What's new

India in Afghanistan

@ MYSTIC.

while you do state that India should get ou andkeou of Afghanistn, ad u also agree with my reasoning, i have a qustin for you.

Won't the reginal and sratgi goals of India be everely diminished if India gets out of Afghanistan? please comment
 
@ MYSTIC.

while you do state that India should get ou andkeou of Afghanistn, ad u also agree with my reasoning, i have a qustin for you.

Won't the reginal and sratgi goals of India be everely diminished if India gets out of Afghanistan? please comment

We have our hands full with domestic issues. Why would we wont to be involved in Afghanistan. I am all for providing humanitarian aid and welfare funds to the Afghans, but to send our troops there is a long term commitment.

Firstly, logistically it would be very difficult.

Secondly, the parliament would have a hard time justifying the cost that such a deployment would incur.

Thirdly, do the benefits outnumber the cost? Highly plausible.

Most section of the Taliban are at the moment against Pakistan. IA's presence in Afghanistan is going to turn the tables in favor of Pakistan. While Taliban had been quietly the Kashmiri movement, there contribution has not been so big. Our presence will lead them to wage a war against India. It would not only bolster the separatist movement but would spill radical islam in India (like in recent Pakistan).

Call me stupid or novice in term of global politics, but I don't want radicals suicide bombers roaming on the streets of Bombay. To hell with Afghanistan. Let them live the way they wish. Why should we be involved in the mess. I don't mind my government spending billions of dollars in form of aid every year. At least we would be in good light of the people of Afghanistan (both NA and the Taliban).
 
Last edited:
We have our hands full with domestic issues. Why would we wont to be involved in Afghanistan. I am all for providing humanitarian aid and welfare funds to the Afghans, but to send our troops there is a long term commitment.

Firstly, logistically it would be very difficult.

Secondly, the parliament would have a hard time justifying the cost that such a deployment would incur.

Thirdly, do the benefits outnumber the cost? Highly plausible.

Most section of the Taliban are at the moment against Pakistan. IA's presence in Afghanistan is going to turn the tables in favor of Afghanistan. While Taliban had been quietly the Kashmiri movement, there contribution has not been so big. Our presence will lead them to wage a war against India. It would not only bolster the separatist movement but would spill radical islam in India (like in recent Pakistan).

Call me stupid or novice in term of global politics, but I don't want radicals suicide bombers roaming on the streets of Bombay. To hell with Afghanistan. Let them live the way they wish. Why should we be involved in the mess. I don't mind my government spending billions of dollars in form of aid every year. At least we would be in good light of the people of Afghanistan (both NA and the Taliban).
Nicely put. We're not going anywhere outside India militarily apart from establishing some watch stations in Tajikistan with Russian partnership and perhaps maintain bases in Madagascar, Seychelles, Maldives, Mauritius, Mongolia and some states who don't mind our neutral presence.

But going militarily into Afghanistan is not our problem. Afghanistan war was initiated by USA because Taliban regime had caused it damage; India condemns all terrorism but our hands are full with cross-border-sponsored terrorists in the state of J&K and our priority is to crush terrorism within our territory first, ensure that we've complete superiority over our territory and to avoid conflicts that we don't need.
 
Nicely put. We're not going anywhere outside India militarily apart from establishing some watch stations in Tajikistan with Russian partnership and perhaps maintain bases in Madagascar, Seychelles, Maldives, Mauritius, Mongolia and some states who don't mind our neutral presence.

But going militarily into Afghanistan is not our problem. Afghanistan war was initiated by USA because Taliban regime had caused it damage; India condemns all terrorism but our hands are full with cross-border-sponsored terrorists in the state of J&K and our priority is to crush terrorism within our territory first, ensure that we've complete superiority over our territory and to avoid conflicts that we don't need.

On the contrary..sending 5000 military personnel to Afghanistan can up India's profile in the region..one can easily decide what those guys would do..maybe just protect utilities...for sharing the spoils..one must have skin in the game..otherwise you will get egg on your face at the end of it all.
 
Unfortunately, India and the US will only lose in Afghanistan, and that reality is pretty evident even now. Look at it logically. India and the US have supported the minority factions of Afghanistan, the non-Pashtuns against the Taliban (Pashtuns). Pakistan has done the right thing in supporting the Pashtuns, as they comprise of a little more than 50% of the total population in Afghanistan. There is a huge sizable population of Pashtuns living in Pakistan, and are fierce supporters of Pakistan.

The remaining less than 50% non-Pashtuns are even fighting amongst each other. There are Farsi speaking non-Pashtuns in places like Herat and Mazar-e-Sharif that the US doesn't like, but then there are Uzbek Afghanis that they do like; but these 2 factions don't like each other either.

The US armed and aided the Taliban (aka Mujahideen) before, the Pakistani intelligence has been in contact with them since forever. Pakistan shares a common border with Afghanistan, India and US doesn't. Pakistan exerts a kind of control over Afghanistan that the US and India can not even dream about. This is because Pakistan is more aware of the realities in Afghanistan, India and US aren't. This is the reason why there are so many NATO and US lives lost everyday. The US is already losing the war, and then when the time is over, India's ambitions in Afghanistan are doomed. In fact they are doomed right now. If they actually understood the situation in Afghanistan, they would know there is no way to defeat the Pashtuns in Afghanistan, and it is inevitable that a Taliban government will soon be restored. Even the US has resigned to that fact, and just want to avenge Pakistan for its involvement in Afghanistan.
 
Unfortunately, India and the US will only lose in Afghanistan, and that reality is pretty evident even now. Look at it logically. India and the US have supported the minority factions of Afghanistan, the non-Pashtuns against the Taliban (Pashtuns). Pakistan has done the right thing in supporting the Pashtuns, as they comprise of a little more than 50% of the total population in Afghanistan. There is a huge sizable population of Pashtuns living in Pakistan, and are fierce supporters of Pakistan.

The remaining less than 50% non-Pashtuns are even fighting amongst each other. There are Farsi speaking non-Pashtuns in places like Herat and Mazar-e-Sharif that the US doesn't like, but then there are Uzbek Afghanis that they do like; but these 2 factions don't like each other either.

The US armed and aided the Taliban (aka Mujahideen) before, the Pakistani intelligence has been in contact with them since forever. Pakistan shares a common border with Afghanistan, India and US doesn't. Pakistan exerts a kind of control over Afghanistan that the US and India can not even dream about. This is because Pakistan is more aware of the realities in Afghanistan, India and US aren't. This is the reason why there are so many NATO and US lives lost everyday. The US is already losing the war, and then when the time is over, India's ambitions in Afghanistan are doomed. In fact they are doomed right now. If they actually understood the situation in Afghanistan, they would know there is no way to defeat the Pashtuns in Afghanistan, and it is inevitable that a Taliban government will soon be restored. Even the US has resigned to that fact, and just want to avenge Pakistan for its involvement in Afghanistan.

Who told you India is anti-Pashtuns? India is pro-peaceful and neutral Afghanistan, Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns included. India only supported the NA because Pakistan was supporting the Taliban.
 
India invited to be engaged in transition in Afghan: US

India invited to be engaged in transition in Afghan: US

Aware of India's "genuine national security interest" in Afghanistan, the Obama Administration has said it has invited both New Delhi and Islamabad to be engaged and support the transition process in the war-torn nation; where US intends to transfer the security to Afghan forces by 2014.


"Our strategy is a regional strategy and we have invited, countries from Pakistan to India to be engaged in and support this transition in Afghanistan," State Department spokesman, P J Crowley, said in response to a question.


"That is perhaps the most significant change that we've put into effect over the last 18 months, almost two years, is to take it from being just about Afghanistan to being about the region as a whole," he said.


While the Obama Administration has been very appreciative of India's role in Afghanistan, this is possibly for the first time that a senior US official has said that India has been invited for the process in Afghanistan.


"India is significantly invested in Afghanistan, and we continue to encourage the role that India is playing to help Afghanistan develop its economy and improve its security.


But primarily just like we saw this week, where Canada announced that it's going to transition its existing military effort from a combat role to a training role, there are many other countries, some within NATO, some outside of NATO, who have provided military forces. We've asked if they can increase the number of trainers that they have committed to this effort," Crowley said in response to a question.


The US envision 2011 as the beginning of a transition where Afghanistan will take greater responsibility for its own security, culminating in Afghanistan leadership in its own security matters by 2014, he said, adding that this is important to Afghanistan, it's important to the region.


"The process between now and then is focused on helping to strengthen Afghanistan's government both at the national level and at the local level, building up critical institutions that include, you know, both military capabilities and police capabilities," Crowley said.


"This has the ability to help continue the transformation of this region. So it has benefits for Afghanistan, but as Afghanistan stabilizes, it has obviously, you know, benefits that accrue to other countries, including Pakistan, including India and others.


"As you build up institutions and they perform, you can expect to see improvements in the Afghan economy and the export of Afghan goods to other countries in the region," Crowley said.
 
Good news..We need to engage more in afghanistan afterall we have deep strategic intrests in afghanistan..;)
 
India invited to be engaged in transition in Afghan: US

India invited to be engaged in transition in Afghan: US

Aware of India's "genuine national security interest" in Afghanistan, the Obama Administration has said it has invited both New Delhi and Islamabad to be engaged and support the transition process in the war-torn nation; where US intends to transfer the security to Afghan forces by 2014.


"Our strategy is a regional strategy and we have invited, countries from Pakistan to India to be engaged in and support this transition in Afghanistan," State Department spokesman, P J Crowley, said in response to a question.


"That is perhaps the most significant change that we've put into effect over the last 18 months, almost two years, is to take it from being just about Afghanistan to being about the region as a whole," he said.


While the Obama Administration has been very appreciative of India's role in Afghanistan, this is possibly for the first time that a senior US official has said that India has been invited for the process in Afghanistan.


"India is significantly invested in Afghanistan, and we continue to encourage the role that India is playing to help Afghanistan develop its economy and improve its security.


But primarily just like we saw this week, where Canada announced that it's going to transition its existing military effort from a combat role to a training role, there are many other countries, some within NATO, some outside of NATO, who have provided military forces. We've asked if they can increase the number of trainers that they have committed to this effort," Crowley said in response to a question.


The US envision 2011 as the beginning of a transition where Afghanistan will take greater responsibility for its own security, culminating in Afghanistan leadership in its own security matters by 2014, he said, adding that this is important to Afghanistan, it's important to the region.


"The process between now and then is focused on helping to strengthen Afghanistan's government both at the national level and at the local level, building up critical institutions that include, you know, both military capabilities and police capabilities," Crowley said.


"This has the ability to help continue the transformation of this region. So it has benefits for Afghanistan, but as Afghanistan stabilizes, it has obviously, you know, benefits that accrue to other countries, including Pakistan, including India and others.


"As you build up institutions and they perform, you can expect to see improvements in the Afghan economy and the export of Afghan goods to other countries in the region," Crowley said.

The invitation by the US to India in the 'transition and settlement' process in Afghanistan is inevitable. How the US has 'contoured' that invitation is not completely clear yet. But India will only be a direct participant in the 'constructive' process not the 'clean-up' one. No way, that India needs to send an expeditionary force into Afghanistan to secure its interests.
Later, the US may invite Russia into the process as well. Am willing to bet on it.
 
India is very popular with the general Afghan people Karzai himself studied in India and is seen as a pro Indian leader. It is in the benefit for both countries to have closer economic relations the mining MoU signed with India‎ is a example why India will expand it's footprint in Afganistan, it won't be leaving even when the US does.
 
presence of India in Afghanistan will keep pressure on pak.

My friend looks like you are people who havent learnt from history,
your presence in afghanistan is temporary, and it will never create pressure for pakistan. Because pakistanis share similar culture and history to afghans (Not All Pakistanis), these people have supported our war efforts for centuries in to India, from as early as 11th century, and as our gratitude we will always protect and support pakistanis,even those who are from eastern pakistan (Punjab, sindh). They are mixed bloods and can hardly be called indians.

Time is close for new generation of ghaznavi and ghuris.
 
India is very popular with the general Afghan people Karzai himself studied in India and is seen as a pro Indian leader. It is in the benefit for both countries to have closer economic relations the mining MoU signed with India‎ is a example why India will expand it's footprint in Afganistan, it won't be leaving even when the US does.

HA HA HA Khyber rifles were very pro British and took shiny guns and money but when momemnt of truth came and they were asked to attack the afghans, they turned their guns on the british,

Afghans who are pro indians were Ghaznavi, Ghuri, Babur, Timur and so on, same mentality just different time.
 
HA HA HA Khyber rifles were very pro British and took shiny guns and money but when momemnt of truth came and they were asked to attack the afghans, they turned their guns on the british,

Afghans who are pro indians were Ghaznavi, Ghuri, Babur, Timur and so on, same mentality just different time.

Yeah unfortunately history can't teach an old dog new tricks... Let em learn the hard way.
 
Who told you India is anti-Pashtuns? India is pro-peaceful and neutral Afghanistan, Pashtuns and non-Pashtuns included. India only supported the NA because Pakistan was supporting the Taliban.

India is anti-Pashtun because they supported the Communist parties in Afghanistan as well as Tajiks, and they supported the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The Pashtuns have always been anti-communism, which is why they got the support of the US against the Soviets. You also seem to forget that India had a huge Communist influence, and still has the huge communist issues (even though they are banished now) in the form of the Maoists. India used to have Communist parties, and it still has some communist parties today without even including the Maoists.
 
India is anti-Pashtun because they supported the Communist parties in Afghanistan as well as Tajiks, and they supported the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. The Pashtuns have always been anti-communism, which is why they got the support of the US against the Soviets. You also seem to forget that India had a huge Communist influence, and still has the huge communist issues (even though they are banished now) in the form of the Maoists. India used to have Communist parties, and it still has some communist parties today without even including the Maoists.

what a load of bullshit was that.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom