Pak protests US Army chief's planned visit to Siachen

[UnKnOwN]

I never knew India had a mountain warfare school on Siachen Glacier. Must be interesting training people next where 2 armies are always ready to clash...

I never said the premier visited Tibet, I said IF. I'll give you a real example this time. The US sent some warships to the Black Sea during the Georgia Crisis with the Russia. Does that change the real "ground situation" with Russia? No, but it lets Russia know that the US is watching, so be careful. Now Russia is sending warships to South America for a training exercise, where they haven't been for decades. Does that change any ground situations? No, but it lets the US know, that the "USSR is back and you need to watch it too".

The US knows that Siachen Glacier is a disputed area, but nevertheless accepted to go there for what? A briefing "on high-altitude land warfare techniques". Its not even at an academy but in a disputed region. The US already has its own mountain warfare schools in Alaska and other northern areas. It also has ties to other nations with expertise on mountain warfare.

You can invite British or French generals to visit the Northern Areas, but will they accept that invitation knowing its a disputed area? If you get a world power to visit a disputed region, it supports your position on that area.

 

[p2prada]

If the high altitude school is located in Siachen he would be very dumb to visit it underwater just to keep Pakistan happy. Heck then US chief will not leave his office in Pentagon in order to keep everyone happy. Protests have not helped so time to change the policy. When did the world complain if China PM visits Tibet ?

Regards

Ps : You can invite the Chinese or British or French General to the NA if they are interested

A few corrections AN.
Chinese leaders are called Premiers.
Siachen is not a school. Its the real thing.

 

[Always Neutral]

I never knew India had a mountain warfare school on Siachen Glacier. Must be interesting training people next where 2 armies are always ready to clash...


The US knows that Siachen Glacier is a disputed area, but nevertheless accepted to go there for what? A briefing "on high-altitude land warfare techniques". Its not even at an academy but in a disputed region. The US already has its own mountain warfare schools in Alaska and other northern areas. It also has ties to other nations with expertise on mountain warfare.

You can invite British or French generals to visit the Northern Areas, but will they accept that invitation knowing its a disputed area? If you get a world power to visit a disputed region, it supports your position on that area.

If Bush went there I can understand but a US General going to see how India maintains it bases there on the worlds highest battlefield I don't see anything sinister. The next time a US General visits the Durand Line you will have a problem. The Chinese have 35,000 km in which the damn well do what they want that does not spoil the Kashmiri cause ? So how will the visit of US General spoil the Kashmiri cause.

Regards

 

[p2prada]

I never knew India had a mountain warfare school on Siachen Glacier. Must be interesting training people next where 2 armies are always ready to clash...

I never said the premier visited Tibet, I said IF. I'll give you a real example this time. The US sent some warships to the Black Sea during the Georgia Crisis with the Russia. Does that change the real "ground situation" with Russia? No, but it lets Russia know that the US is watching, so be careful. Now Russia is sending warships to South America for a training exercise, where they haven't been for decades. Does that change any ground situations? No, but it lets the US know, that the "USSR is back and you need to watch it too".

The US knows that Siachen Glacier is a disputed area, but nevertheless accepted to go there for what? A briefing "on high-altitude land warfare techniques". Its not even at an academy but in a disputed region. The US already has its own mountain warfare schools in Alaska and other northern areas. It also has ties to other nations with expertise on mountain warfare.

You can invite British or French generals to visit the Northern Areas, but will they accept that invitation knowing its a disputed area? If you get a world power to visit a disputed region, it supports your position on that area.

AN:
Yes, according to pakistan any foreign leader visiting India must only visit india. This is because pakistan does not see kashmir as indian territory. But, whenever a foreign leader visits kashmir, it only legitimises indian claim over kashmir. Thus the protests.


Unknown:
The US already has its own mountain warfare schools in Alaska and other northern areas. It also has ties to other nations with expertise on mountain warfare.
True. But india and pakistan are the only 2 countries where high altitude warfare has actually taken place. India has the experience that can contribute to US training methods.

 

[Always Neutral]

AN:
Yes, according to pakistan any foreign leader visiting India must only visit india. This is because pakistan does not see kashmir as indian territory. But, whenever a foreign leader visits kashmir, it only legitimises indian claim over kashmir. Thus the protests.


.

All hogwash you mean to say Foreign Diplomats donot travel to disputed territories ? I am sure the Foreign DA's based in both countries must be visiting disputed areas in Kashmir and it still has not got anyone any brownie points.

Regards

 

[Nauman Umair]

If the high altitude school is located in Siachen he would be very dumb to visit it underwater just to keep Pakistan happy. Heck then US chief will not leave his office in Pentagon in order to keep everyone happy. Protests have not helped so time to change the policy. When did the world complain if China PM visits Tibet ?

Regards

Ps : You can invite the Chinese or British or French General to the NA if they are interested

hey bro...your neutrality rocks as does the mass of proton...but you aren't cognizant of the whole scenario concerning Kashmir...isn't so?

 

[Always Neutral]

hey bro...your neutrality rocks as does the mass of proton...but you aren't cognizant of the whole scenario concerning Kashmir...isn't so?

I have said both countries should stop this drama of loving Kashmiris. Its more about water and and strategic depth otherwise they would not be suffering so much on both sides of the border. BTW China running around in parts of NA is acceptable but one US General visiting Siachen is enough to become a tear jerker.

Regards

 

[Black Stone]

No it doesn't but its political. If China's premier goes to Tibet, wouldn't the Western nations start screaming (because it strengths China position on Tibet)? Or if India sends another expedition to "explore Kashmir", wouldn't Pakistan get mad?

You have used a wrong comparison. The Chinese leaders could visit Tibet whenever they like since Tibet is part of China.

Siachen Glacier on the other hand is a disputed territory.

 

[Black Stone]

A few corrections AN.
Chinese leaders are called Premiers.
Siachen is not a school. Its the real thing.

Actually, Chinese leaders are not called premiers. The Prime Minister of China is called a "Premier" while the President of China is called a "President".

If you want to go into more technical, then the President still uses the title of "Chairman" within the CPC.

 

[p2prada]

All hogwash you mean to say Foreign Diplomats donot travel to disputed territories ? I am sure the Foreign DA's based in both countries must be visiting disputed areas in Kashmir and it still has not got anyone any brownie points.

Regards

It depends on the nature of the visit too. A general(a rank worshiped in pak) or a state head(like bush) will cause more protests than, say, an ambassador or a foreign minister visit.

The general came to witness how india deals with the terrorists in kashmir. It is obviously bad for pakistan, who want to sell a different message to the world.

 

[p2prada]

Actually, Chinese leaders are not called premiers. The Prime Minister of China is called a "Premier" while the President of China is called a "President".

In the true sense of the word, you are right.
But, in the ideological sense calling a communist leader the equivalent of a democratic leader is blasphemous. So, peace.

If you want to go into more technical, then the President still uses the title of "Chairman" within the CPC.

Exactly. Premier and Chairman vs PM and President. China vs US(UK)