has ensured Pakistans survival whilst ensuring that the stakes for Indian action were too high.
Personally- I think that Indias leadership made a huge mess of things, this includes the stupid bureaucrats who sat and fiddled whilst their political masters showed spines of jelly, but there is no doubting the fact that the US has played an extremely stupid game in South Asia, and one which has cost many Indians their lives, no hyperbole intended.
Pakistan launched their fricking Punjab insurgency followed by the J&K one, followed by constant bloodletting against Hindus, Sikhs, Shia Muslims etc once they were sure they had a nuke and wouldnt be touched.
And every darn step of the way, there was the USG protecting its poor "child", for Lord knows what. It makes me crack up to read all the think tanks now talking of "the emergent Islamist threat".
Where the F*** were these "experts" when the Indian Army was fighting the fidayeen in Kashmir for over a decade? Talking about how oppressive the Indian state was.
All these same experts passed comments on India, its "poverty", "its caste system", "its venal elite"- every darn thing by Pakistan escaped censure. Beware of India - the big bad wolf of South Asia. Heck, no appreciation of how a wounded civilization was improving itself by leaps and bounds in its formative years of true independence, but lets protect the Pakis and their N- capability. They need it for stability against the "larger Indians". They are pro- American.
Yeah right.
India won its independence using non violence. For the first two decades, India blundered along, the war with China woke India up. Even so, the view persisted in India that Pak was but an estranged brother and would be brought to its senses (all that Gandhian non violence bit hits the brain rather hard).
Finally, after the attack by Pak in 65, and their genocide in Bangladesh in 71, India's Indira Gandhi - and remember India got its independence in 47, all establishments are still led by the visionary leader syndrome (which we Indians now call Congress-ism after the party that led India for well nigh 4 decades, Nehru, IG and RG)...well Indira decided enough is enough and being made of sterner stuff than her dad vivisected Pak.
This led to the US firmly emerging as Paks de facto guardian, by the 80's IG got assassinated, and her son - a political novice takes over. He wants ties with the US and is rebuffed beyond a point. Hes followed by another series of Prime Ministers..basically, *even* when despite all these ins and outs, any political leader finally found the spine to take on Pak- the US would emerge to "tone things down".
Note, I am not making excuses for Indias own somnolence- it should have had far more spine than it did, but what is truly maddening is how when it finally did move to act, the US would intervene time and again to protect its poor li'l Pakistan.
And this was enough to raise the stakes beyond a point the Indian Govt was willing to pay. India is a large nation with large problems, there was always something else to do when the price to be paid, became too high.
The problem is that India being in its first half century of independence has been too visionary leader driven, with its establishment unable to stand up for itself and determine a coherent policy to be implemented, and with the assassination of IG, it became all too easy for the US to up the stakes for action to a point where lame duck PMs would back off.
Add to this the complete usage of every arrow in the US quiver to hamstring Indias nuke program after the 74 test. The oeriodic threat of international censure, via the UN and all sorts of rigmarole.
BTW, in the 80's Israel offered to take out Kahuta, if all the IAF did- offer staging airbases. India pondered this over. Meanwhile the US leaked the plan to the Pakis, and they threatened to strike BARC, with their F-16's, and the usual diplomatic and economic pressure applied.
Basically, your goddam strat community- for who knows what darn reason- has ensured Pakistans survival whilst ensuring that the stakes for Indian action were too high.
Personally- I think that Indias leadership made a huge mess of things, this includes the stupid bureaucrats who sat and fiddled whilst their political masters showed spines of jelly, but there is no doubting the fact that the US has played an extremely stupid game in South Asia, and one which has cost many Indians their lives, no hyperbole intended.
Pakistan launched their fricking Punjab insurgency followed by the J&K one, followed by constant bloodletting against Hindus, Sikhs, Shia Muslims etc once they were sure they had a nuke and wouldnt be touched.
And every darn step of the way, there was the USG protecting its poor "child", for Lord knows what. It makes me crack up to read all the think tanks now talking of "the emergent Islamist threat".
Where the F*** were these "experts" when the Indian Army was fighting the fidayeen in Kashmir for over a decade? Talking about how oppressive the Indian state was.
All these same experts passed comments on India, its "poverty", "its caste system", "its venal elite"- every darn thing by Pakistan escaped censure. Beware of India - the big bad wolf of South Asia. Heck, no appreciation of how a wounded civilization was improving itself by leaps and bounds in its formative years of true independence, but lets protect the Pakis and their N- capability. They need it for stability against the "larger Indians". They are pro- American.
Yeah right.
-
abhischekcc
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 4277
- Joined: 12 Jul 1999 11:31
- Location: If I can’t move the gods, I’ll stir up hell
- Contact:
You have to be aware of one fact. US policy has always contributed to the growth of Radical Islam. And there is a very good, and philosophical, reason for this:neilg wrote:I don't defend the cynical foreign policy of past American Presidents.
Sure it contributed to the growth of jihadi islam in general and pakistan in particular.
You see, capitalism by its very nature is internationalist. Capital is always in the look out for greener pastures. If one country puts some restrictions on capital, it will leave that country, no matter what. This characteristic of capitalism was postulated, IIRC, by Adam Smith himself.
Now, a nationalist government of any country, will try to control capital in the interest of what it perceives to be its natural right.
So, capitalism and nationalism have always been at loggerheads with each other. In fact, the only time they don't fight is when they merge - and that union is called fascism.
America is the most deeply capitalistic power on earth. Hence, by the very nature of things, it is also the most anti-national power on earth. Anti-national for other countries, that is, not itself. That's the reason US always tries to undermine nationalists of other countries.
And it had found a good ally in Radical Islam. Usually, radical muslims are the only fighters willing to engage in a long bruising fight against anybody who they think is against Islam - including moderate muslims.
It is an existential problem. There really is no middle ground between capitalism and nationalism and radical Islam.
Once you understand the issue in this way, you realize that this fight was inevitable. That 9-11 could have happened on any date.
Even today- we see the Middle East Camp David style approach to India and Pakistan. Sell both arms, make both dependent on US largesse, one is "favoured" (read Israel) and obeys the US, the other nuttier Islamist nation keeps getting enough weapons and aid to keep its elite happy (read Egypt).
Ah.
Only problem- bloody Pakis are next to us. And the genocidal twits think that Islam is well served by killing non Muslims. And over all this, we are supposed to play nice with Pak, "explore" ideas to demilitarize Siachen, make Kashmir a neutral independent state (oh gee!) and the SD bigwgs in the US wonder why arrogant India isnt playing along. Why indeed!
I still wonder, how the heck can a country like the US with such brilliant scientists and untramelled appreciation of security threats, have such idiots in its higher organizations when it comes to South Asia. Then I started reading texts - wow, the bile and venom that drips from the "experts" is awesome. In effect, all the think- tanks and experts that the US has cultivated over decades, are lunatics who themselves left India (Khalistanis to Leftists to extremist nutjobs with ideas of carving out theor own idealogical state) now having tenured positions in the US and sponsoring conference after conference under "academic freedom", to the think tanks- full of ex ambassador to Pakistan, so and so, visiting scholar from Pakistan so and so...).
And while the US blunders about, making equivocal statements- both of you sit down and talk, Pakis couldnt really help killing those four hundred Hindus last year, anyway India has a billion more doesnt it (ha, ha!)- play nice, children.
How long will this asinine state of affairs last, Lord alone knows.
Ah.
Only problem- bloody Pakis are next to us. And the genocidal twits think that Islam is well served by killing non Muslims. And over all this, we are supposed to play nice with Pak, "explore" ideas to demilitarize Siachen, make Kashmir a neutral independent state (oh gee!) and the SD bigwgs in the US wonder why arrogant India isnt playing along. Why indeed!
I still wonder, how the heck can a country like the US with such brilliant scientists and untramelled appreciation of security threats, have such idiots in its higher organizations when it comes to South Asia. Then I started reading texts - wow, the bile and venom that drips from the "experts" is awesome. In effect, all the think- tanks and experts that the US has cultivated over decades, are lunatics who themselves left India (Khalistanis to Leftists to extremist nutjobs with ideas of carving out theor own idealogical state) now having tenured positions in the US and sponsoring conference after conference under "academic freedom", to the think tanks- full of ex ambassador to Pakistan, so and so, visiting scholar from Pakistan so and so...).
And while the US blunders about, making equivocal statements- both of you sit down and talk, Pakis couldnt really help killing those four hundred Hindus last year, anyway India has a billion more doesnt it (ha, ha!)- play nice, children.
How long will this asinine state of affairs last, Lord alone knows.
The big difference between BRF and India is that Indians by and large are admirers of US roads, efficiency, innovation, wealth and generosity, but do not see that all those qualities are interlinked with a powerful US military to bring in "order" as desired by the US. Many Indians think that India could do with more efficiency, innovation, honesty etc but must have nothing to do with weapons or the military and that goodness will somehow win over in the end. So Pakistan is treated like a misbehaving child rather than the rabid dog that it is, and China is looked upon as a sometimes ill tempered but nevertheless good natured neighbor rather than the atrociously behaved and lying boor it is.
Those are aive Indian viewpointsthat BRF does not share. The entire Indian nation needs to be disabused of these ridiculous viewpoints.
Those are aive Indian viewpointsthat BRF does not share. The entire Indian nation needs to be disabused of these ridiculous viewpoints.