Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot  (Read 3346 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

poondu

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,688
The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« on: February 07, 2010, 05:15:23 PM »

Azhar backs Shah Rukh on Pak players' IPL participation

Backing Bollywood star Shah Rukh Khan on the Pakistani players' participation in the Indian Premier League, cricketer-turned-politician Mohammad Azharuddin said the Twenty20 event should feature the world's best players irrespective of their nationality.

"I feel all the good players from different countries should participate in such a big tournament," Azharuddin told PTI.

"Politics and sports are two different things. Players should be left alone. All the good players should be taken in the IPL, not just the Pakistan players," added the former Indian captain, who was stuck in his hotel for an entire day due to the snowstorm in Washington.

The former batsman said having the best players would only enhance the popularity of the tournament.

Azharuddin was in Washington to attend the prestigious National Prayer Breakfast meeting, which was addressed by US President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, which was attended by people from all over the world.

"The function was good. It brings people from different countries together. Got an opportunity to meet lot of people," Azharuddin said.

"At the end of the day we are all human beings. There is no difference. We are all same," he added.

Azharuddin, who is a Congress MP, was the only Indian leader to attend the prestigious meeting being held in Washington for more than five decades now.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/Azhar-backs-Shah-Rukh-on-Pak-players-IPL-participation/H1-Article1-506243.aspx
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 06:28:53 AM by dextrous »
Logged

dextrous

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,763
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #1 on: February 07, 2010, 07:37:37 PM »

Yes, Azhar...mil baat ke khainge
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2010, 03:00:47 PM »

Quote
Politics and sports are two different things

THIS is the most annoying thing about this whole debate and makes me furious. People who say this have no idea about sports or politics or terrorism. Goddamit, WHEN they are sponsoring terrorists to attack us and kill us, HOW is that politics?

PARROTING  politics and sports are separate pretty much amounts to supporting Pakistan's stand vis-a-vis 26/11 and regarding all terror attacks on India. India has been a victim of Pak state sponsored terrorism since last 20+ yrs and to forget that fact and behave as if there is some kind of brotherly tiff between India and Pak about Kashmir is ridiculous and traitorous.
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #3 on: February 11, 2010, 10:07:56 PM »

Quote
Politics and sports are two different things

THIS is the most annoying thing about this whole debate and makes me furious. People who say this have no idea about sports or politics or terrorism. Goddamit, WHEN they are sponsoring terrorists to attack us and kill us, HOW is that politics?

PARROTING  politics and sports are separate pretty much amounts to supporting Pakistan's stand vis-a-vis 26/11 and regarding all terror attacks on India. India has been a victim of Pak state sponsored terrorism since last 20+ yrs and to forget that fact and behave as if there is some kind of brotherly tiff between India and Pak about Kashmir is ridiculous and traitorous.

Completely agree...  :icon_thumleft:
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #4 on: February 11, 2010, 10:34:22 PM »

Can you stop these terrorist attacks by stopping cricket?

Why do you think the Government of India again started talks with Pak?

You can't win this war by just fighting with each other forever, as most countries have already found out. You have to be strict with terrorists and the state sponsors of it, but at the same time be flexible with the people so that other moderate people don't turn into terrorists.
Logged

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #5 on: February 11, 2010, 11:16:03 PM »

Can you stop these terrorist attacks by stopping cricket?

Why do you think the Government of India again started talks with Pak?

You can't win this war by just fighting with each other forever, as most countries have already found out. You have to be strict with terrorists and the state sponsors of it, but at the same time be flexible with the people so that other moderate people don't turn into terrorists.

India and PAK have been playing cricket for how long now? India has allowed how many PAK artists to work and earn in India?

Now let me turn the question around. Since all of the above has been happening, have the terrorists stopped? If not, then why the above should keep on? If allowing people to people contact has not made a dent in PAK supporting terrorism, then why let it continue anymore? Just for the sake of it?

It's time India start doing things that are in IT'S best interest, not in the best interest of intellectuals. You said India has to be strict with the state that sponsors terrorism. Right? Well, PAK sponsors terrorism against India. So by your logic India will have to be strict with it.

Now explain to me how can India be strict with PAK while being flexible with the people?

Explain to me the logic that says that if India is not flexible with people of PAK, they will turn into terrorists? You said this, I didn't, so please explain.

Explain to me how long are we going to live in this constant fear that if we anger or irritate or snub people of PAK even slightly, they will turn into terrorists and attack India?

Do you think people of PAK are some sort of zombies who are just waiting eagerly for some sort of snub from India, to turn in to instant terrorists? What sort of logic is this - so that other moderate people don't turn into terrorists. I demand to know from you that if you think you are referring to so-called moderates, then by definition they should be tolerant, right? At least somewhat tolerant. If they are moderate and tolerant then how come they will suddenly flip a switch and turn terrorists?

And alternatively, if they are not so-called tolerant then they don't care about India anyways. So why the heck should we care about them?


Let me go on a rant for a while.....

It's time people realize that the only way of dealing with PAK is to crush it into submission and keep killing every single terrorist that raises it's head within or outside India. If it means killing 10 million of them then so be it. Better to kill 10 million terrorists than to let 1 innocent Indian die at their hands.

As for Indian govt starting talks with PAK, what else can you expect from them? BJP did it. Cong is doing it. Ultimately, time is being wasted. There is no point in talking to PAK. I ask, how many times have we "talked" to PAK about everything under the sun? And what has it achieved? What will these so-called talks achieve? End result of all these talks was attack on Mumbai.

If I was Indian PM, after Mumbai attacks I would have broken all relations with PAK, closed Indian embassy there, and then started taking unilateral actions against it, stopped issuing any kind of Visas to Pakis, stopped Pakis from earning in India, put police to use and asked them to find any PAK national in India and throw them out.

I say enough of this people contact *. Nothing has come out of it yet and nothing will come out of it in future. Stop wasting time on PAK and carry on with our lives. Don't have absolutely any kind of interaction with them. Don't play any sport with them. Don't have any business with them. If India has to play them in ODI world cup then forfeit the match.

Unlike Saudi Arabia, PAK does not have anything on which India is dependent on. So treat PAK like a true enemy. It's time for Indian politicians to grow some spine and start using a cannon where a needle would do. Start acting like a bigger country. Once India puts PAK in it's place, smaller irritations like Bangladesh will automatically behave themselves.

End of rant.....
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #6 on: February 11, 2010, 11:25:08 PM »

So why do you think all countries are pouring their money into Afghanistan and into Pakistan, rebuilding their country? Do you understand that America with all its weapons & power realized it can't win this war just by bombing millions of Afghans?

Moderates can become terrorists, that is easy for anybody to understand. Are you a moderate or an extremist? Didn't you express extremist views in your last post?  In other words, moderates can become terrorists. How would you kill a paki terrorist from India? Can you please help the whole world by giving us an idea about how to kill a terrorist from 100 miles? Drones? Can India or any other country except US dare to send any fighter jet over pakistan?

How stopping all of the business with Pak is going to help India? We are not dependent on pak for anything? We are dependent on pak to stop the terror. That is our biggest dependency. That is the biggest dependency of the whole world on pakistan. For that, we need to continue to maintain relationship with them, at least with moderate people in Pakistan, so that they force politicians to concentrate on developing Pakistan rather than trying to destroy India.

Did you ever hear of politicians changing their policy, if there is no public support? Pak is not that democratic yet, but the whole world has begun to force Pak to start behaving like a democratic country.

As you said, BJP did it and now congress is doing it. Why? Do you have a clue? It is not driven by the party, it is driven by foreign policy experts. No matter who is at power in Delhi, they do what these experts advise them. Do you by any chance think that you have better grip over this than those experts?

Being strict with terrorists means, stopping them from entering the country, destroying their financial network in India, destroying their support within India. Being strict with Pak means, building up the International pressure over it, building military pressure over it by continuing to acquire better military equipment, which also puts economic pressure since Pak is forced to acquire military equipment crippling their economy further. You still need to continue to talk to it so that your innocent fishermen get released and the trade will continue between people of Jammu & Kashmir and the rest of Pakistan. If you stop the trade and relationships between Jammu & Kashmir and the rest of the Pakistan, you end up losing support even in the J&K area. Do you want the J&K to boil more?

We need to talk to them and make more agreements with them, increase trade and improve relationships step by step. This issue can't be resolved by war, it has to be resolved by getting Pakistan to slowly move with a progressive view towards India than a destructive view. You need to make paksitan more dependent on us & our people. You need to establish more relations. Then you have to put a threat to Pak that you will stop these relations, if they fail to take action.

Do you know why Pak acted on some members of JUD at least? Because, threat worked. It didn't work because we stopped relationships. It worked because we stopped temporarily and we told them we will restore relationship, if they take certain steps. The prospect of reopening relationship worked. If they know that we will never reopen relationship, they wouldn't have taken any action.

If we simply made a threat saying we will reopen talks only after they killed all terrorists, nothing would have happened. Because Pak will never kill all terrorists, they think it is not in their best interest, which is wrong. The only way to resolve this issue is by making the majority of pakistan to agree to the current borders as permanent borders. We need to stop claiming PoK and they need to stop claiming J&K. The people of pakistan should stop funding these jihadi terrorists. If the terrorists don't find support from the people, they won't do it. It is in India's & world's interest to develop Pakistan, so that people over there do real jobs rather than taking part in these destructive activities. That development doesn't happen by stopping all kinds of relations with pakistan. It happens by growing trade & investing there. That is what US & other countries are doing. That is what we have to do.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 12:20:31 AM by indcric »
Logged

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2010, 12:22:00 AM »

So why do you think all countries are pouring their money into Afghanistan and into Pakistan, rebuilding their country? Do you understand that America with all its weapons & power realized it can't win this war just by bombing millions of Afghans?

Oh...America could have won the Afghan war in a jiffy had Bush allowed the war to be fought the way a war is fought. These wars are dragging so long because the ridiculous rules of engagement that US army has.

Rebuilding - Since US attacked, it is rebuilding to earn favor of common man. That's easy to understand. However, this has nothing to do with IND-PAK situation because India has not attacked PAK.


Moderates can become terrorists, that is easy for anybody to understand. Are you a moderate or an extremist? Didn't you express extremist views in your last post?  In other words, moderates can become terrorists. How would you kill a paki terrorist from India? Can you please help the whole world by giving us an idea about how to kill a terrorist from 100 miles? Drones? Can India or any other country except US dare to send any fighter jet over pakistan?

Am I an extremist? Well, will I go and attack another nation? No I won't. Will I not do it even if one of their citizen comes and kills my family? No I won't. Maybe I will join army, but I wont pick a gun and go there and kill one of theirs.

So, you tell me, am I an extremist? You should see the difference between writing and actually killing.

Now let me ask, what kind of a moderate turns into a terrorist? I will limit myself to your example. You said if people to people contact is stopped, moderate Pakis will become terrorists. So, let me ask you. What kind of a moderate are you talking about? How can a person be a moderate person and then flip a switch and turn terrorist simply because he is unable to meet Indians!!!! ???? !!!!! What kind of moderate is he? His moderation evaporates so quickly that he becomes a terrorist if he can't meet Indians? what the heck?

How would I kill Paki terrorist from India? I think drones are a good idea to have. Maybe Indian Air Force should seriously think of buying some drones and let them loose over POK to begin with.

Just wait for the day when PAK becomes useless for USA. Then you will see how easy it is to send jets over PAK and bomb terrorist hideouts. What you need is political spine.


How stopping all of the business with Pak is going to help India? We are not dependent on pak for anything? We are dependent on pak to stop the terror. That is our biggest dependency. That is the biggest dependency of the whole world on pakistan. For that, we need to continue to maintain relationship with them, at least with moderate people in Pakistan, so that they elect politicians who hold moderate views on India and concentrate on developing Pakistan rather than trying to destroy Indian cities.

Disagree. We are not dependent on PAK to stop terrorism. If you think we are, then please tell me some specific steps that we can take, that would encourage PAK to help us in stopping terrorism. It will be helpful if you can list your steps individually. That way I will be able to reply to them individually.

Can you please elaborate on how India having relations with moderate Pakis is going to urge Pakis into electing moderate politicians? I can't understand this POV. I don't think there is absolutely any PAK politician that has a favorable view of India. If you think there is, can you please name some names?

From what I have read about PAK politicians over time, I have understood that they win elections by badmouthing India, not praising India. I have not seen one PAK politician who praised India and won elections. Please name one if you know.


Did you ever hear of politicians changing their policy, if there is no public support? Pak is not that democratic yet, but the whole world has begun to force Pak to start behaving like a democratic country.

PAK behaving like a democratic country? That's news to me. I'm simply waiting for the next military coup, which might be coming soon since US want to raid NWFP and ISI and PAK army doesn't want that to happen. IMO, democratic PAK is an oxymoron.


As you said, BJP did it and now congress is doing it. Why? Do you have a clue? It is not driven by the party, it is driven by foreign policy experts. No matter who is at power in Delhi, they do what these experts advise them. Do you by any chance think that you have better grip over this than those experts?

These experts are human. I don't think they know what they are doing. If you think they know what they are doing, then show me what benefits India have got for 60 years of talks with PAK. Show me the benefits. IMO successive spineless Indian politicians have hidden behind these so-called experts. I'm not an expert, but I know that if something ain't working you need to do things differently. Talks have not yielded any benefits. So what kind of a person are you if you keep doing stuff that does not yield favorable results? My answer - spineless.


Being strict with terrorists means, stopping them from entering the country, destroying their financial network in India, destroying their support within India. Being strict with Pak means, building up the International pressure over it, building military pressure over it by continuing to acquire better military equipment, which also puts economic pressure since Pak is forced to acquire military equipment crippling their economy further.

Haven't we been doing this for last 60 years? What has it achieved? I'm not saying stop doing what you listed above. I am saying in conjunction to the above, we need to now do something that we haven't tried before, and that is start treating PAK as a real enemy.


You still need to continue to talk to it so that your innocent fishermen get released and the trade will continue between people of Jammu & Kashmir and the rest of Pakistan. If you stop the trade and relationships between Jammu & Kashmir and the rest of the Pakistan, you end up losing support even in the J&K area. Do you want the J&K to boil more?

Are Indian fisherman the only ones that are caught? If I'm not wrong, then India catches a lot of Paki fishermen too. So India doesn't need to maintain formal contact with PAK to get Indian fishermen back. It's a simple method of exchange. We will give you yours and you will give us ours. That's how it has been done till now.

Since when did J&K become bigger than the nation? Since when did J&K begin to decide our foreign policy. PAK is not the only place where J&K has trade with, is it? So, if India as a nation take a course of action with PAK, then J&K has to live with it, just like every other state will live with it!!! If J&K boils over the decision then we will have to cool the boil down!
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2010, 12:57:37 AM »

You are getting close. But need to get closer.

You said US is rebuilding Afghanistan, because they attacked them. Good. Then why is US investing in NWFP of pakistan? Because they are sending drones? No. Because they want the normal people to think that the US is interested in having good relationship with people of pakistan. Stop harbouring & funding these terrorists. Help us find these people, they are a threat to us, but they are a threat to your development as well. That is the whole idea.

This is not just about talks. Talks are just a way of fecilitating the relationship. You need to establish more relations with the neighbors, make them dependent on us through trade and human relations between people of J&K and Pak. Then the moderate people on Pakistani side will oppose terrorists, because it hurts the relationship. They advise people to stop funding & harboring terrorists. It is a chain. More people will realize it is not in their best interest to destroy India, but it is in maintaining good relationship with India.

I think you are under the view that either there will be a moderate or an extermist. It is a broad spectrum. One can be a terrorist holding a gun, another can be one who just plans for the terrorists, another can be the one who funds, another can be the one who teaches hatred, another one can be who harbors & provides shelter to them, another can be just the one who has an unfavorable view towards India and talks about it in his circle. The last one is this list is moderate. He doesn't have a favorable view towards India. But at the same time he doesn't come to India and attack. He just talks unfavorably with his friends & relatives. So, this guy can be transformed with good relationship. If he starts talking favorably and can transform a few other people, people begin to stop believing that India is evil. Then people don't believe when somebody teaches them hatred. Then people stop funding terrorists, because it doesn't help them and they realize it is bad. Then terrorists won't have funds to execute these acts. It is a long long process which might take 100 years, but it has to start somewhere. This won't happen if we stop all the relationship. This has to happen gradually and it will happen only if we establish more relations.

Do you think US is stopping India from attacking Pak? Where did you get this idea? It was stopping us in the cold war era. They are certainly advising us not to go to war. But they can't stop us. Not now. It is Pak's Nuclear weapons that are stopping us. Read some statements by our former Army chiefs.

Somehow you have a very wrong theory. Do you think the US war with terrorists will ever end? Never. It can't be won with weapons. It certainly can't be won with just attacking NWFP. It only stops it temporarily. But it won't stop it from raising again. The idea is to stop it temporarily by eliminating the current terrorists and encouraging moderates to educate and stop people from becoming terrorists.

We started having serious relations with them starting from Vajpayee. Before that we had a view that Pak is our enemy and we should deal with it only when necessary, just like what you are suggesting now. It didn't yield anything and it certainly worsened.

People are developing, people are getting educated even in pak. It is no more 70's & 80s. We are in 21st century. People are getting educated even in Paki remote areas. Slowly, they will realize what is better for them. We need to provide the atmosphere for that by continuing to have the relations.

Now, you said we should start treating it as enemy. What will happen if educated pakis also treat India as their enemy? Since Pak can't win over India by war, they will start funding these terrorists and you see, this proxy war will go on forever. Are you getting an Idea of how moderates start becoming terrorists and how treating Pak as an enemy won't work?

J&K is not bigger than India. There is a lot of muslim population through out India, not just J&K. They harbor terrorists, they fund terrorists. You need to win over them. Once you cut their relationship with other muslims over the border, they begin supporting Pak and its policies.

What if Pak thinks its fishermen can be gone away with? They are losing lot of military men & freedom fighters  ;) in their fight against India. They could obviously afford losing fishermen. But we are a democratic country, every citizen is important for us. We need to take care of every body's interest even in J&K,  because J&K is equal to UP or Gujarat. It is no bigger, but is no less.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 01:19:41 AM by indcric »
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2010, 01:24:21 AM »

You are somehow supporting this theory but not realizing it.

Let me quote you. There is no Paki politician who praises India. He badmouthes India to win elections. Why? Turn over your observation.

If there are more people who don't view India as enemy and want relations with India, then the politicians would praise India or at least not badmouth India. Correct?

So, you are in a way, supporting the theory of having more people to people relations and improving the paki common man thought process.

It is not spineless nature but it is called intelligence of thinking through the whole scenario, when you realize the following.

A small incident like sending a fighter jet over PoK will spark Pak to send its own fighter jet and attack our forward positions. It won't stop with that. Then India attacks Pak's forward positions. It will start the war. War is not controllable. It grows big, when it starts the decisions have to be taken rather fast and you don't have time to contact US or others and take decisions. It will grow bigger and bigger within no time. Pak slowly starts losing the war. Then it has only one option. Use Nuclear weapons. They have at least 100 warheads ready pointing to our cities.

Well, India might wipe out entire Pak, but in the process, most of India's biggest cities will be gone too.

Yes, there is a possibility that it might stop somewhere in the middle. It is a very small possibility, because in Pak, no body has control over military. In spite of International pressure, they might not stop war and certainly no body can force it not to use nuclear weapons.

Are you counting on the possibility that Paki military realizing the serious consequences and not using nuclear weapons? It simply has no other option to prevent India from further attacking it. Just think over it more seriously. Since India is more responsible for its citizens and India has control over its military and India thinks about its future more seriously, India will not use Nuclear weapons, even if Pak uses one weapon like US did in Hiroshima & Nagasaki. India will run to US to stop this war, not Pak in this scenario. You know who lost? India.

You might be thinking from a Kargil perspective. They certainly ran to US to stop the war, because it remained conventional war. But there is no reason to believe that it will be repeated, specially when they know that if they don't respond to a fighter jet, India & all other nations will continue to send their jets. Their only option is to respond to any such attacks to prevent more attacks.

Kargil was different. It was started by Pak and it is their fault. All India did was to push out them to the border, not attack within their country. Attacking inside Pak is totally different and it will certainly have a response.

Let us take that small possibility of the war stopping in the middle. What did you achieve? Just more hatred from Pakis. Will Pak stop its proxy war after that? It only intensifies.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 01:57:07 AM by indcric »
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #10 on: February 12, 2010, 02:15:29 AM »

indicric, all this people-people contact tamasha and sports/politics separate nonsense is missing one vital point and that is the very idea of pakistan. The very idea of pakistan is hate India and unless we strike at the root cause which breeds hatred in people of that region right from school days, there is no solution. Thinking that people-people contacts will breed more moderates or stop moderates from becoming terrorists is utter BS. For example, pak cricketers who travelled and seen the developed and who have seen the system in India and even travelled to India are still thinking ( atleast one is thinking on prime time TV) that the very nature of hindus is to hate/insult/conspire against them.

People to people contacts and other good natured methods work when there is no aritficial system breeding hatred against you. For example, it might work for US but not for India, because the very existence of pakistan depends on India hatred. The moment they stop hating India, they disintegrate. Indians since last 60+ yrs have been fools to ignore this basic fact.

Inspite of all this, I am not supporting war, because we are not strong enough for a decisive war. We need to buy time and wait and wait and when it works, strike and dismantle pak. Meanwhile, do whatever we can to keep them engaged by cultivating elements which weaken the pak systems and idea of pak, element like balochis, sindhs, mohajirs etc.
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #11 on: February 12, 2010, 04:46:01 AM »

Indcric --

Quote
You said US is rebuilding Afghanistan, because they attacked them. Good. Then why is US investing in NWFP of pakistan? Because they are sending drones? No. Because they want the normal people to think that the US is interested in having good relationship with people of pakistan. Stop harbouring & funding these terrorists. Help us find these people, they are a threat to us, but they are a threat to your development as well. That is the whole idea.

Wow... this is news to me. Can you provide links to support this claim? I haven't heard of any US investment in NWFP.


Quote
This is not just about talks. Talks are just a way of fecilitating the relationship. You need to establish more relations with the neighbors, make them dependent on us through trade and human relations between people of J&K and Pak. Then the moderate people on Pakistani side will oppose terrorists, because it hurts the relationship. They advise people to stop funding & harboring terrorists. It is a chain. More people will realize it is not in their best interest to destroy India, but it is in maintaining good relationship with India.

You think the ruling class (politicians and army) in PAK will allow PAK citizenry to become dependent on India? That's utopian thought at best. If making PAK citizenry dependent on India was as easy as you make it sound, don't you think some politician or so-called foreign experts would have thought of it by now? Just asking...


Quote
I think you are under the view that either there will be a moderate or an extermist. It is a broad spectrum. One can be a terrorist holding a gun, another can be one who just plans for the terrorists, another can be the one who funds, another can be the one who teaches hatred, another one can be who harbors & provides shelter to them, another can be just the one who has an unfavorable view towards India and talks about it in his circle. The last one is this list is moderate. He doesn't have a favorable view towards India. But at the same time he doesn't come to India and attack. He just talks unfavorably with his friends & relatives. So, this guy can be transformed with good relationship. If he starts talking favorably and can transform a few other people, people begin to stop believing that India is evil. Then people don't believe when somebody teaches them hatred. Then people stop funding terrorists, because it doesn't help them and they realize it is bad. Then terrorists won't have funds to execute these acts. It is a long long process which might take 100 years, but it has to start somewhere. This won't happen if we stop all the relationship. This has to happen gradually and it will happen only if we establish more relations.

Okay... so a moderate can lean toward making plans for terrorists. Fine, you are talking about probably 0.01% of Pakis. Now let me ask you the question again, a question you haven't answered yet, - India has been having so-called people to people contact for last so many years, what has that resulted in? My answer - Mumbai attacks. That's the problem you are unwilling to even acknowledge. The problem that India has been having these contact with PAK since forever and it has not resulted in one single Paki having a favorable view of India. If it has, then please tell me which Paki was converted to India-loving Paki through these contact. What I'm saying is that this contact business is useless... it has been proven useless beyond any doubt, so what bother carrying it on?


Quote
Do you think US is stopping India from attacking Pak? Where did you get this idea? It was stopping us in the cold war era. They are certainly advising us not to go to war. But they can't stop us. Not now. It is Pak's Nuclear weapons that are stopping us. Read some statements by our former Army chiefs.

What? Where did I say US was stopping India? I am saying Indian politicians are so spineless that they can't even treat an enemy as an enemy.


Quote
Somehow you have a very wrong theory. Do you think the US war with terrorists will ever end? Never. It can't be won with weapons. It certainly can't be won with just attacking NWFP. It only stops it temporarily. But it won't stop it from raising again. The idea is to stop it temporarily by eliminating the current terrorists and encouraging moderates to educate and stop people from becoming terrorists.

The war will end when one side dies completely. Either muslim terrorists will die or the other side (whoever it may be). That's my vision.


Quote
We started having serious relations with them starting from Vajpayee. Before that we had a view that Pak is our enemy and we should deal with it only when necessary, just like what you are suggesting now. It didn't yield anything and it certainly worsened.

 ;D ;D ;D  And what did serious relations under Vajpayee achieve? Seriously? My answer - Mumbai attacks. All the relations that Vajpayee tried to foster resulted in Kargill attack and Mumbai attacks.

So I get back to what I have been asking for so long -- What has been the net result of India trying to appease PAK and Pakis? Has India gained anything by such efforts? If the answer to both questions in NO then I demand to know what should we keep carrying on a failed policy? Why? Why keep doing the same thing over and over again when by doing that you have gotten screwed over and over again? Why?


Quote
Now, you said we should start treating it as enemy. What will happen if educated pakis also treat India as their enemy? Since Pak can't win over India by war, they will start funding these terrorists and you see, this proxy war will go on forever. Are you getting an Idea of how moderates start becoming terrorists and how treating Pak as an enemy won't work?

Ummm..... Isn't that happening every day anyways? Isn't PAK funding terrorists everyday? So what's new? All that you want India to do with PAK is being done, and has been done for many many years. And after doing all that, the end result is that what you fear will happen if India doesn't do what you say, is happening anyways. So why bother with these old failed ideas?


Quote
J&K is not bigger than India. There is a lot of muslim population through out India, not just J&K. They harbor terrorists, they fund terrorists. You need to win over them. Once you cut their relationship with other muslims over the border, they begin supporting Pak and its policies.

Excuse you... it is this very mentality that hurts India - that you have to win over those Indiam muslims who harbor terrorists and fund them. NO NO NO. We don't need to win them over. We need to find them and throw them in jail for life. We need to make examples out of them so that others think a million times before thinking of hurting India. IMO that's what we need to do.


Quote
What if Pak thinks its fishermen can be gone away with? They are losing lot of military men & freedom fighters  ;) in their fight against India. They could obviously afford losing fishermen. But we are a democratic country, every citizen is important for us. We need to take care of every body's interest even in J&K,  because J&K is equal to UP or Gujarat. It is no bigger, but is no less.

I dare PAK to do away with their captured fishermen. I can guarantee you that PAK public will turn against PAK politicians and army if they even think of hurting the public this directly. This will never ever happen IMO.


Quote
Let me quote you. There is no Paki politician who praises India. He badmouthes India to win elections. Why? Turn over your observation.

If there are more people who don't view India as enemy and want relations with India, then the politicians would praise India or at least not badmouth India. Correct?

So, you are in a way, supporting the theory of having more people to people relations and improving the paki common man thought process.

It is not spineless nature but it is called intelligence of thinking through the whole scenario, when you realize the following.

Again, excuse you... I will repeat myself again... Show me one single Paki who was converted to India loving Paki through these contact. My answer - NONE. Since there are no India loving Pakis, you will never ever have a politican voted to power who is India loving. Okay, let me not say India loving but say having favorable view of India.

I submit that in order to win an election in PAK, the first step for any Paki politician is to run down India and everything Indian. That's why they do. Think... why do they do that? Because that's what people of PAK buy. Think... why do people of PAK buy that? Because they don't like India.

Now before you say "since people of PAK don't like India, we should have more people to people contact so they start liking us"... I will say that we have been having these contact since forever and inspite of all such contacts, people of PAK still dislike us. So why bother having these contact anymore? They are useless.


Quote
It is not spineless nature but it is called intelligence of thinking through the whole scenario, when you realize the following.

A small incident like sending a fighter jet over PoK will spark Pak to send its own fighter jet and attack our forward positions. It won't stop with that. Then India attacks Pak's forward positions. It will start the war. War is not controllable. It grows big, when it starts the decisions have to be taken rather fast and you don't have time to contact US or others and take decisions. It will grow bigger and bigger within no time. Pak slowly starts losing the war. Then it has only one option. Use Nuclear weapons. They have at least 100 warheads ready pointing to our cities.

It would be called "intelligence of thinking" if it yielded favorable result. Unfortunately for India, it hasn't. And since it has been tried innumerable times with the exact same failed results, it can no longer be called "intelligence of thinking". It can only be called being spineless.

Yes, war is uncontrollable. That's the beauty of war (it sounds harsh, doesn't it?). When a war happens, every involved nation tries to use it to achieve whatever it wants to achieve. For example, Indian army wanted to use Kargill war as an excuse to damage PAK's terrorism supporting capabilities by going beyond LOC but spineless Vajpayee stopped them. Too bad for India, we are picking the fruits of that well intentioned decision today in Mumbai.


As for PAK using nukes on India... again it is an imagination of a fertile mind. PAK army generals like to keep themselves alive a lot more that what you may think. They know that if they nuke India, India will nuke PAK. Now, Indian politicians may survive the nuke attack, but no one in PAK will survive. Not even those generals. And as I said... these generals like to keep themselves alive.....
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #12 on: February 12, 2010, 07:03:58 PM »

Here is the link. There are more plans as well. Just google "US investement in NWFP". I actually read about these in mainstream US media like CNN, FOX News and NYTimes, but I don't have the link for them now.

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/south-asia/ambitious-15-year-anti-terror-us-plan-for-fata-nwfp-revealed_1009975.html

At least, I expect this to help you get to know the US strategy of winning the war on terror on a permanent basis.

Well, I need to respond to Flute's thoughts on why it works for US and why it won't work for India. I will do that in a separate post.

I guess you are still viewing the whole situation from a very narrow angle. What do you mean by Pak citizens becoming dependent on India? I mean do you think they will depend on us for their survival? I just meant trade & human relations. That is more than enough. Pak is dependent on us for water as well. Is the Paki ruling class stopping the trade & human relations? When and How? The experts already thought of it and the relations are improving, more trade is happening. More railway lines, more buses etc. You need to read the Indo-pak relationship history.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_relations#Developments_since_2004

Though my understanding of this issue is more based on the news I have been following, I can not find all those links now. The situation is improving. More relations are being established. At least, Pak is being forced to act upon some terrorist leaders and curb some training activity as opposed to the earlier situation.

I hope you get a grip of the solution you are offering, of war and forcing a resolution on Pak. That didn't work. Check "Simla Agreement". Pakistan now says they don't agree to Simla Agreement. The only way for us to force a resolution is to win Pakistan in the war and make Pakistan our client state & rule Pakistan like the British ruled India by appointing a Governor General. Do you think it is possible with all these nuclear weapons?

You didn't give me an idea of how you will kill only the terrorists and not the common people. What do you mean by other side dying? The whole of Pakistan? or you dreaming? Most of India will also be gone in that case. What a vision? I am lucky that the foreign policy experts don't have this vision. Think about people who need to live in India. Which sane person can have this vision? Most of India's biggest cities will be gone in this scenario with crores of lives lost and India goes backwards by at least 200 years. Compare that to a terror attack once every year, with 200 lives lost. Compare crores with hundreds and get an Idea. No, I am not saying I am OK with one terror attack every year. It has to stop completely. But the lesser is always better than complete ruin.

Foreign experts of India are not that naive and Indian leaders are not spineless. RAW is not spineless. They are doing their best job. There were retaliatory terror attacks on Pakistan soil after Mumbai attacks, though India will never agree that RAW planned them & provided funding. Well, no body can provide you the proof. But there is talk at least some talk of this in the media. It is not just pak accusing it. But former Indian intelligence officials advising it. Again I can't provide you the links. You need to read at least "rediff" on a regular basis.

So, we are not just sitting idle proposing only "Shanti Shanti Shanti". We are giving them a taste of their own medicine along with proposing the other more peaceful approach.

You seem to have no clue of what is happening on the ground in J&K since 2004 and whether the terror attacks in that area have reduced etc. Yes, there were Mumbai Attacks. I did never say Pak totally stopped supporting terror. I only said the relations are improving, there is an improvement in situation on ground in J&K. You need to read news more often. I can't provide all the links for you. At least read rediff on a regular basis for news and quotes from Indian military officials & analsis by former army men or intelligence officials.

US went to Afghanistan. Did they stop all the attacks? Were the terror attempts not there, although they were not successful? The success of US in foiling attacks is more due to their own intelligence efforts & security measures. We have to do the same, we can never eliminate the attempts fully. There will be attempts. Indian security measures have to improve to foil them.

You keep saying it has been happening on since 60 years. NO. It was not happening for 60 years. It only started seriously since 2004. Read news, read analysis. Our political leaders' mentality earlier to 2004 was exactly what you are proposing now, that we can resolve this situation with force. Indira *hi tried that with Simla Agreement. Nothing happened with that. Only solution is "Colonial Rule by India on Pakistan". Tell me whether it is possible.

How can I show you one single paki who has a favorable view on India? Did  you ever talk to any paki? I lived with a paki roommate in US for 6 months and I share a cubicle with one in my office. Can you come to my office right now?

You are really thinking far far away from the real situation on ground, either w.r.t war or w.r.t intelligence and law enforcement. For the muslims in India, get closer to reality. Is it possible to identify each and every muslim who supports terrorists? When you can't identify, how can you put all of them in jail? I am not saying we should not touch them and rather appease them through reservations etc. NO. I am only saying it is not possible to identify each & every one and put in jail. But don't annoy them unnecessarily.



Finally, you don't need to excuse me. You need to excuse yourself for not reading news, not knowing the exact situation and for proposing an idea that could cause the destruction of most of the Indian cities.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 07:50:40 PM by indcric »
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #13 on: February 12, 2010, 07:20:55 PM »

The very idea of pakistan is hate India and unless we strike at the root cause which breeds hatred in people of that region right from school days, there is no solution.

Can you have a direct access to the schools? Can you influence every single person or every single paki 10 year old? The only possible thing is to influence them through having relations.

Quote
For example, pak cricketers who travelled and seen the developed and who have seen the system in India and even travelled to India are still thinking ( atleast one is thinking on prime time TV) that the very nature of hindus is to hate/insult/conspire against them.
Who was this player? Afridi? Think Wasim Akram. If we can start influencing at least some people, that is a good beginning.

Quote
People to people contacts and other good natured methods work when there is no aritficial system breeding hatred against you. For example, it might work for US but not for India, because the very existence of pakistan depends on India hatred. The moment they stop hating India, they disintegrate. Indians since last 60+ yrs have been fools to ignore this basic fact.

No. Pakistan's existence doesn't depend on hating India. Some politician's existence might. Some military officials' promotions might. But not the people's existence.

Indeed those are fools who think that some body can prosper by destroying others and fools are the those who buy that idea on the Indian side. This kind of hatred on both sides will only lead to destruction not prosperity.

Quote
Inspite of all this, I am not supporting war, because we are not strong enough for a decisive war.

Good. At least you realize the consequnces of war, while Ruchir has no clue.

Quote
Meanwhile, do whatever we can to keep them engaged by cultivating elements which weaken the pak systems and idea of pak, element like balochis, sindhs, mohajirs etc.
Isn't RAW doing exactly this?
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 07:23:25 PM by indcric »
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #14 on: February 12, 2010, 08:14:45 PM »

Quote
No. Pakistan's existence doesn't depend on hating India. Some politician's existence might. Some military officials' promotions might. But not the people's existence.

Indeed those are fools who think that some body can prosper by destroying others and fools are the those who buy that idea on the Indian side. This kind of hatred on both sides will only lead to destruction not prosperity.
you are confusing existence of people in a region with the idea of an entity called country.

The idea of pakistan had roots in communal divide and hatred and it had roots in the thinking that hindus cannot rule over muslims ( former rulers). A large portion of people in that region bought into that idea and after partition the resultant instituions, systems and education sytem solidified and furthered this hatred/communal thinking among their people. To even attempt to change/influence these people based on people-people contacts or relations is foolish and counter productive. It will never work. 60+ yrs of multiple attempts at reconciliation are the evidence that it will not work.

Please do not assume that my advocacy of pak disintegration is equivalent to their destruction. In fact pak can be disintegrated without much loss of life, they are in fact doing it themselves. Pak disintegration is nothing but defeat for communal thinking behind its creation.

I am also not against all contact, we should maintain relations and contacts where it helps us and refrain from engagement where it helps pak.



Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #15 on: February 12, 2010, 08:21:39 PM »

Quote
No. Pakistan's existence doesn't depend on hating India. Some politician's existence might. Some military officials' promotions might. But not the people's existence.

Indeed those are fools who think that some body can prosper by destroying others and fools are the those who buy that idea on the Indian side. This kind of hatred on both sides will only lead to destruction not prosperity.
you are confusing existence of people in a region with the idea of an entity called country.

The idea of pakistan had roots in communal divide and hatred and it had roots in the thinking that hindus cannot rule over muslims ( former rulers). A large portion of people in that region bought into that idea and after partition the resultant instituions, systems and education sytem solidified and furthered this hatred/communal thinking among their people. To even attempt to change/influence these people based on people-people contacts or relations is foolish and counter productive. It will never work. 60+ yrs of multiple attempts at reconciliation are the evidence that it will not work.

Please do not assume that my advocacy of pak disintegration is equivalent to their destruction. In fact pak can be disintegrated without much loss of life, they are in fact doing it themselves. Pak disintegration is nothing but defeat for communal thinking behind its creation.

I am also not against all contact, we should maintain relations and contacts where it helps us and refrain from engagement where it helps pak.

We have to come out of this thinking of Muslims hate Hindus stuff. Not all Muslims hate Hindus. Not even all pakis hate Indian hindus. That is not reality.

But at the same time we can't deny what is happening in Pakistani Madrassas. But we are helpless, as we don't have a direct control over those Madrassas. Sorry, but we can't even bomb them. That is the reality.

If you closely observe what India is doing to counter what pak is doing, you can see this:

India is not acting "*hi". India is only acting as "*hi" in public, but in private RAW is retaliating ISI techniques with planning & funding attacks on pak soil.

This is the most practical and least destructive way of countering terror, because a full scale war will destroy most of India.

NO. We didn't try these methods for the last 60 years. Nehru tried the most foolish thing of going to UN. Indira tried the Simla Agreement and division of Pakistan.

The new method is different, it is not spineless. It is working as atleast what we are seeing on ground in J&K. Situation has changed all over the world. US is realizing what Pak is upto. Terror attacks increased on pak soil too. So the whole dynamic has changed. We need to read more news and analyze to get a better grip on the current situation.
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 08:30:59 PM by indcric »
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #16 on: February 12, 2010, 08:32:46 PM »

Quote
No. Pakistan's existence doesn't depend on hating India. Some politician's existence might. Some military officials' promotions might. But not the people's existence.

Indeed those are fools who think that some body can prosper by destroying others and fools are the those who buy that idea on the Indian side. This kind of hatred on both sides will only lead to destruction not prosperity.
you are confusing existence of people in a region with the idea of an entity called country.

The idea of pakistan had roots in communal divide and hatred and it had roots in the thinking that hindus cannot rule over muslims ( former rulers). A large portion of people in that region bought into that idea and after partition the resultant instituions, systems and education sytem solidified and furthered this hatred/communal thinking among their people. To even attempt to change/influence these people based on people-people contacts or relations is foolish and counter productive. It will never work. 60+ yrs of multiple attempts at reconciliation are the evidence that it will not work.

Please do not assume that my advocacy of pak disintegration is equivalent to their destruction. In fact pak can be disintegrated without much loss of life, they are in fact doing it themselves. Pak disintegration is nothing but defeat for communal thinking behind its creation.

I am also not against all contact, we should maintain relations and contacts where it helps us and refrain from engagement where it helps pak.

If you closely observe what India is doing to counter what pak is doing, you can see this:

India is not acting "*hi". India is only acting as "*hi" in public, but in private RAW is retaliating ISI techniques with planning & funding attacks on pak soil.

This is the most practical and least destructive way of countering terror, because a full scale war will destroy most of India.

NO. We didn't try these methods for the last 60 years. Nehru tried the most foolish thing of going to UN. Indira tried the Simla Agreement and division of Pakistan.

The new method is different, it is not spineless. It is working as atleast what we are seeing on ground in J&K. Situation has changed all over the world. US is realizing what Pak is upto. Terror attacks increased on pak soil too. So the whole dynamic has changed. We need to read more news and analyze to get a better grip on the current situation.
indcric babu, I read whole lot of news...I even read lesser known publications from retired intelligence heads etc., so far I am yet to come up with any indication that we in fact retaliating.

Even if they are retaliating and if RAW is involved in those bomb attacks in pak, I did be extremely ashamed of it. killing innocents in karachi as retaliation for mumbai is BS and will make us no different from pak. We should not be doing it and I gladly I don't think we are doing it. I can support moral support for balochis and mohajirs, but not for killing random people on the street.

do you have any links which supports your theory that RAW is doing some such thing? By a lot of accounts RAW/IB are in shambles from IK gujral time, our MMS is further pressing it into ground which everybody thought already hit rock bottom.
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #17 on: February 12, 2010, 08:38:58 PM »

Quote
No. Pakistan's existence doesn't depend on hating India. Some politician's existence might. Some military officials' promotions might. But not the people's existence.

Indeed those are fools who think that some body can prosper by destroying others and fools are the those who buy that idea on the Indian side. This kind of hatred on both sides will only lead to destruction not prosperity.
you are confusing existence of people in a region with the idea of an entity called country.

The idea of pakistan had roots in communal divide and hatred and it had roots in the thinking that hindus cannot rule over muslims ( former rulers). A large portion of people in that region bought into that idea and after partition the resultant instituions, systems and education sytem solidified and furthered this hatred/communal thinking among their people. To even attempt to change/influence these people based on people-people contacts or relations is foolish and counter productive. It will never work. 60+ yrs of multiple attempts at reconciliation are the evidence that it will not work.

Please do not assume that my advocacy of pak disintegration is equivalent to their destruction. In fact pak can be disintegrated without much loss of life, they are in fact doing it themselves. Pak disintegration is nothing but defeat for communal thinking behind its creation.

I am also not against all contact, we should maintain relations and contacts where it helps us and refrain from engagement where it helps pak.

We have to come out of this thinking of Muslims hate Hindus stuff. Not all Muslims hate Hindus. Not even all pakis hate Indian hindus. That is not reality.

But at the same time we can't deny what is happening in Pakistani Madrassas. But we are helpless, as we don't have a direct control over those Madrassas. Sorry, but we can't even bomb them. That is the reality.

If you closely observe what India is doing to counter what pak is doing, you can see this:

India is not acting "*hi". India is only acting as "*hi" in public, but in private RAW is retaliating ISI techniques with planning & funding attacks on pak soil.

This is the most practical and least destructive way of countering terror, because a full scale war will destroy most of India.

NO. We didn't try these methods for the last 60 years. Nehru tried the most foolish thing of going to UN. Indira tried the Simla Agreement and division of Pakistan.

The new method is different, it is not spineless. It is working as atleast what we are seeing on ground in J&K. Situation has changed all over the world. US is realizing what Pak is upto. Terror attacks increased on pak soil too. So the whole dynamic has changed. We need to read more news and analyze to get a better grip on the current situation.
also, please don't put words into my mouth. we are not talking muslims Vs hindus here, we are talking about pakis hating indians.  Pak is a closed soceity and hatred is filled into their heads even in normal schools, not even madrassas and also distorted history is taught to them to support idea of pakistan.
Please don't use not all pakis hate type of logic. A predominant number of them view india with hatred and want its destruction. if you are not able to recognize this fact, then you are in denial. Not all hate type of logic applies when we are talking about a single individual, then we need to give him the benefit of doubt in our personal interactions until he proves otherwise.

Not all hate applies also if I am advocating hatred in response to their hatred. I am talking about rooting out the source of that hatred, rooting out the institutions, systems,ideas which breed this hatred. Until we think of that, we did still be in same situation even 50yrs from now

Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #18 on: February 12, 2010, 08:46:50 PM »

Quote
I am talking about rooting out the source of that hatred, rooting out the institutions, systems,ideas which breed this hatred.

How do you do this? By bombing those institutions? Can you offer one practical solution?
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 09:25:22 PM by indcric »
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #19 on: February 12, 2010, 09:37:17 PM »

Quote
I am talking about rooting out the source of that hatred, rooting out the institutions, systems,ideas which breed this hatred.

How do you do this? By bombing those institutions? Can you offer one practical solution?
by disintegrating pak..by dividing pak..by releasing as many areas as possible from pak...no afghanistan is no longer under pak, tomorrow balochistan , sindh, POK etc.

you keep repeating Indira's division did not work, but I think you are completely ignorant of the great many benefits we accrued from bangladhesh creation, atleast we don't have 2 paks on both sides. Bangladesh is much more friendly towards today than pak. same goes with NWFP, balochistan etc.
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #20 on: February 12, 2010, 09:47:38 PM »

Quote
I am talking about rooting out the source of that hatred, rooting out the institutions, systems,ideas which breed this hatred.

How do you do this? By bombing those institutions? Can you offer one practical solution?
by disintegrating pak..by dividing pak..by releasing as many areas as possible from pak...no afghanistan is no longer under pak, tomorrow balochistan , sindh, POK etc.

How do you divide pak, without war?

you keep repeating Indira's division did not work, but I think you are completely ignorant of the great many benefits we accrued from bangladhesh creation, atleast we don't have 2 paks on both sides. Bangladesh is much more friendly towards today than pak. same goes with NWFP, balochistan etc.
I don't know whether you are aware or not, but lot many terrorists get trained in BD & enter through BD. Little better than Pak in that the military or intelligence not guiding them, but what was the cost of that war (in terms of soldiers lost and in terms of money spent)?
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 09:50:56 PM by indcric »
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #21 on: February 12, 2010, 09:57:16 PM »

Quote
How do you divide pak, without war?
I am not ruling out war but not today, not in near future, until we are in a much much stronger position. We definitely be in a position to deliver a huge jhapad without nuclear escalation in sometime. meanwhile, what pak is doing today is not sustainable for very long, it will go towards disintegration over a period of time and we help it along. We can fund divisive forces, we can fund intensive RAW presence in pak to attack terror infrastructure in their land.



Quote
I don't know whether you are aware or not, but lot many terrorists get trained in BD & enter through BD.
if you think bangladesh is as much as threat as pak today and if you think state sponsored anti-India activity is more in bang compared to pak, you are living in a different planet. With a friendly regime in bang, we are in fact in a much stronger position today.
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #22 on: February 12, 2010, 10:06:18 PM »

We can fund divisive forces

We are doing that already.
, we can fund intensive RAW presence in pak to attack terror infrastructure in their land.
I think this is quite a difficult task and we lose great RAW officers, without achieving much. RAW's main role is to act passively. They can't take an active role without  loss of their life.

Moreover even if it is possible and say a few RAW officers destroy a training center and in the process lose their lives, it is much easier to recruit terrorists than recruiting effective RAW officers who can enter & attack inside pak. So, it would be very ineffective and will become progressively difficult.

if you think bangladesh is as much as threat as pak today and if you think state sponsored anti-India activity is more in bang compared to pak, you are living in a different planet. With a friendly regime in bang, we are in fact in a much stronger position today.
We are in a better position for sure, there is no paki military on the east. But terror attacks have not subsided, terrorists continue to get trained & enter through BD. Moreover, war is not possible now, not until we successfully test a foolproof missile defense systesm, which we are actively developing (another proof that the Indian experts are not spineless and are actively thinking and acting).
« Last Edit: February 12, 2010, 10:28:52 PM by indcric »
Logged

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #23 on: February 12, 2010, 10:53:07 PM »

Here is the link. There are more plans as well. Just google "US investement in NWFP". I actually read about these in mainstream US media like CNN, FOX News and NYTimes, but I don't have the link for them now.

http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/south-asia/ambitious-15-year-anti-terror-us-plan-for-fata-nwfp-revealed_1009975.html

At least, I expect this to help you get to know the US strategy of winning the war on terror on a permanent basis.

Are you for real? The article you put here has more stuff on what US is supposedly REFUSING to fund, rather than what is has supposedly agree to fund.

And how come you were not able to find a US news web site for this effort, if this entire thing is true? I am surprised that US is doing this major work in PAK and not even one single news organization is publicizing it!?


I guess you are still viewing the whole situation from a very narrow angle. What do you mean by Pak citizens becoming dependent on India? I mean do you think they will depend on us for their survival? I just meant trade & human relations. That is more than enough. Pak is dependent on us for water as well. Is the Paki ruling class stopping the trade & human relations? When and How? The experts already thought of it and the relations are improving, more trade is happening. More railway lines, more buses etc. You need to read the Indo-pak relationship history.

And how is all this trade business helping India in curbing terrorism? To me, the ultimate goal is that PAK support for terrorism in India should stop. Explain to me that if this trade business is improving between India and PAK then how come terrorism is also increasing? Do you have an answer for that? If you think that these relations will help in pushing PAK to stop their support for terrorists against India, then why haven't they stopped their support yet? What more are they waiting for? Huh? Is this some sort of a blackmail they are doing? That if you don't have trade relations with us we will support terrorism? Is that what it is? If it isn't then explain to me why is terrorism increasing in India when according to you relations with PAK are improving?

To me, the end game is always stopping terrorism. All efforts should be concentrated to that end only.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-Pakistani_relations#Developments_since_2004

Though my understanding of this issue is more based on the news I have been following, I can not find all those links now. The situation is improving. More relations are being established. At least, Pak is being forced to act upon some terrorist leaders and curb some training activity as opposed to the earlier situation.

And what is the end result of all this force on PAK? Mumbai attacks? Train bombs? Is that what the result is?


I hope you get a grip of the solution you are offering, of war and forcing a resolution on Pak. That didn't work. Check "Simla Agreement". Pakistan now says they don't agree to Simla Agreement. The only way for us to force a resolution is to win Pakistan in the war and make Pakistan our client state & rule Pakistan like the British ruled India by appointing a Governor General. Do you think it is possible with all these nuclear weapons?

Are you living in utopia, my friend? Make PAK our client state? Client for what, exactly?


You didn't give me an idea of how you will kill only the terrorists and not the common people. What do you mean by other side dying? The whole of Pakistan? or you dreaming? Most of India will also be gone in that case. What a vision? I am lucky that the foreign policy experts don't have this vision. Think about people who need to live in India. Which sane person can have this vision? Most of India's biggest cities will be gone in this scenario with crores of lives lost and India goes backwards by at least 200 years. Compare that to a terror attack once every year, with 200 lives lost. Compare crores with hundreds and get an Idea. No, I am not saying I am OK with one terror attack every year. It has to stop completely. But the lesser is always better than complete ruin.

I am more worried about common man of India, not common man of PAK. If common man of PAK dies in an attack on terrorists hiding there, then that's collateral damage. I would be least worried about it. And I would also not worry about how many new terrorists this collateral damage creates, 'cause my vision is to kill all terrorists by all means possible. I will quote John Travolta from Swordfish "Make begin a terrorist so difficult for the terrorist that he thinks a thousand times before carrying out his next plot".

By "the other side" I don't mean PAK. I mean, us, India, USA, whoever is fighting muslim terrorists. It's either us or them. My vision is that nuclear war will never happen. PAK generals are too chicken to kill themselves in an Indian nuke attack. I explained that already. PAK generals don't want to die. They know for sure that an Indian retaliation of PAK nuke attack will surely kill them. So there won't be a nuclear war. It's time we called their bluff.

But the lesser is always better than complete ruin -- This is the mentality that always results in terror attacks in India. This is what I call being spineless. Less is better than complete ruin. I'm saying there won't be a complete ruin to begin with, so why worry about it? PAK generals are not fools to start a nuke war with India.


Foreign experts of India are not that naive and Indian leaders are not spineless. RAW is not spineless. They are doing their best job. There were retaliatory terror attacks on Pakistan soil after Mumbai attacks, though India will never agree that RAW planned them & provided funding. Well, no body can provide you the proof. But there is talk at least some talk of this in the media. It is not just pak accusing it. But former Indian intelligence officials advising it. Again I can't provide you the links. You need to read at least "rediff" on a regular basis.

So, we are not just sitting idle proposing only "Shanti Shanti Shanti". We are giving them a taste of their own medicine along with proposing the other more peaceful approach.

Hmmmmm.... more fantasy? On one hand you say you can not prove that attacks in PAK are planned by RAW, and then you want me to believe that it is RAW who is planning them?  ;D ;D ;D  Really? If you want to believe it, then be my guest.

And I do read Rediff.


You seem to have no clue of what is happening on the ground in J&K since 2004 and whether the terror attacks in that area have reduced etc. Yes, there were Mumbai Attacks. I did never say Pak totally stopped supporting terror. I only said the relations are improving, there is an improvement in situation on ground in J&K. You need to read news more often. I can't provide all the links for you. At least read rediff on a regular basis for news and quotes from Indian military officials & analsis by former army men or intelligence officials.

So, relations with PAK are improving, terror attacks in J&K have reduced and terror attacks in rest of India have increased. This is a fact, I'm not making this up. Terror attacks outside of J&K have increased over the years. And as you said, relations with PAK have also improved.

So I am seeing a direct correlation between improved relations with PAK and increased terror attacks in India. And you are saying improved relations with PAK is a good thing? How exactly?


US went to Afghanistan. Did they stop all the attacks? Were the terror attempts not there, although they were not successful? The success of US in foiling attacks is more due to their own intelligence efforts & security measures. We have to do the same, we can never eliminate the attempts fully. There will be attempts. Indian security measures have to improve to foil them.

Sir, it is basic military fact. No terror attack happened in US because it started a war in Afghanistan and terrorists were pulled there, fighting US army. Also, in Afghanistan US captured many terrorists who gave intel which stopped many attacks in US. Had US not gone to war in Afghanistan, terrorists would have kept up their efforts in attacking US soil and US would also have not gotten the precious intel that it did from captured terrorists.


You keep saying it has been happening on since 60 years. NO. It was not happening for 60 years. It only started seriously since 2004. Read news, read analysis. Our political leaders' mentality earlier to 2004 was exactly what you are proposing now, that we can resolve this situation with force. Indira *hi tried that with Simla Agreement. Nothing happened with that. Only solution is "Colonial Rule by India on Pakistan". Tell me whether it is possible.

Sire.... talks with PAK have been happening since Rajiv *hi days and even before. I read enough news. This parroting from you that real talks started only in 2004 is nothing but humbug.

By the way, if serious talks started in 2004 and we had Mumbai attack then what does it say about the seriousness of these talk? They are nothing but rubbish IMO. Mumbai attack proves my point.


How can I show you one single paki who has a favorable view on India? Did  you ever talk to any paki? I lived with a paki roommate in US for 6 months and I share a cubicle with one in my office. Can you come to my office right now?

No, and it does not matter. You cross your heart and tell me honestly, does the Paki sharing your cubicle have a favorable view of India?


You are really thinking far far away from the real situation on ground, either w.r.t war or w.r.t intelligence and law enforcement. For the muslims in India, get closer to reality. Is it possible to identify each and every muslim who supports terrorists? When you can't identify, how can you put all of them in jail? I am not saying we should not touch them and rather appease them through reservations etc. NO. I am only saying it is not possible to identify each & every one and put in jail. But don't annoy them unnecessarily.

You seem to be very worried about muslims getting annoyed. Are you as much worried about hindus getting killed? I am saying when you find a muslim supporting terrorism, throw him in jail without worrying whether that will annoy muslims or not. That's what I'm saying.
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #24 on: February 12, 2010, 11:55:55 PM »

Did you read my post fully? I saw it in CNN, Fox News & NYT too. Only thing is the links cannot be obtained now.

Meanwhile, check this reuters link.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6103AW20100201

Read the portion about $7.5 billion non-military aid.

Read the above in combination with the last para of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_%E2%80%93_United_States_relations

Then you will figure that these $7.5 billion is related to strategically important regions.

Who cares what you think? Rediff quoted army chief saying the war is not possible because of Pak's nuclear weapons. It doesn't look like you even read rediff.

You keep harping about Mumbai attack, but don't seem to pay any attention to my questions. We fought 3 wars, did it change the pak policy? What is wrong with having relations? Does it harm anything?

The result of relations is: improvement in ground situation in J&K and support for Indian troops from common people of J&K.

You are living in Utopia, that war would solve some issue. 3 wars didn't do much to improving anything.

Excusing your ignorance. RAW is actively funding & planning. No official agrees that and there would be no proof.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KA21Df02.html

Search for the word "covert" in this page.

Again excusing your ignorance. The intelligence mostly came from terrorists captured by Pak in Pak, not from those in Afghanistan. Real terrorists vacated Afghan long back in 2001.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 12:02:06 AM by indcric »
Logged

inoc

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,707
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #25 on: February 13, 2010, 03:21:27 AM »

Fascinating discussion

Quote
Sir, it is basic military fact. No terror attack happened in US because it started a war in Afghanistan and terrorists were pulled there, fighting US army.

I am picking one of Ruchirs statements to get my opinion across.

This is what a lot of people are saying, to suggest, that terrorism has been reduced/eliminated in the US and the ‘war on terror’ is responsible for that.

The terrorists pulled back into Afghan killed 1500 since the war started. Mostly in terrorist type bomb blasts and not head to head military conflict.
 
Half that of 9/11.

Hugely more than those killed in terrorist attacks in the last hundred years in the US, bar 9/11.

Oklahoma had less than 200 dead. 9/11 was far worse than anybody ever thought it could be including Osama.

The Afghani terrorists didn’t need to go to USA to kill anymore, they had a readymade population of 30000 US citizens to choose from at their doorstep.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not advocating against the war, only, pointing out the fallacy in the argument.

This happened when the greatest military power in the world was pitted against someone with ZERO military power........ ....
EIGHT years later.

In cricketing terms – Aussies against Timbuctoo. 

So, to answer Flute’s idea that we attack Pak when we have decisive power – that will be never my friend.

Coming to other issues

Cost of war is about a trillion, so far, I may be mistaken and it may be much more, but this is top of my head, similar to the bale out money spent in the financial crisis.

US debt has soared to 10 trillion, up 3.5 trillion since the war started. Most of it to China.

China is therefore now dictating terms, and sending third ranked officials to talks backed by Obama, and point blank refusing when it is not in their interest, e.g. global warming talks in Copenhagen.

They are also dictating the policy in Iran, so far as to compel the special envoy to the middle east, Tony Blair, to comment that a war in Iran may be now necessary.

The current situation is that a great amount of lobbying is going around in the UN to get China to abstain and not veto sanctions against Iran. This is a direct consequence of the war and the resultant indebtedness of the American economy affecting its subsequent foreign policy.

China calls back the 3 trillion in US bonds, and US will become the next Greece, ahead of Spain and Portugal and even the UK.

US bonds used to be for repayment in 1-2 years, this conflict and the one in Iraq, PRIOR to the credit crunch, has caused US to sell bonds with repayment in 20 years.

India cannot afford and frankly will be silly to venture down this road. All out war, sentiments apart, is even further distant than Ruchir’s optimism of non use of nuclear weapons by Pak in duress.


Now, to come to why I supported the afghan war? 

I was mistaken, like Flute, that, decisive military power would rule the roost. In modern day warfare that is not possible.

In war Aussies cannot beat Timbuctoo.

Ruchir, Indcric named a Pakistani, Akram, I will name another, Adnan Swami, these are prominent guys who have openly imbibed India and its culture, there are many more but that is not the point.

You tell me, one instance, when military force forged a political solution.

IF YOU HAVE READ THIS POST, I WANT THIS ANSWER BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE.

I am sorry for shouting but I did not want this to get lost among inanities.


Ireland, possibly the first modern terrorist outfit, has laid down its weapons, not because of war......there wasn’t one, but by TALKS.

Closer to home, Khalistan........the only successfully solved insurgency in India, was not solved by Operation Bluestar.
Operation Bluestar resulted in ‘moderate’ heavyweights like Khushwant Singh turn against the government.
Operation Bluestar killed our PM
It served no purpose

What ACTUALLY changed the scenario was the understanding in Punjabland, that they did not need to do this.

The light was in front of the tunnel.
Everything changed when the light was visible
That is what we should strive to do – show the light.

that is what indcric is trying to say.......IMO
« Last Edit: February 13, 2010, 03:34:11 AM by inoc »
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #26 on: February 13, 2010, 04:03:07 PM »

Quote
IF YOU HAVE READ THIS POST, I WANT THIS ANSWER BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE.

I am sorry for shouting but I did not want this to get lost among inanities.


Ireland, possibly the first modern terrorist outfit, has laid down its weapons, not because of war......there wasn’t one, but by TALKS.

Closer to home, Khalistan........the only successfully solved insurgency in India, was not solved by Operation Bluestar.
Operation Bluestar resulted in ‘moderate’ heavyweights like Khushwant Singh turn against the government.
Operation Bluestar killed our PM
It served no purpose

What ACTUALLY changed the scenario was the understanding in Punjabland, that they did not need to do this.

The light was in front of the tunnel.
Everything changed when the light was visible
That is what we should strive to do – show the light.

that is what indcric is trying to say.......IMO
inoc, you are displaying amazing ignorance about modern indian history to make above claim. Punjab militancy was brutally and ruthlessly suppressed with use of disproportionate force and power. Are you not aware of it? why did the light suddenly appear at the end of tunnel?


are you even aware of the situation prior to op bluestar? Little more delay and pak was ready to recognize punjab as separate country. There was chaos and violence everywhere. Salutes to Indira for taking such a bold step inspite of known risk to her own life. We need more leaders with guts like her. Whatever may be her other mistakes, she definitely showed guts and leadership in dealing with external threats with aplomb.

« Last Edit: February 14, 2010, 02:12:16 PM by flute »
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

ramshorns

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 13,029
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #27 on: February 13, 2010, 04:04:57 PM »

Quote
IF YOU HAVE READ THIS POST, I WANT THIS ANSWER BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE.

I am sorry for shouting but I did not want this to get lost among inanities.


Ireland, possibly the first modern terrorist outfit, has laid down its weapons, not because of war......there wasn’t one, but by TALKS.

Closer to home, Khalistan........the only successfully solved insurgency in India, was not solved by Operation Bluestar.
Operation Bluestar resulted in ‘moderate’ heavyweights like Khushwant Singh turn against the government.
Operation Bluestar killed our PM
It served no purpose

What ACTUALLY changed the scenario was the understanding in Punjabland, that they did not need to do this.

The light was in front of the tunnel.
Everything changed when the light was visible
That is what we should strive to do – show the light.

that is what indcric is trying to say.......IMO
indcric, you are displaying amazing ignorance about modern indian history to make above claim. Punjab militancy was brutally and ruthlessly suppressed with use of disproportionate force and power. Are you not aware of it? why did the light suddenly appear at the end of tunnel?


are you even aware of the situation prior to op bluestar? Little more delay and pak was ready to recognize punjab as separate country. There was chaos and violence everywhere. Salutes to Indira for taking such a bold step inspite of known risk to her own life. We need more leaders with guts like her. Whatever may be her other mistakes, she definitely showed guts and leadership in dealing with external threats with aplomb.
I think that was a quote from Inoc is it not?
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #28 on: February 14, 2010, 02:12:44 PM »

Quote
IF YOU HAVE READ THIS POST, I WANT THIS ANSWER BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE.

I am sorry for shouting but I did not want this to get lost among inanities.


Ireland, possibly the first modern terrorist outfit, has laid down its weapons, not because of war......there wasn’t one, but by TALKS.

Closer to home, Khalistan........the only successfully solved insurgency in India, was not solved by Operation Bluestar.
Operation Bluestar resulted in ‘moderate’ heavyweights like Khushwant Singh turn against the government.
Operation Bluestar killed our PM
It served no purpose

What ACTUALLY changed the scenario was the understanding in Punjabland, that they did not need to do this.

The light was in front of the tunnel.
Everything changed when the light was visible
That is what we should strive to do – show the light.

that is what indcric is trying to say.......IMO
indcric, you are displaying amazing ignorance about modern indian history to make above claim. Punjab militancy was brutally and ruthlessly suppressed with use of disproportionate force and power. Are you not aware of it? why did the light suddenly appear at the end of tunnel?


are you even aware of the situation prior to op bluestar? Little more delay and pak was ready to recognize punjab as separate country. There was chaos and violence everywhere. Salutes to Indira for taking such a bold step inspite of known risk to her own life. We need more leaders with guts like her. Whatever may be her other mistakes, she definitely showed guts and leadership in dealing with external threats with aplomb.
I think that was a quote from Inoc is it not?
correction made..thanks
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #29 on: February 14, 2010, 05:46:02 PM »

Fascinating discussion

Quote
Sir, it is basic military fact. No terror attack happened in US because it started a war in Afghanistan and terrorists were pulled there, fighting US army.

I am picking one of Ruchirs statements to get my opinion across.

This is what a lot of people are saying, to suggest, that terrorism has been reduced/eliminated in the US and the ‘war on terror’ is responsible for that.

The terrorists pulled back into Afghan killed 1500 since the war started. Mostly in terrorist type bomb blasts and not head to head military conflict.
 
Half that of 9/11.

Hugely more than those killed in terrorist attacks in the last hundred years in the US, bar 9/11.

Oklahoma had less than 200 dead. 9/11 was far worse than anybody ever thought it could be including Osama.

The Afghani terrorists didn’t need to go to USA to kill anymore, they had a readymade population of 30000 US citizens to choose from at their doorstep.

Don’t get me wrong. I am not advocating against the war, only, pointing out the fallacy in the argument.

This happened when the greatest military power in the world was pitted against someone with ZERO military power........ ....
EIGHT years later.

Not sure whether you are deliberately misreading my statement or you didn't really understand it. You picked one single statement out of a big comment. Actually you should have picked the whole paragraph, not just this single sentence.

What I said was that during war, US captured many terrorists who provided intelligence that helped in stopping other attacks. This intelligence would not be available if those terrorists were not captured. Does that make sense?

Now, you say Terrorists have 30,000 americans to chose from, at their doorsteps. Remember one thing here. When someone joins an army, he joins knowing that his life will be in danger should his country go to war. He chooses this profession knowing all the risks and dangers. So, he is ready for a fight.

However, civilians don't choose to be in danger. They are not ready for fight. It is better to have an army fight these terrorists at their doorsteps rather than them coming to US soil and attacking US civilians.

I said it before, Bush had terrible rules of engagement because of which this war has stretched so long. Had Bush allowed army to use all it's might, the war would have been over 8 year ago. As a president, Bush had first responsibility toward saving american lives than anything else. He chose to start a war but did not allow the army to fight the war in the best possible way. That's my opinion.

When you have a rule of engagement that a soldier can not shoot unless someone starts shooting at him first, war will stretch for 8 years. In a war, hesitation of one second can mean death... that's why you have so many american causalities.


In cricketing terms – Aussies against Timbuctoo. 

So, to answer Flute’s idea that we attack Pak when we have decisive power – that will be never my friend.

Coming to other issues

Cost of war is about a trillion, so far, I may be mistaken and it may be much more, but this is top of my head, similar to the bale out money spent in the financial crisis.

US debt has soared to 10 trillion, up 3.5 trillion since the war started. Most of it to China.

China is therefore now dictating terms, and sending third ranked officials to talks backed by Obama, and point blank refusing when it is not in their interest, e.g. global warming talks in Copenhagen.

They are also dictating the policy in Iran, so far as to compel the special envoy to the middle east, Tony Blair, to comment that a war in Iran may be now necessary.

The current situation is that a great amount of lobbying is going around in the UN to get China to abstain and not veto sanctions against Iran. This is a direct consequence of the war and the resultant indebtedness of the American economy affecting its subsequent foreign policy.

China calls back the 3 trillion in US bonds, and US will become the next Greece, ahead of Spain and Portugal and even the UK.

US bonds used to be for repayment in 1-2 years, this conflict and the one in Iraq, PRIOR to the credit crunch, has caused US to sell bonds with repayment in 20 years.

India cannot afford and frankly will be silly to venture down this road. All out war, sentiments apart, is even further distant than Ruchir’s optimism of non use of nuclear weapons by Pak in duress.

Again, fallacy of why I say Bush did not fight the war properly. After deposing Saddam, Bush should have taken over Iraq's oil supply distribution and used that oil to cover for US's expenses in Iraq. He didn't do that and that is hurting US debt.


Now, to come to why I supported the afghan war? 

I was mistaken, like Flute, that, decisive military power would rule the roost. In modern day warfare that is not possible.

In war Aussies cannot beat Timbuctoo.

Disagree, AUS can beat TBT provided AUS prime minister allows AUS army to fight the war the way it should be fought.


Ruchir, Indcric named a Pakistani, Akram, I will name another, Adnan Swami, these are prominent guys who have openly imbibed India and its culture, there are many more but that is not the point.

You tell me, one instance, when military force forged a political solution.

IF YOU HAVE READ THIS POST, I WANT THIS ANSWER BEFORE ANYTHING ELSE.

I am sorry for shouting but I did not want this to get lost among inanities.


Ireland, possibly the first modern terrorist outfit, has laid down its weapons, not because of war......there wasn’t one, but by TALKS.

Closer to home, Khalistan........the only successfully solved insurgency in India, was not solved by Operation Bluestar.
Operation Bluestar resulted in ‘moderate’ heavyweights like Khushwant Singh turn against the government.
Operation Bluestar killed our PM
It served no purpose

What ACTUALLY changed the scenario was the understanding in Punjabland, that they did not need to do this.

The light was in front of the tunnel.
Everything changed when the light was visible
That is what we should strive to do – show the light.

that is what indcric is trying to say.......IMO

Khalistan - Crushed by KPS Gill using police strongarm tactics. KSPG made it terrible for anyone to be a Punjabi terrorist or support them. That's how Khalistan was crushed.

Adnan Sami -- Adnan Sami Khan (Urdu: عدنان سمیع خان; born 15 August 1973), popularly known simply as Adnan Sami, is a British-born singer, musician, pianist[1][2], actor and composer[3][4] of Pakistani origin. He currently holds Canadian citizenship and lives in Mumbai, India.

This is from his Wiki page. Can you tell me from which angle Adnan Sami has anything to do with PAK? For god's sake, he even lives in India!!!!!!!

As for the person Indcric named, that guy does not live in PAK, I assume. That guy lives in US. Let me cut the chase. Name one PAK politician who has got elected despite praising India. After all, it is the politicians or PAK army that needs to change their attitude for India, for PAK to do anything that remotely resembles them helping India in fighting terror.
Logged

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #30 on: February 14, 2010, 06:01:45 PM »

Did you read my post fully? I saw it in CNN, Fox News & NYT too. Only thing is the links cannot be obtained now.

Meanwhile, check this reuters link.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6103AW20100201

Read the portion about $7.5 billion non-military aid.

Read the above in combination with the last para of this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan_%E2%80%93_United_States_relations

Then you will figure that these $7.5 billion is related to strategically important regions.

Sir, I read both links and still don't see any proof that US is spending money to rebuild NWFP.

In fact this is from the first link.

Economic support funds are provided on a grant basis and are available for many economic purposes, like infrastructure and development projects. The House aide did not know what how the new funds would be spent in Pakistan.

It seems like even the House does not know how the funds will be spent in PAK but you seem to know that they will be spent to rebuild NWFP? How come?


Who cares what you think? Rediff quoted army chief saying the war is not possible because of Pak's nuclear weapons. It doesn't look like you even read rediff.

No one should care what I think... and the same should be true for you too. Do you really think that an army chief is going to go on record and say that he favors a war with neighbor? That would be foolish on chief's part. Army chief has to use a running war as an excuse to accomplish his objectives and for that he needs politicians to have some spine and back him.


You keep harping about Mumbai attack, but don't seem to pay any attention to my questions. We fought 3 wars, did it change the pak policy? What is wrong with having relations? Does it harm anything?

The result of relations is: improvement in ground situation in J&K and support for Indian troops from common people of J&K.

Those wars were not fought the way wars are supposed to be fought.

Example 1 - Kargill war. Army should have crossed LOC and decimated terrorist hideouts and supply lines. That would have made a dent in PAK's ability to sponsor terrorism. Army was not allowed.

Example 2 - 1971 war. India had captured 90,000 PAK soldiers. At that time, India could have asked PAK to vacate POK if it wanted it's soldiers back. Kashmir problem would have been solved. It didn't.

If fought intelligently and ruthlessly, war can solve problems. What you need is political spine.


You are living in Utopia, that war would solve some issue. 3 wars didn't do much to improving anything.

See above.


Excusing your ignorance. RAW is actively funding & planning. No official agrees that and there would be no proof.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KA21Df02.html

Search for the word "covert" in this page.

Again excusing your ignorance. The intelligence mostly came from terrorists captured by Pak in Pak, not from those in Afghanistan. Real terrorists vacated Afghan long back in 2001.

Thanks... one line on covert operations being planned, and you seem to think that anything happening in PAK is by RAW?

Sure, part of intelligence came from guys captured in PAK. But tell me, if it was not for Afghan war and established US army bases in PAK because of that war, how would have US forced PAK to capture and hand over these terrorists?
Logged

Cover Point

  • Cover Point
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 12,448
  • Cover Point
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #31 on: February 14, 2010, 06:02:33 PM »

agree with Ruchir.

Punjab militancy was crushed by brute force. A lot of innocents were lost in that too. Police had a goonda raj ... a lot of personal issues were tackled in the name of fake encounters.

But it was effective. It rooted the militants out ... once and for all. Without that Punjab would have been lost.
Logged
Busting Gangulian chops since eternity.

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #32 on: February 15, 2010, 07:23:11 PM »

Quote
So, to answer Flute’s idea that we attack Pak when we have decisive power – that will be never my friend.

first you misunderstood my comment and second you are making too many assumptions regarding we never having such decisive power.

You are mistaken on both counts.

First, we are already in a position to decisively defeat pak in an all out war with Pak. The only reason why India is failing to do it is because of the way we are playing the nuclear threshold game. In simple terms pak is able to continue its covert war with India without consequences because they are successfully playing the nuclear blackmail game. They are keeping India and intl community confused about where the threshold lies and who controls the button etc.  Do you think it is a coincidence that each time there is a major terror attack, we hear noises of nuclear holocaust, mad general making nonsensical claims about nuclear war etc?

Second, what I suggested was delivering a jhapad, a strategic jhapad , not all out war. This can be easily delivered if India has the outrage, political will  and determination and memory ( of murders committed thru pak agents) of outrages done against our country. (I am simply appaled at the complete disappearance of outrage just one yr after mumbai attacks, while the master mind of attacks isstill holding rallies in broad day light, we are talking about  talks already and being apologetic about IPL fiasco? WHAT THE F**K deal is this? WHY ?). This strategic jhpad can be delivered if India pursues this goal with purpose and political will. Over the next 5 yrs, we build covert assets inside pak, modules, intelligene network etc. which will give us valuable inputs about terror network, infrastructure etc. We also simultaneously work on strenthening our defense forces ( read your the link from atimes posted on this thread..by a lot of counts, indian military backed out on an attack after mumbai attacks not political masters). We develop enough muscle to implement cold start like strategies and then wait for the next minor incident to deliver a blow. It should be swift and effective, it should both quickly destroy atleast a part of terror outfits infratructure and also quickly makes gains in POK and then call ceasefire.  We should also declare that this will happen each tie there is an attack on India. This jhapad will achieve 2 major benefits. MAIN benefit is to call the nuclear bluff joke being played on India. It tells everyone that intl community and pak cannot use this joke on India anymore. Second is to sooth Indian public outrage and also punish those who attacked India. Above scenario has no decisive victory illusions about it, which is where you got me wrong.

Mind you, I am not cooking up the above , many many former army generals, intelligence chiefs elaborated on this strategy may times. The problem is not our capability, but rather India's f**ked up memory which makes us forget any outrage within an year.


If India has the political will and perseverence, it is very much a possibility that in about 5-10 yrs time, India will be in a hugely advantageous and strong enough position to deliver such a jhapad to pak.

Along with working on this jhapad, India should increase funding to RAW manifold and from here on, anyone who is plotting against India should not be able to sleep peacefully. We should build enough external network to pretty eliminate major masterminds outside India. Hafeez Sayeed should piss in his pants to even think about holding a rally in public.  Everyone connected with mumbai attacks should have prize attached to their heads. Assasinating everyone connectd with mumbai attacks can easily be done again if we have the outrage and the political will. WHAT we do not want to do is becomes like terrorists and fund bombing innocents. Other than that, we can easily support covert ops against terror outfits.
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

inoc

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,707
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #33 on: February 17, 2010, 03:49:07 AM »

Ruchir

Sorry, you misunderstood.

I did not pick one sentence from your post to reply to you, but picked A sentence to try and participate and put across my point of view in this fascinating discussion. It might not coincide with your view but everyone is entitled to their own views.

My post was not a rebuttal of yours.

I stand by what I said despite the arguments of 'less than full might' application of the US forces.
After a change in leadership 'the full might' might be in use now, and even then according to the Afghan President, in a world leaders meeting in London recently, Karzai said the minimum time for withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan was 15 years from now.

I don't suppose that the full US 'might' would take another fifteen years to overcome the insurgency, but it will still be needed to weed out the nefarious elements produced as a direct result of the war in the coming years.

All of this would not be successful with 'might' alone but with education.

Education of the home troops/police, populace and the terrorist minds.

An expensive solution with more loss in life and not certain end results by any means.

I am not against war as an option but am against war as a first option.

In my view it should be the last option.


Also, I do not deliberately misread, so such insinuations are not expected in the midst of decent discussions.


Secondly, I agree that excessive force was utilised in the Khalistan chapter. Similar excessive forces have been since,  if not before, and applied in JK and elsewhere, with different results.

Have you ever tried to understand why?

Let me tell you.

When the result of the excessive force was certain, or near certain failure (read death) and the perpetrators had another avenue to lead a productive life, they chose the latter.

It was possible in Punjab, being one of our richest states.

all the new recruits dried up. Hence the insurgency ended.

therefore the answer should be .....along with force .....the ability to show another path. the Irish insurgency also ended in that vein.

Another example is the 70s naxalite movement in Bengal, which was lead by highly qualified and intelligent people in Bengal at that time.

100% of the recruits were from the top universities and colleges. Ruthless suppression resulted in those misguided young men and women to choose the other path, allowed them to lead successful lives albeit without the satisfaction/achievement of their preferred goal.

The situation is different in Pak/Afghan. The insurgents have no other path to take.

You may site some examples of people who are not like the ones I have just portrayed, prime example, Osama, but most are. A quick run through on the backgrounds of the Mumbai terrorists will suffice.

The terrorist organisations are preying on this phenomena.

Thirdly, regarding guys like Adnan Swami, you are changing tack here.
You had earlier challenged indcric to prove that his friends living in the US (I assume) were actually sympathetic to India.

Now you are ignoring all those who live outside Pak. I thought this was a Pak ORIGIN question which you has posed.

Cannot but vehemently disagree. Makes you a Pakistani hater without reason....like the indian hating pakistanis you presume.

Also, no politician in India will win an election being pro PAK.


Flute

Sorry mate. Decisive power has only ONE meaning. A power great enough to overcome any opposition and win a decisive (sorry there isn't another better word) victory and by that means bring to a stop whatever is the concern of the victor.

India does not have that against Pakistan now.

In my opinion will not have that in the next hundreds of years. Since war has stopped being a man to man combat.

If anybody had decisive power in a military sense it was the US, against Afghanistan. That, decisive power, has kept them in Afghanistan for 9 years so far and at least another 15, according to the now Afghan President.

Since then you have moved on from decisive power to 'jhapad'.

How is 'jhapad' going to help?

Without a decisive victory, wont there be the terrorist 'laths' that you will always entertain as a result.

This jhapad is in response to the terrorist attacks, as you say, but how is it going to stop another one from happening ?

This jhapad is only going to instigate/ recruit another wave of insurgents, who for a few thousands and the belief of attaining jannat will follow in the footsteps of their predecessors (read heroes).

Either, you have the ability to annihilate Pak, which we don't at the moment, and probably not be able to in the next few decades at least, and take over and suppress all anti India activity hence (another almost impossible task), or we try covert mechanisms, along with the rest of the world to show the insurgents the other path, which we are doing I think.

WAR is an option but the last option.



There is also this vital aspect to consider – ECONOMY.

Indian economy will recede by ten years – at least – if we fight a war. Many expert opinions exist in this regard.
If those opinions are unbelievable, lets look at the US economy vis-a-vis current pre/post war scenario.

The original Goldman Sachs estimate in 2001, for China to overtake US was in between 2040 -2050.
Now it is between 2025 -2030. (US growth rate reduced significantly for a year – well on its way to original levels now)

An approximately 15 years loss in economy, primarily due to the war. (The credit crunch had no appreciable effect).

Mind you China would have overtaken US inevitably, but will do so now 15 years earlier.

Do you think India can afford such a downturn.
Logged

flute

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,173
  • Mother India
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #34 on: February 17, 2010, 04:28:15 AM »


Since then you have moved on from decisive power to 'jhapad'.
inoc, read reply #21 on this thread..there is no moving on from decisive power to jhapad. plz read my posts completely.
Logged
Where the mind is without fear and the head held high;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the dreary desert sand of dead habit;
let my country awake.

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #35 on: February 17, 2010, 06:29:52 PM »

This Rediff article tells how unrealistic and futile it is to talk to any PAK politician. They don't matter. It also tells what pains PAK military has taken, in terms of investments in building network and infrastructure, for terrorists. It is apparently futile to talk to them about helping India in curbing terrorism. Why would they want to dismantle everything they built over the years? Just because we asked them to? The last paragraph is spoken like a true patriot, what this person most obviously is.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2010/feb/17/slide-show-1-we-are-keeping-the-nation-alive-in-an-icu.htm


'The message has gone out that in India it's always business as usual'

Archana Masih

With another Pakistan-based terror outfit, the hither-to-unheard-of Lashkar e Tayiba al Alami, the role of non-State actors ensconced in India's western neighbour in fomenting terror has once again come into focus.

There have been other links to terror groups in Pakistan as well. After each trip to India, for instance, Laskhar-e-Tayiba operative David Coleman Headley, the Pakistani-origin US citizen charged with criminal conspiracy in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attack, returned to Pakistan to meet other co-conspirators and provided results of his surveillance, including oral descriptions of various locations.

A retired Pakistani Army major was also arrested for his links with Headley and Pakistan-born-Candian Tawwahur Rehman, another 26/11 accused. These developments yet again bring into focus Pakistan-based terror operatives for targeting India in deadly ways.

Maroof Raza, a former Indian Army officer and well-known security and defence analyst, gives a detailed view of the Pakistani establishment's response to the Mumbai attacks and describes how the Pakistan Army controls the country's national identity.

The author of three books on India' security concerns, his latest book Confronting Terrorism was released last month. In a candid conversation with Archana Masih, he discussed how terror had become an industry in Pakistan, the pre-eminence of the Pakistan Army in the State, and how India diplomatically lost the plot after 26/11.

The prime minister recently said that Pakistan hasn't done enough on 26/11 and India doesn't even know who to speak to since real power rests with the Army -- what options does this leave for India?

The long term agenda of the international community is to depoliticise Pakistan. It will take 10-20 years, till one or two generations of young officers grow up recognising the fact that there is a civilian leadership that they must respect.

The reason why the Pakistan military became pre-eminent is because at its creation the civilian leadership was unable to take interest in matters of foreign policy and strategy. Hence, the military became actively involved in defence purchases. India, China, the US and nuclear issues became their domain. They really call the shots on key issues that are part of Pakistan's national identity. Even when the military is not in power, issues like India, China, Afghanistan, the US, nuclear strategy are in their domain.

Civilians have repeatedly been given chances by history and they've failed to deliver in Pakistan. Asif Zardari is no better and his time is limited. In India at the time of Independence, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru and other leaders commanded the respect of the military. The military did not feel the need to get into a confrontation with Panditji on foreign policy even after the Nehru and Krishna Menon's [then foreign minister] China blunder in 1962.

Dr Singh is a great economist, he is honest but is rather naive and misdirected on foreign policy. He got away with the nuclear deal because it was good for the country -- let's not talk about the Nuclear Supplier's Group -- the deal gave us access to technology that was denied to us in spite of us being a law-abiding country. But Dr Singh got Sharm-el-Sheikh [where India and Pakistan gave a joint statement delinking action on terror with the composite dialogue] completely wrong.

In Pakistan even on a happy day its prime minister does not have the decision-making powers as ours. In all talks with Pakistan, you must involve the army chief and the ISI, only then can you get a rubber stamp of respectability. Dr Singh should speak to all the establishment, you can't talk to one man.

In spite of international acknowledgement of the Lashkar-e-Tayiba's role in 26/11 and Pakistan's own admission of Lashkar's involvement, its leader Hafiz Sayeed still roams free?

Diplomatically we've lost the plot. With world opinion in our favour, we haven't achieved anything. Pakistan's smirk has changed into a smile ever since we have been making all concessions to them in Sharm-el-Sheikh and elsewhere. The message that's gone out to the world is that with India it will always be business as usual.

If India had effectively used all its diplomatic leverage, the goodwill of the international community and our politicians had not got very busy in trying to win the next election, we had lots in our favour but we abandoned it. The world thinks we are not serious about handling terror.

As far as action on the perpetrators of 26/11 are concerned, do you think it would have been different if Pervez Musharraf was in-charge?

Historically, Pakistan's military commanders have been shrewder politicians than their politicians. All of them are by and large of the view that one key issue should be settled in Pakistan's favour for them to move into the next phase of growth. 'Settle' means give them Kashmir. The attack on our Parliament was to take the whole Parliament hostage and then get the Government of India to grant a concession over Kashmir for the release of the politicians. The attack misfired.

The Mumbai attack was to not just hold India hostage, it was to convey a message to India that we won't allow you to grow economically unhindered because if you become too wealthy, you're not going to talk to us. We want to talk to you as one poor nation to yesterday's poor nation, so that you are willing to listen and make concessions to us. If you become wealthy, you'll say talk if you want to talk to us or we'll move on -- which is how China is dealing with the world. Pakistan saw India heading in that direction so an attack on the heart of India's business centre was to tell the world that India is not safe and to tell India that we'll hit you not only at the military camps but in the corporate sector also.

Musharraf was known to be adventurist. At his time Kargil, the Parliament attack had happened -- importantly Musharraf felt that he would have a military attack on India and then talk peace. In Musharraf's time all the terror groups were under the control of the army, now they've gone out of their control.

Therefore, to say that only the army was behind this attack is largely the truth but there is the possibility which prevents the international community and India to fully put the blame on Pakistan, which is that these could be renegade terror groups that have gone out of control. But Pakistani intelligence and military set-up cannot be absolved of the blame because their strategic aim was that if India responded militarily or even deployed its troops, then Pakistan would get a reason not to pull their troops out of the Indo-Pak border and shift them to fight the militants on the Af-Pak border who were also their proteges.

Pakistan's military keeps two sets of proteges intact, one is the Taliban and others led by Gulbuddin Hekmetyar and Jalalludin Haqquani, and the other is the Lashkar-e-Tayiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad and other groups with an anti-India focus.

After the Mumbai attack, a lot of these anti-India groups were shifted to the frontier region and began to be locally addressed as the Punjabi Taliban. After this attack the ISI was bypassed by the army and the army created a second group of minders for the terrorists, who were ex-army officers and ex-frontier force officers who had retired and settled in Peshawar, pretending to be NGOs in the day and monitoring the Taliban and other hardline groups in the night.

When Western agencies -- America in particular -- started penetrating the ISI in return for paying them the money, they found out that the ISI was not as thickly involved with the Al Qaeda and tribals in the FATA region -- because the army has created a second rung of leadership for those guys who the US and others don't know how to penetrate and where to penetrate because it is not a structured organisation.

For Pakistan terror is an industry. Dr Manmohan Singh -- who is otherwise a very honest, modest, sincere, moderate man -- for him to say after 26/11 that terror is an extension of Pakistan foreign policy was a bold statement.

A lot of security measures were taken after the 26/11 Mumbai attacks -- NSG hubs were opened, equipment was bought by the Mumbai police, a commando unit of the state police set up etc. In your opinion where are we now compared to then?

We are more or less where we were except there is greater awareness in the common man about what terror can do to you. There is an awakening in the corporate sector to try and create terror awareness. Our abilities to withstand another terror attack haven't improved. In terms of equipment we need to fortify India -- the police, army, navy and air force.

If the three services continue to assume that their primary role is to look for a war across the border, then quite frankly the era of conventional wars is behind us. You may be equipped with these big weapon systems but they are like elephant's teeth. You also need a rethink on the defence budget, on where the money should go. Ideally it should go for internal security.

It's not as if India does not have money, we're a country with the largest defence purchases in the world. We have a budget of 40 million dollars and out of that a midget amount, if at all, has been set aside for internal security.

There is very little synergy between the various departments of intelligence, everyone is operating in watertight compartments. If we were to have a terror attack again (this interview was conducted before the Pune terror attack of February 13, 2010) , the sequence of our responses would be as shoddy, with the exception that perhaps the NSG will fly out to the location quicker and the police is hoping that the NSG will bail them out.

Won't the NSG hubs that have been created in the four metros better the response to any terror attack?

If there is a terror attack in a city where the NSG is not present, they will still take time to get there. The NSG is not meant to be your first level of response, it is only to be activated when the police have contained the situation, then the NSG is required to give the killing blow.

In Mumbai, the police kept waiting for the NSG to arrive. The Mumbai police commissioner, the top bureaucrat and the then chief minister -- who has happily been rehabilitated with a Cabinet post -- all of them refrained from calling the army stationed in Colaba which was waiting for instructions.

Then if the army comes in on its own they'll say ki chota coup ho gaya [a mini coup has happened]. The army has been told that unless you have written instructions don't move in or it'll be blamed for having a coup. The then commanding officer had just come in from the Kashmir Valley with 150 men who were trained commandos. He could have gone in and the NSG would not have been needed.

You mentioned how there has been no accountability after what happened in Mumbai.

What can you say when you rehabilitate the Maharashtra chief minister himself! Basically Prime Minister Manmohan Singh is too soft on terror. The (then) national security adviser is one of the heads that should have rolled. The chief minister should have been out in the wild politically but four months later he was a Cabinet minister. I would blame Sonia *hi, Manmohan Singh -- everybody downwards for India's plight.

Our problem is that we are too much of a democracy. This horse-trading over votes decides the fate of your citizens. Elections make no difference. Is the best of India reflected in its Cabinet? What experience does Mamta Banerjee have of running the railways? The day she becomes the chief minister of West Bengal, she'll dump the railways. Is this the commitment you expect from a Cabinet minister?

She also brings in 26 members of Parliament...

So that the Congress has an uninterrupted tenure. What have they achieved in their last tenure apart from the Indo-US nuclear deal? We're going through every five-year tenure wasting our nation's time and its future. We're just keeping the nation alive in an ICU, we're not looking at the nation as an athlete who has homed in completely to pick a medal in the Olympics.

So you think we are no safer than what we were before?

We are no safer. In terms of equipment we are badly behind time. In terms of coordination, intelligence agencies, inter-service cooperation etc it is no better today than it was a year ago. In terms of training and efficiency of policemen, there maybe a marginal improvement but nothing dramatic. The Mumbai police may not repeat the same mistakes but that doesn't mean they can handle the next terror attack.

The mindset hasn't changed, everyone is living in Disneyland hoping this will not happen again. There is too much divisive opinion on how we should proceed with Pakistan. Candlelight vigils are not going to get you anywhere.

At the end of the day it is each man for himself and God for us all. The political leadership has failed us completely. War and conflict are too serious a business to be left to politicians, to paraphrase Churchill and Clemenceau who said war is too serious a business to be left to generals. But Churchill, Clemenceau and others had done military service. They knew that there comes a time when you need to take decisions.

After 26/11 we as a nation should have gone into a huddle and prioritised that we will hit back if nothing else to give a message to Pakistan that you hit us and we hit you. That we will make our economy jump and exploit its potential fully. We should have had a five-point agenda, not a 20-year target which gives politicians too much time to maouevre. They should be given a five-year target, if they don't deliver then they should stand in front of the guillotine and say take my head.
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #36 on: February 17, 2010, 08:11:34 PM »

Sir, I read both links and still don't see any proof that US is spending money to rebuild NWFP.

In fact this is from the first link.

Economic support funds are provided on a grant basis and are available for many economic purposes, like infrastructure and development projects. The House aide did not know what how the new funds would be spent in Pakistan.

It seems like even the House does not know how the funds will be spent in PAK but you seem to know that they will be spent to rebuild NWFP? How come?
It clearly says infrastructure & development projects and also mentions "strategically important regions". What areas in pak are strategically important for US?


No one should care what I think... and the same should be true for you too. Do you really think that an army chief is going to go on record and say that he favors a war with neighbor? That would be foolish on chief's part. Army chief has to use a running war as an excuse to accomplish his objectives and for that he needs politicians to have some spine and back him.
He doesn't have to say whether he favors a war or not. But he can clearly say, we have the capacity to decisively defeat them. See the difference. But he didn't say that. He mentioned nuclear deterrence etc.


Those wars were not fought the way wars are supposed to be fought.

Example 1 - Kargill war. Army should have crossed LOC and decimated terrorist hideouts and supply lines. That would have made a dent in PAK's ability to sponsor terrorism. Army was not allowed.

Example 2 - 1971 war. India had captured 90,000 PAK soldiers. At that time, India could have asked PAK to vacate POK if it wanted it's soldiers back. Kashmir problem would have been solved. It didn't.

If fought intelligently and ruthlessly, war can solve problems. What you need is political spine.

Example 1: If we crossed LOC, there would have been a big esaclation in the war and nuclear war might have had happened.

Example 2: How could you say we lacked political spine, when we divided pakistan successfully? You could divide pakistan, but you couldn't capture your own land of PoK without spine?

Thanks... one line on covert operations being planned, and you seem to think that anything happening in PAK is by RAW?

Sure, part of intelligence came from guys captured in PAK. But tell me, if it was not for Afghan war and established US army bases in PAK because of that war, how would have US forced PAK to capture and hand over these terrorists?

Do you know that in a recent joint statement after both the PMs met, there was a mention of India supporting Balochistan separatists? It is for real. No body from Indian side is going to agree with that officially. You have to read between the lines and understand. If you don't want to read, that is your problem. But it is for real that we are actually aiding the separatists.

No, not part of intelligence. Most of the intelligence came from those guys. All the No.3 guys & most recently the No.2 Taliban are all captured in Pak. US pressure on Pak has nothing to do with Afghan capturing, it has more to do with directly threatening Pak. Do I have to explain this on how US can directly make a threat to Pak?

Finally, I really didn't understand what do you mean by political leaders not having spine? Can you explain? Are the political leaders going to pick up a gun & fight? Can't they go into bunkers after authorizing war? What are the political leaders afraid of, if we have the military might to decisively defeat pak? Isn't the military that is going to fight the war? or Is it the political leaders?

The rediff article that you posted doesn't mention anything about what happens after we defeated pakistan. Can you please enlighten me? What will you do after that? For a clue, think about what happened after US captured Iraq or Afghanistan. How many army men does it need and how much money does it need to make sure there would be no further threats and no retaliation?

We defeated pak in 1971. What could Indira have done after that? Occupy PoK? Would that have solved Kashmir issue? Solving Kashmir issue is not as simple as that.  Occupying PoK actually means getting closer to the fire. That would only increase our problems. Did the terror attempts stop after US occupied Afghanistan? The attempts still happen. They failed because of the effectiveness of US intelligence & security infrastructure and also because US is too far from Pakistan. It is very difficult to come to US since they have to travel through Air or Sea, which will be heavily guarded. Crossing the LOC is lot easier than that.

Finally, do you know that this proxy war has started out of Pak's desire to divide India, because we divided Pak in 1971? That 1971 war resulted in a lot much hate, we could not pacify that after 40 years. How are you planning to pacify the hate that might result after another war? What are going to do with Pak, after you defeat it? Occupy it? or Just bomb the whole thing? Or just bomb all the training compounds and come back?

Until we build the missile defence system, our only option is to increase the covert operations and support the separatists. Talks are not going to affect it negatively. Just talk and have relations, what is the problem? When you are talking, there is absolutely no need to stop the covert operations.
« Last Edit: February 17, 2010, 08:32:23 PM by indcric »
Logged

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #37 on: February 17, 2010, 09:03:28 PM »

It clearly says infrastructure & development projects and also mentions "strategically important regions". What areas in pak are strategically important for US?

Oh... so you are assuming that it is NWFP. Right? BTW, did you read what the indian analyst had to say about US knowledge on FATA region? They don't know what's going on there and you think they will put even a dime there? Well, if it's your opinion then there nothing I can say about it.


He doesn't have to say whether he favors a war or not. But he can clearly say, we have the capacity to decisively defeat them. See the difference. But he didn't say that. He mentioned nuclear deterrence etc.

So? If like so many other politicians, he too is under the fear of a nuclear strike what can I do about it? All I can say is that it is India's misfortune that they have such a guy as army chief. Of course, he can have his opinion and I can have mine.


Example 1: If we crossed LOC, there would have been a big esaclation in the war and nuclear war might have had happened.

Example 2: How could you say we lacked political spine, when we divided pakistan successfully? You could divide pakistan, but you couldn't capture your own land of PoK without spine?

Well I can only give my opinion, and my opinion is that there is no way PAK will enter into a nuclear war with India. That's a bluff they have been playing on Indian politicians for long and Indian politicians have been having their tails in their legs.

And what did we do while dividing PAK? Being political spineless is not about not doing the obvious. Even Vajpayee activated military in Kargill. Does that mean he had political spine. No. He was spineless. Having political spine means using an opportunity to achieve as many national interest goals as possible. Indira *hi was bold, but lacked political spine to make use of captured 90,000 PAK soldiers and settle Kashmir for ever. Vajpayee lacked political spine to use Kargill was as an excuse to decimate PAK capability of sponsoring terrorists. Manmohan does not have any political spine to begin with. His own ministers go to Sonia instead of him.


Do you know that in a recent joint statement after both the PMs met, there was a mention of India supporting Balochistan separatists? It is for real. No body from Indian side is going to agree with that officially. You have to read between the lines and understand. If you don't want to read, that is your problem. But it is for real that we are actually aiding the separatists.

Hey man, if what you are saying is true I will applaud RAW for it.


No, not part of intelligence. Most of the intelligence came from those guys. All the No.3 guys & most recently the No.2 Taliban are all captured in Pak. US pressure on Pak has nothing to do with Afghan capturing, it has more to do with directly threatening Pak. Do I have to explain this on how US can directly make a threat to Pak?

If the situation was that PAK had captured these guys for themselves, why did they hand them over to US? How was US able to apply pressure on PAK to hand these guys over? Because US had it's forces right there in PAK. Why did US have it's forces in PAK? Because of Afghan war. So IMO US leveraged the presence of their troops in PAK to get hold of these guys who provided them with intelligence. Ultimately they got the intelligence because of the war only. If US troops were not there do you think PAK would have handed over anyone to US?



Finally, I really didn't understand what do you mean by political leaders not having spine? Can you explain? Are the political leaders going to pick up a gun & fight? Can't they go into bunkers after authorizing war? What are the political leaders afraid of, if we have the military might to decisively defeat pak? Isn't the military that is going to fight the war? or Is it the political leaders?

Political spine is explained above.


The rediff article that you posted doesn't mention anything about what happens after we defeated pakistan. Can you please enlighten me? What will you do after that? We defeated pak in 1971. What could Indira have done after that? Occupy PoK? Would that have solved Kashmir issue? Solving Kashmir issue is not as simple as that.  Occupying PoK actually means getting closer to the fire. That would only increase our problems. Did the terror attempts stop after US occupied Afghanistan? The attempts still happen. This is only because of the effectiveness of US intelligence & security infrastructure and also because US is too far from Pakistan. It is very difficult to come to US since they have to travel through Air or Sea, which will be heavily guarded. Crossing the LOC is lot easier than that.

You want me to design foreign policy on this DG?

Had Indira *hi traded 90,000 PAK soldiers for PAK vacating POK, whatever Kashmir problem emanated would have been an internal Indian problem and govt would have dealt with it like it deals with any internal problem. Today, Kashmir is an international problem. International problems are always harder to deal with.

If PAK messes with India over the unified state of Kashmir then India has all the rights to deal with them militarily. Today, PAK uses POK as launching pad for their terrorists. Why does it not use Punjab? Think.... If unified Kashmir was with India, PAK would have to use it's own soil, rather than a disputed piece of land, to launch terror attacks. That would give India legitimacy to launch a counter-attack on PAK.

I have said this before, India, US, both did not fight the wars the way a war is supposed to be fought. India let go of an opportunity in 1971. As a result, we have terrorism now. India again let go of an opportunity in Kargil war. We keep on suffering. US should have flattened every inch of space where Taliban and AQ were hiding in Afghanistan. They didn't and they are suffering because of it.


Finally, do you know that this proxy war has started out of Pak's desire to divide India, because we divided Pak in 1971? That 1971 war resulted in a lot much hate, we could not pacify that after 40 years. How are you planning to pacify the hate that might result after another war? What are going to do with Pak, after you defeat it? Occupy it? or Just bomb the whole thing? Or just bomb all the training compounds and come back?

Part of this is explained above. If I was Indian PM in 1971, I would have solved POK issue. If I was Indian PM during Kargill, I would have given army free reign to decimate PAK capability of supporting terrorism. Again, it is difficult to formulate foreign policy on this DG. I can only tell you what I vision for India. There are people who would decide how to achieve that vision.


Until we build the missile defence system, our only option is to increase the covert operations and support the separatists. Talks are not going to affect it negatively. Just talk and have relations, what is the problem? When you are talking, there is absolutely no need to stop the covert operations.

Finally there is something we can agree on. I would just add that India should use every opportunity to decimate PAK. Missile defense is good but not fool-proof.
Logged

indcric

  • World XI Star
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 785
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #38 on: February 17, 2010, 10:08:09 PM »

It is so clear and you still don't want to concede. I will leave it until I find an article that specifically quotes NWFP.

So, you know more about this issue than the army chief himself, good.

So, what is this spine you are talking about? Spine to go to war was there, but was not there to force something on Pak? If there was an opportunity to force Pak to concede POK, would they have lost that opportunity after doing all the hard work?

You seem to not know many facts about these 2 wars and the conditions under which they ended. Read more about them on whatever sources you find.

The US ships were in Bay of Bengal & Arabian Sea threatening India to withdraw from BD by the time we ended 1971 war. Indira tried her best by forcing Simla Agreement on Pak.

You still think US can't threaten pak, if it didn't have forces in Afghanistan? There is not much I can talk after reading this. You have absolutely no idea of how these things are working. The wars, the International pressure, the military threats etc.

Now that it has its military in Afghanistan, why is it not able to force PAK to do something on the topmost guys? You need to understand how pressure works and what are its limits.

I am stopping  this debate here. It was much easier debating with Flute, because he had facts with him and he had the intelligence to see what is actually possible and what is not.
Logged

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,983
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: The dirty b***h is backing the village idiot
« Reply #39 on: February 18, 2010, 04:03:45 PM »

Indcric:

Quote
So, you know more about this issue than the army chief himself, good.

I have a point of view which is different from what you say army chief's point of view is.


Quote
So, what is this spine you are talking about? Spine to go to war was there, but was not there to force something on Pak? If there was an opportunity to force Pak to concede POK, would they have lost that opportunity after doing all the hard work?

1971 war was a war of necessity. On humanitarian grounds, India had allowed fleeing Pakis to come to the eastern states but could not bear the financial burden those lakhs of refugees put. There was no international financial help coming. So Indira *hi was forced to take up the last resort measure and divide PAK so that refugees could go back. HERE is where she lost political spine. She could have solved Kashmir problem in Simla Agreement but she didn't.


Quote
You seem to not know many facts about these 2 wars and the conditions under which they ended. Read more about them on whatever sources you find.

The US ships were in Bay of Bengal & Arabian Sea threatening India to withdraw from BD by the time we ended 1971 war. Indira tried her best by forcing Simla Agreement on Pak.

Luckily, I do read facts.

From Wiki page of 1971 war:
When Pakistan's defeat in the eastern sector seemed certain, Nixon ordered the USS Enterprise into the Bay of Bengal. The Enterprise arrived on station on 11 December 1971. It has been documented that Nixon even persuaded Iran and Jordan to send their F-86, F-104 and F-5 fighter jets in aid of Pakistan. On 6 December and 13 December, the Soviet Navy dispatched two groups of ships and a submarine, armed with nuclear missiles, from Vladivostok; they trailed U.S. Task Force 74 into the Indian Ocean from 18 December 1971 until 7 January 1972. The Soviets also had a nuclear submarine to help ward off the threat posed by USS Enterprise task force in the Indian Ocean.

The Soviet Union sympathized with the Bangladeshis, and supported the Indian Army and Mukti Bahini during the war, recognizing that the independence of Bangladesh would weaken the position of its rivals—the United States and China. The USSR gave assurances to India that if a confrontation with the United States or China developed, it would take counter-measures. This assurance was enshrined in the Indo-Soviet friendship treaty signed in August 1971.


India was not alone. USSR was supporting it against USA.


Quote
You still think US can't threaten pak, if it didn't have forces in Afghanistan? There is not much I can talk after reading this. You have absolutely no idea of how these things are working. The wars, the International pressure, the military threats etc.

Okay, that's your opinion and you are entitled to it. I'm glad that at least one of us know how these things work.


Quote
I am stopping  this debate here. It was much easier debating with Flute, because he had facts with him and he had the intelligence to see what is actually possible and what is not.

Okay, nice talking to you.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up