Lahore bombings planned in Afghanistan

[karan.1970]

We dont have to use 'good' taliban to do this or that we have much better options for eliminating afghanistan based indian terrorists and also their financers in delhi

All the best to you for that..

 

[Iggy]

By bombing our citizens, it is you who would be committing an act of war...

As Karan said it has to be proven..and i am asking that is the government is willing and capable enough to fight a two front war by bombing in Afghanistan?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

An overt strike by elements of Pakistan armed forces is certainly not a terror strike but a declaration of war.

An overt strike by Pakistan on the five declared Indian diplomatic missions would be taken as a declaration of war, but overt military strikes on other 'assets' that Pakistan declares as being involved in sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan would not necessarily be taken as a declaration of war.

A covert strike in Afghanistan on Indian consulates using Taliban is surely a terror strike unless by then India and Pakistan are already in the state of war by then.

Strawman - I never said Pakistan would use the Taliban to strike anyone, nor is there any evidence that Pakistan has done so in the past, including the Kabul embassy bombing.

About assasinations of Palestinian folks... If they were really terminated by Israeli forces then yes it is a declaration of war on those organizations (but I think that war is already declared and on for some time now).

The question is not one of declaration of war, but whether covert assassinations by Israel, that Israel does not claim, amount to terrorism.

You cant legitimize the action till you prove it. Else you may still chose to do so but attempts to legitimize it will not go far...

The US is not 'proving' anything when it carries out strikes in FATA - it is arguing 'self-defence', so shall we, and so long as the strikes are not overt military strikes on Indian diplomatic missions or officials, then India has little cause to complain.

If however an Indian Brigadier, Colonel or other soldiers and/or government employees die in a strike on a compound in Afghanistan that is not a declared Indian mission, then it is India that has to explain what its military and government officials were doing hobnobbing at the terrorist compound where they got killed.

 

[Awesome]

The key is if proven and if Pakistan is willing to stick to this stand of if proven, then really why would Pakistan need to use Taliban.. In that case any thing less than a full blown overt strike will be shameful..

As I've said time and again, no one is pointing Ghauris, Shaheens and Baburs onto you guys yet. If you think Pakistanis are exhibiting an overkill level of aggression right now, wait till that situation ever arises.

 

[ramu]

AgNoStIc MuSliM,

Only time will tell if Pakistan has the spine. First and foremost, lets get some proof. If that is not forthcoming, your actions will be condemned by every country including Saudi Arabia and China. The implications of diplomatic isolation will strangle the delicate Pakistani economy in to taking baby steps back to square one added with the humiliation and loss of trust all around.

Afghanistan and Pakistan already suffer from a massive trust deficit and such actions will do more harm than help.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AgNoStIc MuSliM,

Only time will tell if Pakistan has the spine.

Going by what Indians believe about the Afghan Embassy bombings and other attacks on Indians, you already believe we have the spine.

First and foremost, lets get some proof. If that is not forthcoming, your actions will be condemned by every country including Saudi Arabia and China. The implications of diplomatic isolation will strangle the delicate Pakistani economy in to taking baby steps back to square one added with the humiliation and loss of trust all around.

Condemnations do not equal sanctions, and refer to the adage of 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but words ...'

So long as 80%+ of NATO supplies flow through Pakistan, and Pakistan continues to support NATO efforts against the Taliban, there will be neither sanctions on an individual basis nor through the UN.

Afghanistan and Pakistan already suffer from a massive trust deficit and such actions will do more harm than help.

For Pakistan to take such actions implies Pakistan believes Afghanistan is aiding and abetting terrorism in Pakistan, which means that 'trust deficit' will be the least of Pakistan's concerns.

 

[Awesome]

As Karan said it has to be proven..and i am asking that is the government is willing and capable enough to fight a two front war by bombing in Afghanistan?

It has to be proven in Pakistan, thats it. For example if this news is true and there really is a mastermind caught, then there will be hell to pay for what you guys did to Lahore.

We don't need any country's certificate of approval to defend Pakistan.

 

[ramu]

Going by what Indians believe about the Afghan Embassy bombings and other attacks on Indians, you already believe we have the spine.

Well, you guys thought the GoI would launch strikes against Pakistan. But did that even happen ? NO. You can interpret the same about India. About Pakistan launching attacks, to tell you the truth, this is just TRP material and will not find takers even within the Pak army.

Condemnations do not equal sanctions, and refer to the adage of 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but words ...'

So long as 80%+ of NATO supplies flow through Pakistan, and Pakistan continues to support NATO efforts against the Taliban, there will be neither sanctions on an individual basis nor through the UN.

For Pakistan to take such actions implies Pakistan believes Afghanistan is aiding and abetting terrorism in Pakistan, which means that 'trust deficit' will be the least of Pakistan's concerns.

The leverage of 80% of supplies flowing through Pakistan is overused.
We all know that alternatives exist. The leverage you can argue is the cost of logistics. When a war is costing a few hundred billions a further escalation by a fraction is a call for the stake holders to make.

 

[ramu]

For Pakistan to take such actions implies Pakistan believes Afghanistan is aiding and abetting terrorism in Pakistan, which means that 'trust deficit' will be the least of Pakistan's concerns.

Purely at a strategy level, this would give India an unchallenged edge in influencing Afghans to move away from Pakistan. This will be a diplomatic suicide in Afghanistan to say the least.

 

[karan.1970]

I will voluteer if there is war between India and Pakistan , may father faught against the indians at Husani Wala and knocked down many and I will do the same.

You see there are many myths that indians have created about past wars , many of which are just false , bangladesh was a terriroty infested with traitors where as on West Pakistan side Pakistan actaully gave the indians a beating on more than one front most notable being the capture of Chamb and also of Hussainiwala ( Hussainiwala was later ruturned )

Indains got beat up badly at Hussainiwala and look what they write on Wikipedia .. tch tch such loosers

Hussainiwala - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



We will decend upon you like wrath that you have not seen before , this war is not about defending a traitor infested terrirtory , its about securing our cites and the future of our coming genrations.

We are ready to fight indians any where any time!!!

I will volunteer... lol... the eternal promise of cowardly cyber war mongers.

Folks encouraging war while sitting in the comfort of their sub urban homes in the west are worse than the ones who put money on Cockfights willing one to win against the other while not realizing that they are condemning both to death..Thankfully GoI and GoP are not as mindless..

 

[TheBraveHeart]

It has to be proven in Pakistan, thats it. For example if this news is true and there really is a mastermind caught, then there will be hell to pay for what you guys did to Lahore.

We don't need any country's certificate of approval to defend Pakistan.

Truth or not!! Certificate or not......!! U wont b able to move an inch forget about paying hell!!
Be practical when u speak, even after paralyzing Mumbai for four complete days by Pakistan supported militants we couldn't even threaten you with most of the International community supporting us and such a big military and economy!!
This is going to continue for some more years to come and as a prime sponsor of terrorism in 1990s and against India, Pakistan will feel the heat from inside, others need not trouble it!!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Purely at a strategy level, this would give India an unchallenged edge in influencing Afghans to move away from Pakistan. This will be a diplomatic suicide in Afghanistan to say the least.

But again, if Pakistan already believes the Afghans are aiding and abetting terrorism in Pakistan, there is little 'diplomatic advantage' left to be gained - in such a scenario Afghanistan has already shown itself to be Pakistan's enemy and willing to support terrorism in Pakistan.

Therefore at a strategic level it only improves Pakistan's position by removing sources of terror, since the GoA would be anti-Pakistan before such Pakistani action and anti-Pakistan after Pakistani action.

 

[RobbieS]

It has to be proven in Pakistan, thats it. For example if this news is true and there really is a mastermind caught, then there will be hell to pay for what you guys did to Lahore.

We don't need any country's certificate of approval to defend Pakistan.

Capturing a Pakistani who says his boss met an Indian army guy in Afghanistan is like shooting in the dark. May be you internal propaganda and conspiracy theory driven population will lap it up but nobody else.

And we understand your version of hell to pay - Bombings and terrorist strikes killing innocents. That's the only thing you guys are good at.

 

[Chappal Chor]

But again, if Pakistan already believes the Afghans are aiding and abetting terrorism in Pakistan, there is little 'diplomatic advantage' left to be gained - in such a scenario Afghanistan has already shown itself to be Pakistan's enemy and willing to support terrorism in Pakistan.

Therefore at a strategic level it only improves Pakistan's position by removing sources of terror, since the GoA would be anti-Pakistan before such Pakistani action and anti-Pakistan after Pakistani action.

And this would be more better for us as we would be easily be able encircle you then. any such strikes would result in relations between pakistan and afghans to be reduced to 0. And at the same time we will enjoy the leverage in Afghanistan. this would further fuel our presence in afghanistan with the consent of the afghan government. at least they are bit reluctant now.............

 

[karan.1970]

An overt strike by Pakistan on the five declared Indian diplomatic missions would be taken as a declaration of war, but overt military strikes on other 'assets' that Pakistan declares as being involved in sponsoring terrorism in Pakistan would not necessarily be taken as a declaration of war.

An overt strike on declared missions will be a declaration of war on India and Afg. Any where else, it will be just a war on Afghanistan.

Strawman - I never said Pakistan would use the Taliban to strike anyone, nor is there any evidence that Pakistan has done so in the past, including the Kabul embassy bombing.

I know you didnt. I was just listing possibilities and their result..

The question is not one of declaration of war, but whether covert assassinations by Israel, that Israel does not claim, amount to terrorism.

IMHO Yes, If true..

The US is not 'proving' anything when it carries out strikes in FATA - it is arguing 'self-defence', so shall we, and so long as the strikes are not overt military strikes on Indian diplomatic missions or officials, then India has little cause to complain.

If however an Indian Brigadier, Colonel or other soldiers and/or government employees die in a strike on a compound in Afghanistan that is not a declared Indian mission, then it is India that has to explain what its military and government officials were doing hobnobbing at the terrorist compound where they got killed.

So I dont disagree to most of your post here.. My view is following

1. Overt Strike on Declared Missions: War on India and Afg
2. Overt Strike elsewhere: War on Afghanistan (terrorists killed or not).. Similar to if India attacks terrorist camps in Pakistan Ocupied Kashmir or Mudrike
3. Covert strike anywhere irrespective of who killed: Terrorism
4. And to your last point: You will first have to prove that the area bombed was indeed a terrorist hideout before you demand explanations. Just saying it will not cut it..

That said, one of the folly of your arguement is that you are willing Paksitan to be able to do what US is doing. I dont think Pakistan has the will or the means to do that..