US strike options on TSP

Rishirishi · Post by **Rishirishi** » 22 Oct 2011 05:19

Now that it the Amrikis are finally understanding the TSP mindset, what options does the US have if they go to an all out war.

*The issue is how much power do they have and want to use?
*Is it possible to take out TSP nukes and delivery capability?
*What will the effects be?

Republican congressman talks of "nutralizing" TSP nuclear capability
http://www.therightscoop.com/allen-west ... e-need-to/

Realistic strike capability of the US:

Afganistan:
Some 150 AC bombers.

Sea:
2 carrier groups, approx 150 AC
Patriot Missiles

Diego Garcia:
Some 20 heavy bombers

I am assuming that the US has total air dominance within very short time. First wave to destroy radar and communications facilities. Second wave to take out air defences.

Rishirishi · Post by **Rishirishi** » 22 Oct 2011 05:24

In this link Pravda states that the US has the capacity to destroy 10 000 targets within hours.
http://english.pravda.ru/hotspots/confl ... _garcia-0/

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 05:37

Rishirishi wrote: I am assuming that the US has total air dominance within very short time. First wave to destroy radar and communications facilities. Second wave to take out air defences.

That is what they did to Afghanistan! And look where it got them. If they do it to Pakhanastan the photo ops that Americans have with the smartest military in the world will go, leaving only the Taliban which the Americans have successfully fought in Afghanistan!

I find this rah rah rah of US military power funny. This thread is yet another avatar of the sentiment "Hey the US military can take out Pakistan in a minute" (....if they wanted to do that. Just like I could have got Angelina Jolie yesterday, but I'm not in the mood) It will never be used against Pakhanastan. All this "air dominance in hours" is rubbish. For once the Pakhanis are correct. Paakistan is no Iraq and even in Iraq air dominance was not achieved in "hours". Oh but the Taliban Air Force was dominated in hours. the Taliban are a defeated force anyway. No?

Air dominance does not win wars no matter which way you cut it.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 05:46

One needs to distinguish between

1) Capability to Wage War vs. Will to Wage War

2) Destroying the Enemy vs. Nation Building

3) Occupying Strategic Parts vs. Full Occupation

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 06:08

~~Let us say I actually get Angelina Jolie to be with me today~~ sorry, I mean let us say the US actually uses its awesome military power against Pakistan and decimates the Pakistan military. And we then cheer that with rahrahrahrahrah because we are quietly satisfied that it proves that the US is everything that India is not and that we wish India was but know in our heart of hearts that India will never be.

Then what?

Whom will the US bribe to provide security to NATO supply trucks?

Whom will the US bribe to provide security to Pakhanastani nuclear stockpiles?

Whom will the US bribe to protect all US personnel in Pakhanaland? Remember - the US is not like India no. Even one US citizen's life is important. More important than many countries. The US will take out any entity even if one US citizen is touched. At least that is what i have always been taught about America. Where are my teachers who taught me all that today when I need them most?

Pakistan has the US's gonads in both its hands. Pakistan knows that. The US knows that. Only "ahead of curve" BRF has not figured that out yet. We just wanna see someone else take out Pakhanastan because India is weak and the US is strong

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Oct 2011 06:47

well US need not destroy pakistan or occupy it too much - only baluchistan is enough. secure the route from gwader to quetta and beyond. its a very unpopulated province with a people who are hostile to pakjabis. they will co-operate esp now if their gas and minerals can no longer be looted by pakjab who will have to pay a fair price.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 22 Oct 2011 07:20

Brutus Fulmen.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 07:29

Singha wrote:well US need not destroy pakistan or occupy it too much - only baluchistan is enough.

Singha this is pure imagination. The Pakistan army is not able to protect itself or the Chinese there. What is the number of troops the US will need on the ground to protect one road link that is a thousand km long?

Even 1400 aircraft carriers will not have enough men for that. And the US has only 2 in the area. I mean this like saying that I need to protect myself against a swarm of bees and I have 20 axes for that

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 22 Oct 2011 07:44

shiv:

Distances work both ways.

These are relatively desolate areas; prime territory for the National Bird to act with little collateral damage.

The US can easily manage the motorable roads. There are not that many in any case.

And the distances make the foot-soldier jehadi unviable. Unlike the LOC the terrain does not provide a lot of cover or areas to hide in.

Gwadar is almost next to Iran, very far away from the TSP heartland. It literally looks like the surface of the moon. Very little sign of human habitation and very few roads.

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Balochist ... an&t=h&z=8

I do not think it will be very hard to protect large convoys in this kind of territory which provides very little natural cover, very few civilian centers to merge into, all which makes the national birds very effective.

The first step of course requires the US to create an alternate route through Gwadar completely bypassing Karachi and the heartland. This may require laying out some new motor-ways where trucks can traverse. Do this without any obvious hostility and find the vulnerabilities. Once they are ironed out, the control of the gonads will severely diminish.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 07:56

VikramS wrote:shiv:

Distances work both ways.

Of course of course Of course. And destroying the Pakistan army is going to make the US get control over all that? I'm not sure who is being awarded more stupidity points here, the US or Pakistan.

Vikramji please do not delude yourself. Remember that there is no major highway via Baluchistan. The highway heads east towards Karachi. A few men who dig a 5 foot deep trench in 5 places on the road overnight will stop traffic and the national bird will only be able to fart into those holes. One RPG into one fuel truck will block traffic further and the national bird will hadly be able to keep track of a rebellious Paki army. Do this every night for 30 nights and there will be no traffic moving unless the US has men on the ground. Its the men on the ground that count. Pakistan is currently providing the US the men on the ground.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 22 Oct 2011 08:02

shiv:

If you click on the link which shows the Google Map, you will notice roads leading all the way to within 20-30 miles of the Afghan border. The entire section runs along the Iran border and goes nowhere close to Quetta. M6-N85-N40 gets you from Gwadar to very close to the Afghan border. By most metrics these are very desolate areas.

And of course the convoys will run under heavy escort and support. A 5 foot deep trench can be bridged in minutes, assuming the national birds do not make the trench diggers meet their 72.

Of course there are going to be challenges. But if there is one area where a project like this is feasible, it is this. Very few people, very few roads, very little cover. And there are going to be boots. While the US is officially withdrawing from Iraq by the end of this year, about 5000 contractors and a lot of CIA assets are still being left behind....

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 08:32

VikramS wrote:
Of course there are going to be challenges. But if there is one area where a project like this is feasible, it is this. Very few people, very few roads, very little cover. And there are going to be boots. While the US is officially withdrawing from Iraq by the end of this year, about 5000 contractors and a lot of CIA assets are still being left behind....

No Vikram. The US does not have the number boots on the ground required to do this. It is a fond hope of those who admire US air power that the US can do this. It cannot and will not. The US knows it and so do the Pakis. BRF will find out in due course.

The Ho Chi Minh trail was bombed for over a decade using all the catch phrases we are so fond of using '"Air Dominance", "Carpet Bombing", "Rolling Thunder", "more tonnage than all of WW 2", "Agent Orange", "Napalm" - and it all came to naught. The Viet Cong kept on coming. The Pakis too will keep on coming and they will use the very tactics and methods the US of A taught them to use against the Soviets.

if the US attempts anything of the sort - come back and mock me and tell me I was wrong. Till then I will have beer and popcorn. I will be dead from alcohol poisoning before the US puts boots on the ground in Pakistan to keep a road open via Baluchistan or wherever. The very premise of this thread attributes more stupidity to the US that even I am not willing to credit the US with.

RoyG · Post by **RoyG** » 22 Oct 2011 08:37

I agree with Shiv. Nothing is going to happen. Perhaps they may increase the number of drone strikes, special ops, etc and maybe even escalate to helicopter gunships and artillery. Pakistan with the support of China knows that the Americans wont push too hard especially with elections around the corner and a worsening economic crisis. All India can do at the moment is help coordinate some type of buffer with the Central Asian states, Iran and Russia to fill the vacuum once the Americans pull out most of their forces.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Oct 2011 08:59

Already, the US supplies through Karachi to Chaman & Khyber have come down to some 30% of the total supplies. Nearly 25% of these supplies are lost anyway due to attacks. I think the Gwadar-Balochistan alternate route may be able to sustain this traffic without any more hazards than what the US logistics through the Indus Highway are already facing in Pakistan.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 Oct 2011 09:47

For the Paks, their most potent threat is nuclear proliferation, especially towards West Asia.

For the US, the choice tools will be economic squeeze, supporting separatists, subversion, fomenting mayhem etc.

But all that is besides the point, because the US is still committed to protecting and preserving Pakistan as a tool.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 22 Oct 2011 09:54

Why should not forget sea lanes . USN can put effective blockade on Poxxistan within a day or so.Poaks will run our of oil within a week. They are lving from tanker to tanker.Power shortage has already caused violent demonstrations and complete lack of it for sure will cause civil war.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Oct 2011 10:03

and the US surely has full details of where the jernails and leaders have hidden their money in dubai, london, cayman, swiss .... if it wants, all these balls can be squeezed and money frozen quietly by being tagged as 'terror funds' ...that message will hit home loud and clear.
also retired Fauj and kids living comfortably in US/UK could be deported on some trumped up charges , GC's can easily be cancelled you know.

Unkil has all the levers on the paki elites atleast, though it has little leverage on the foot soldiers.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 22 Oct 2011 10:38

Prem wrote:Why should not forget sea lanes . USN can put effective blockade on Poxxistan within a day or so.Poaks will run our of oil within a week. They are lving from tanker to tanker.Power shortage has already caused violent demonstrations and cpmplete lack of it for sure will cause civil war.

A sea blockade is an act of war. Things will probably stay short of overt hostilities for now. But yes, that would bring them to their knees pretty quickly.

VikramS · Post by **VikramS** » 22 Oct 2011 11:14

shiv:

The question I am answering is about the feasibility of keeping a hostile TSPA at bay while having a land route open to Afghanistan.

I am not commenting about the will, the military cost, the political cost or the terror cost.

A well escorted convoy with a fleet of national birds, support choppers etc can keep that land route secure. Even if they take some hits, it will be much less than what they lose right now in the monthly ritual of NATO truck burning. This is simply because the area is sparsely populated and does not provide the same opportunity as the other parts. Parts of the route are on national highways which I believe have some form of access control. And all the examples you have given are irrelevant in the current context. There is nothing to bomb here. It is a sparsely populated moon like landscape.

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 22 Oct 2011 11:24

brutum fulmen

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Oct 2011 12:07

Acharya wrote:brutum fulmen

Acharya, it would be so only if Pakistan sticks to its stand and the US runs away with its tail between the hinds. If the US succeeds in making Pakistan do what the US wants without a military operation, it won't be brutem fulmen. Let's wait for the verdict this time.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 22 Oct 2011 12:23

the PA guards its own convoys PA/FC using the cobra gunships in NWFP/tribal agencies.

baluchi hills should be less amenable to the kind of guerilla war seen in NWFP. this is likely a reason why the PA was able to crush the baluchi insurgents in short order once they put resources behind it. the population is indeed very thin and national bird is unlikely to be very discriminating about who it shoots at...anyone seen roaming around could be fair game.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 13:14

VikramS wrote: A well escorted convoy with a fleet of national birds, support choppers etc can keep that land route secure. Even if they take some hits, it will be much less than what they lose right now in the monthly ritual of NATO truck burning. This is simply because the area is sparsely populated and does not provide the same opportunity as the other parts. Parts of the route are on national highways which I believe have some form of access control. And all the examples you have given are irrelevant in the current context. There is nothing to bomb here. It is a sparsely populated moon like landscape.

Nope. This was the exact US thinking when they went into Vietnam and even Somalia all of which have now become "irrelevant thinking" for the purpose of this completely hypothetical discussion. In a hypothetical discussion all inconvenient facts can be dismissed as irrelevant. I believe you (and a whole lot of other air power admirers) are overestimating the effect of US air power in Pakistan by a huge margin. But your theory is protected by the "magic veil" of the fact that it will never happen. So one could keep on saying "Yes the US can do it".

That is the premise on which this thread was started. Somehow I see it as a kind of frustrated time pass (like we on BRF talk of retaking PoK or occupying Tibet) that delays acceptance of the inevitable unavoidable fact that the US is not going to even attempt this since it is bound to fail.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 13:29

Securing land routes through Baluchistan is perhaps the simplest of enterprises.

India ∨ USA can build up a Baluch National Army of say 80,000 and they can look after security of the roads. It is a sparsely populated place, and any Pakjabi or even Pushtun would stick out like a sore thumb.

The Pushtuns are mostly in the North/Northeast of Baluchistan and that region need not be part of the "Independent" Baluchistan. In Baluchistan Proper (just populated by Baluchs and liberated by India ∨ USA) Areas Pakjabis and Pushtuns would simply not be allowed in. The Baluchs would take care of that. There can be an added layer of security by India ∨ USA as well.

USA can finance. India can build the roads. We can build a motorway from Gwadar going all the way to Afghanistan which passes only through Baluch territory.

chaanakya · Post by **chaanakya** » 22 Oct 2011 13:44

Is Unkil really itching for another fight now that it is relatively free from Iraq and Af?? Does it want to use Pak as a launching pad for Iran?? Why can't it be done from AF?

IMHO, unkil and Pak are interdependent on each other and all this sound and fury and escalating crescendo is for 2012. Pak would just submit to unkil and things would be fine. 911 was deflected to Iraq because Sad mama cocked a snook to Jhadi senior.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 14:31

1000 km of roadways to be protected against disruptive attacks is not easy. Even if you apply your mind to the idea for 5 minutes you can see the magnitude of the problem. How many men can you keep per kilometer of road 24/7 to protect and maintain. Those men themselves will need quarters and facilities to rest and at least 2 shifts per team.

It is always easier to cut a bridge or disrupt a road than to keep it open. Keeping it open requires occupation. Keeping 1000 km of road open requires physical occupation of at least half km on either side - so you are looking at physical occupation of 1000 sq km at the very least, stretched over 1000 km of road. At any point that road could be attacked and the local security overwhelmed by a group of say 50 men who have moved in stealthily. The disrupting group only has to dominate one stretch of road - maybe a bend in a mountainous area for 4 or 5 days to cause severe disruption. Repair of a damaged road may be possible in hours, but that requires heavy equipment and more men, who in turn can be attacked. Any tailback of vehicles also becomes a target. This is what the Taliban are doing in Afghanistan ensuring that the US/NATO dominate only the urban areas. What is air dominance achieving there. Whatever it is its no more than a stalemate. Heck the US could not stop a soosai against its embassy in Kabul They will never avoid soosais against bridges, culvers ot even ships in Gwadar if the antagonise the Pakhani army.

And guess who is driving those vehicles for the Americans on any given day. You collect 1000 drivers and call out "Mike" and not one will raise his hand. Call out "Abdul" and you will get 100. The Pakistani army dominates Baluchistan and does so by having Intel in the villages and towns and keeping a tab on leaders. And yet Pakhanastan is yet unable to protect the roads and infrastructure reliably - making their tarrel friend give up ideas of using Gwadar. Imagining that the US is going to do that without Paki army support and mainly air power is the lousiest and least credible yarn I have heard in recent times.

You have constant disruptions in the road - and over weeks and months your war effort grinds down to a snail's pace because you are putting in more effort than you need just to keep an artery open against fierce local resistance in an alien land.

krishnan · Post by **krishnan** » 22 Oct 2011 14:40

I give a paki idea..

Build a strong tunnel that can withstand strong attack , movement can happen within it, you can even build a railway track.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 15:03

Basically the Baluch National Army would have posts in most villages and towns and checkpoints on all roads coming into Baluchistan. Any Pakjabi or Pushtun would have to avoid these villages and towns when they pass through 100s of kms of Baluch territory to reach the North-South Trans-Baluchistan Motorway, say going between Gwadar and Lashkar-Gah!

If these "mischief-makers" are travelling by avoiding the main roads, they can still be picked up by some scouts, aware villagers. Or they can be noticed by drones hovering overhead. The drone controllers can then call up some local troops to go and check up on these "travelers"! If they are Pakjabi or Pushtun, others would be alerted. If the "travelers" overwhelm the scouting party, then that would mean they just activated the second trip-wire. And forces can be mobilized to pounce on them, and cut off their routes. Then helicopter-gunships can be sent to intercept them and engage them.

The whole are would be full with Baloch trip-wires which would notify "Central Command" of any impending danger. It is not easy to travel through 100s of kms of barren area totally unnoticed when the area is full of Baloch scout parties and "trip-wires". Even if these "miscreants" manage to damage the motorway, they would still have to escape through 100 of kms of hostile territory swarming with Baloch. Not easy for Pakjabis and Pushtun to go unnoticed.

If there is damage to some part of the motorway, and it is found out relatively quickly, say within the next 4-5 hours, as some registered vehicle traveling over the motorway would report the damage, then a cordoning off operation can be started pretty quickly by (India ∨ USA) and Balochs cooperating together. Most escape route and passes through the hills can be put under observation. For the Pakjabis and Pushtun this would still be hostile territory!

The trick is to consolidate the Baloch under a plan to provide them independence from Pakjabis and Pakistan. Anybody roaming around that vast region would either have to be Baloch or have valid papers which the Baloch National Army units can control by calling some central authority where the papers for the non-Baloch traveler have been issued.

Would the Pakjabis and Pushtun travel 100s of kms through enemy territory to make a hole in some road, if their chances of making out are slim?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 15:07

krishnan wrote:I give a paki idea..

Build a strong tunnel that can withstand strong attack , movement can happen within it, you can even build a railway track.

When the US started attacking the Ho Chi Minh trail in Vietnam thinking that supplies of Viet Cong troops could be stopped by air attacks - tunnels were part of the Viet Cong response.

I hear people say "Vietnam had tree cover. Baluchistan is bare" If the problem is so obvious why on earth did the US spend over a decade fruitlessly bombing the Ho Chi Minh trail only to cop out at the end? The answer is that 20/20 hindsight always makes everything very clear. it is easy to look back at Vietnam and say "The Ho Chi Minh trails had tree cover and the Viet Cong did blah blah blah" There is a huge difference between physical control of a highway with men on the ground and hitting insurgents from the air.

The US Unmanned Predator/Reaper campaign evokes both laughter and admiration from me.

i think it is the most useless method of trying to win a war. It will never win the war. But we have to admire the technology that is being developed that will be used in some years from now. But those drones will never win any US war with Pakistan. They are mere pinpricks. That can never control a 1000 km highway against concerted attacks.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 15:08

RajeshA wrote: Would the Pakjabis and Pushtun travel 100s of kms through enemy territory to make a hole in some road, if their chances of making out are slim?

Maybe they will travel by sea? That is what they did in Mumbai.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 15:18

We should keep in mind that that 1000-km motorway would be running through America-friendly or India-friendly territory policed by Balochs.

It is the Pakjabis and Pushtun who would be in hostile territory, if they want to commit insurgent acts.

shiv wrote:
RajeshA wrote: Would the Pakjabis and Pushtun travel 100s of kms through enemy territory to make a hole in some road, if their chances of making out are slim?
Maybe they will travel by sea? That is what they did in Mumbai.

Mumbai is a huge cosmopolitan city with people from all over the Subcontinent and beyond. It is easy to go underground there. There is also much shipping along those routes, and some can escape the radar. In Baluchistan Proper, there are only Baloch. If one is not a Baloch, then one would be asked who one is!

Gwadar is a long way from Karachi, and still relatively little used, still isolated place. US/Indian Navy with Baloch personnel on board can better monitor the boats, etc.

At the most, the insurgents could enter Gwadar by the sea route, and do some damage there, but the motorway would still be safe.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Oct 2011 16:18

shiv wrote:1000 km of roadways to be protected against disruptive attacks is not easy.

Yes, of course. But, today, these NATO containers take a 1300 Km of hostile Indus Highway road to Peshawar from Karachi (and if it is closed, take a circuitous route through Lahore) and then cover the distance of about 75 even more hostile kms from Peshawar to Landi Kotal to enter Afghanistan. I believe that the Gwadar-Turbat-Quetta route would be much less vulnerable than the Indus Highway/ If NATO can secure the Quetta-Chaman route (the Taliban are active here), NATO can get more containers safely into Kandahar and then to Kabul and Bagram than through Landi Kotal.

Was just reading this report. It says that between 2007-2010, almost 8000 NATO containers were pilfered with and another 24000 went missing, never to be traced. I am sure the fatalities won't be that high through Gwadar.

darshhan · Post by **darshhan** » 22 Oct 2011 16:28

RajeshA wrote:We should keep in mind that that 1000-km motorway would be running through America-friendly or India-friendly territory policed by Balochs.

It is the Pakjabis and Pushtun who would be in hostile territory, if they want to commit insurgent acts.

But Rajeshji , for this to happen , Balochistan has to be an independent country and when that happens Pakistan will cease to exist.Hence from the point of this scenario , this thread"US strike options on TSP" becomes redundant.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 16:53

darshhan wrote:
RajeshA wrote:We should keep in mind that that 1000-km motorway would be running through America-friendly or India-friendly territory policed by Balochs.

It is the Pakjabis and Pushtun who would be in hostile territory, if they want to commit insurgent acts.

But Rajeshji , for this to happen , Balochistan has to be an independent country and when that happens Pakistan will cease to exist.Hence from the point of this scenario , this thread"US strike options on TSP" becomes redundant.

The scenario I painted is to provide the focus for (India ∨ USA) in Pakistan. TSPA must be forced to retreat to Pakjab and move its strategic assets there.

For that we need to put some strategic parts of current Pakistan out of reach of Pakjab and its Army, namely Baluchistan. The road to Afghanistan provides a route for (India ∨ USA) to Central Asia and makes an investment in this course of action additionally lucrative besides ensuring the geographic concentration of Pakistan's nuclear assets within the confines of Pakjab.

The route to Afghanistan allows us to curtail Pakjabi Army's influence in Afghanistan as well. If Karachi is kept in uproar or otherwise blocked, the Pakistanis can say bye-bye to the sea coast.

It is a process. The scenario reaches its culmination several years down the line. As we see from Afghanistan, it takes some time for the insurgency to build up strength. This is the time, (India ∨ USA) can use to build up the Baluchistan National Army, making a return of Pakjabi domination highly improbably.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 17:01

SSridhar wrote: Was just reading this report. It says that between 2007-2010, almost 8000 NATO containers were pilfered with and another 24000 went missing, never to be traced. I am sure the fatalities won't be that high through Gwadar.

This is with Pakistan Army help!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 17:03

RajeshA wrote: Mumbai is a huge cosmopolitan city with people from all over the Subcontinent and beyond. It is easy to go underground there. There is also much shipping along those routes, and some can escape the radar. In Baluchistan Proper, there are only Baloch. If one is not a Baloch, then one would be asked who one is!

The point was whether anyone would be put off because they could get killed. Armies indoctrinate men not to be put off by the thought of being killed. Pakistan has fluffed up the numbers of men ready to kill and be killed by encouraging jihadis.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 17:18

shiv wrote:The point was whether anyone would be put off because they could get killed. Armies indoctrinate men not to be put off by the thought of being killed. Pakistan has fluffed up the numbers of men ready to kill and be killed by encouraging jihadis.

That is true.

However these Jihadis, Pakjabi or otherwise, can only hit out at the Balochis in the villages and Baluchi scouts or from 'Baluchistan National Army' who would be on the periphery of Baluchistan bordering Pakjabi and Pushtun areas. The Baluchis form the first line of defense. The long way to the North-South Motorway would mean, these Jihadis would have to wade a long way through a swamp full of Baluchi crocodiles before they get to (India ∨ USA) assets or the motorway itself. For Pakjabi and Pushtun Jihadis it is hostile territory where as non-Baluch ethnicities they stand out.

I don't doubt the will of the Pakjabis and other Jihadis to continue to put Baluchistan under Jihadi pressure, but the motorway would basically remain secure, and so would (India ∨ USA) assets.

I am questioning the ability of Jihadis to be able make Baluchistan just as insecure for 'coalition troops' as has been the case in Afghanistan, where often the coalition troops have been active in hostile territory - in Pushtun regions, and even in the Tajik regions where often Pushtuns and Pakjabis have been able to move around pretty openly.

True one would have to avenge any Baluchi depths by hitting back at Pakjabis, etc. which makes life easier than it is now, where 'coalition troops' cannot violate the so-virginity of Pakistan.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Oct 2011 17:22

darshhan wrote:
RajeshA wrote:We should keep in mind that that 1000-km motorway would be running through America-friendly or India-friendly territory policed by Balochs.

It is the Pakjabis and Pushtun who would be in hostile territory, if they want to commit insurgent acts.

But Rajeshji , for this to happen , Balochistan has to be an independent country and when that happens Pakistan will cease to exist.Hence from the point of this scenario , this thread"US strike options on TSP" becomes redundant.

Absolutely. Once Pakistan ceases to be recognized as exerting sovereignty in Baluchistan and in NWFP, the problem is partly solved. The US does not want that.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 22 Oct 2011 17:30

shiv wrote:
RajeshA wrote:We should keep in mind that that 1000-km motorway would be running through America-friendly or India-friendly territory policed by Balochs.

It is the Pakjabis and Pushtun who would be in hostile territory, if they want to commit insurgent acts.
darshhan wrote:But Rajeshji , for this to happen , Balochistan has to be an independent country and when that happens Pakistan will cease to exist.Hence from the point of this scenario , this thread"US strike options on TSP" becomes redundant.
Absolutely. Once Pakistan ceases to be recognized as exerting sovereignty in Baluchistan and in NWFP, the problem is partly solved. The US does not want that.

The question of will to wage war against Pakistan would remain till the last moment before they finally go ahead. No, as of now, it is premature to say, USA is willing to wage war against Pakistan.

What we are discussing here, as I see it, is "should USA be politically willing to wage war", what would be its options, what it should try to achieve, and what would be the benefits.

As Senator Carl Levin said earlier, USA should be willing to walk away from the Alliance with Pakistan if necessary. The point of discussion here is to convince the doubting Toms in USA, that there is life after an alliance with Pak, that it is easy to walk away, and should one walk away, there is indeed treasure at the end of the rainbow.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 22 Oct 2011 17:45

Bharat Rakshak is having dreams