US must convince India to move troops from LoC

[Hellfire]

Hellfire, if the IA withdraws then either the PA or the head of the LeT will be sitting in Srinagar.

PA is in no position to offer any such guarantees. They have lost control over the Kashmir-oriented groups.

I agree Rabit

that is why I said they can guarantee that ..... and no they have not lost the control over these groups as of yet. however if there is a significant reversal on western front than they might be in trouble.

post-Kargil when Musharraf ordered closures of camp and attachement of all personnel in that to specifica regions under direct control of PA units there, it was noted that these people proved to be a bigger headache for PA in terms of lawlessness and discipline. And they are dangerious. So its carrots and stick for them ..... PA is good you have to grant that. They know their business!

 

[Hutchroy]

OHHHH boy there is a saying in urdu NAYE NAYE FAKIR HOYE HOO BHEEK MANGNEE KI JALDI HAI....let me translate...YOU HAVE JUST BECOME POOR YOU ARE DESPRATE TO START BEGGING SOON.....listen my friend you know when PAKISTAN got parity with india once and for all it was back in may 1998...after we did our nuclear tests!!! after than conventional war became obsoloete for both nations!!

Indian Estimated GDP for 2008-2009 is Rs. 54,26,277 Crores i.e. Rs. 54,262.77 Billion

Exchange Rate USD 1 = INR 44.7329 for the Period 01-04-2008 to 31-12-2008

If for Period 01-01-2009 to 31-04-2009 the USD is worth INR 51 then the Average works out to INR 46.26. For easy calculation I would allow USD 1 = INR 47.

Thus the Indian GDP is USD 1,153 Billion which is slightly over Seven time the Pakistani Estimated GDP of USD 162 Billion.

With India’s GDP being say Seven Times that of Pakistan it is not unreasonable for India to spend Seven times the Amount on he Defence as compared to Pakistan.

Pakistan’s Defence Budget is about USD 5 Billion and India’s Defence Budget is about USD 30 Billion which comparatively is not “Excessive”.

Of course Pakistan spending One Sixth of India is able to have Sixty Percent Personnel Strength and also 60% of Defence Capability is a “Credit” to the Pakistani Armed Forces.

However, it would be difficult for Pakistan to have Parity with India as it would be difficult for Pakistan to compete with a Country whose GDP is Seven times that of Pakistan.

 

[Zob]

@ HUTCHROY.... i meant parity in terms of war capability.... please read my post....now since we and you both have developed our NUCLEAR weapons it means neither you india nor us pakistan are going to war anytime soon!!!

 

[PeacefulIndian]

@ HUTCHROY.... i meant parity in terms of war capability.... please read my post....now since we and you both have developed our NUCLEAR weapons it means neither you india nor us pakistan are going to war anytime soon!!!

War has always been out of question since last decade or so. And nuclear weapons have little to do with it. When India's economy started booming, we realized that feudal wars will only take us back in time, and development will have to be sacrificed. So I don't see a war anytime soon, unless something unforeseen happens.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

EyelessInGaza

.............
Two, is a pullback by the IA supposed to neutralize the possibility of an Indian thrust into Pakistan? Does anyone really think that India is going to mount an offensive at this of all times? Not even considering the fact that this would be military adventurism at its worst, you think the current geo political dynamic would even permit India to make such a move? Simply put, America would hand us our a$$es to us in a heart beat for muddying the waters.

As of today, US will gladly support it. Had India decided to strike post 26/11, they would have at best remained neutral if not joined in with India along with Israel, UK, and others. NATO forces are 'bogged down' as per general public perceptions in Europe and mainland US. These countries (aprat from US) have no interest in looking outside their own borders. So its a dicey situation for the respective governments which are being increasingly seen as being US lackey.

Hellfire: I genuinely doubt if the US is going to support an Indian strike into Pakistan, when chances are that any such act by the IA can turn in to an all out war and end in a nuclear tea party.

Apart from the obviously catastrophic consequences for the region, even the most tentative of IA incursions will give PA the perfect and utterly undeniable 'excuse' not to clean out it's own backyard in the West. Which significantly dilutes the primary objective of the US, which is Afghanistan. And the US isn't going to support any action that is deleterious to it's interests.

 

[Contrarian]

Hi,

The parliament attack in dehli and mumbai attacks have nothing in common---the first one was sponsored by india on itself---the second attack was to ruin the relationship being built up between indai and pakistan.

I reiterate Mastan, do you have any kind of proof regarding India using terrorists to attack its own Parliament, or have you come to this conclusion on the basis of the logic that you have mentioned above. That Pakistan had nothing to gain while India did.

Malay---as you stated in your post that india had gone way ahead of pakistan in the 90's---so now pakistan has gotten a chance to re-deem its replenished defence---there is no country in any frame of mind---sane or insane would carry out any kind of attack under those conditions which existed in 2002. So---you did asnwer it yourself---india so far ahead---pakistan to do catch up---why would india want pakistan to do catch up---india stupid---no india not stupid---india very clever---kill some of your own and make it look like your enemy has done the act.

Come on Mastan. Just the fact that Pakistan was also improving its economy and thus defence does not mean India will start attacking herself. It pushed India to war, a war that would have been catastrophic to India's economy.

Years ago---nobody would have believed that Col Purohit was behind the killings of muslims---or the fire in the train was not caused by the muslims but an unfortunate cooking accident in the passenger coach---who would have believed these things at all---india had made all the world believe that muslims were behind the fire in the train and no other muslims were killed by any hindu radicals---the world believed evry word that the indians said---now the truth comes out---india had lied to the world---there was state sponsored terrorism involved in the killings of the muslim civilians in india.

Your statements are self contradictory. If you say it is state sponsored terrorism, then it automatically means that no independent inquiry can be conducted. And if a seemingly independent inquiry would be conducted then it would come out with the same result what the India said.

So think about it, if an inquiry is comming out and saying it was an accident, not a deliberate action, then what does it mean, that it is not state sponsored. And secondly, any action becomes State Sponsored, if the Govt of India comes out and says or endorses it. Now if your not aware Mastan, the GoI has not defended the course of events in Gujarat. The Govt has condemned it, the ruling political party unequivocally blasts the Gujarat govt for not taking timely action among numerous other faults. That the state govt of Gujarat did not intervene is already a hotly criticized topic.

Also the fact, that a couple of the cabinet ministers of Gujarat have been arrested because of them being complicit in the Gujarat riots also points to the fact that any action was NOT state sponsored.
Justice in India is always delayed but in most cases, not denied.

So before you talk about serious issues such as State Sponsored communal rioting, think about the facts first.

As regards to India making the world believe that Muslims burnt the train, i think Indian Media talking about things does not imply that 'India' said that. Again, unless the GoI says something, India does not. Dont confuse things here.

The bottomline is that regardless of what india does---americans are going to leave afghanistan one day---the northern alliance would lose the elctions and pushtuns would be in power---so india would lose one more time.

Remains to be seen. I believe that is the reason India is ONLY investing in civil infrastructure and aid in Afghanistan, so as to gain goodwill. And that has been a successful venture till now. India has not donated military equipment, arms, etc. Its all something which will help the Afghan civil society. Lets see how things turn out.

I believe that it is about time that india swallow its pride one more time and show itself to be a leader and stop funding the terrorist activities in baluchistan and fata and move its forces away from the border. Bottomline is that, we will eventually pay back in coin either with friendship or with war. The 5 or 6 years of friendship were good years for both of us---50 years of friendship will be much better for us.

Lets hope for the best.

 

[Contrarian]

Army on high alert, claims terrorist waiting across to infiltrate

After foiling two major intrusion bids in the last month, Army said on Wednesday that more terrorists are waiting at "launch pads" across the Line of Control (LoC) in Jammu and Kashmir for a chance to infiltrate and troops have been "redeployed" to thwart any such attempt.

Over the last month, terrorists have made two major infiltration bids, which were partly successful, Vice Chief of Army Staff Lt Gen Noble Thamburaj told reporters in New Delhi.

However, most of the infiltrators were neutralised in the second tier of security along the LoC, he added.

"We have realised that there are some more terrorists who are waiting in their launch pads and training camps, ready to be launched (into India)," he said.

"The Indian Army has done redeployment (of troops to counter infiltration)...We have built in additional surveillance capabilities to look across LoC ... We have deployed more technical equipment for surveillance even at most difficult places keeping the LoC under active patrolling and surveillance at all times," the Army Vice Chief said.

Indian Defence News - 8ak Tri-Services Nuclear Space Tenders www.8ak.inNew 2009 RC Battle Tanks High Quality Radio Control RC Tanks www.BananaHobby.comHealthy Living - Skin How to Keep Your Skin Looking Young RealSimple.com/healt Ads by Google

Thamburaj said infiltration bids have been "timed around" Lok Sabha elections.

After a visit to forward areas of Jammu and Kashmir, Army Chief Gen Deepak Kapoor said on Tuesday that 54 militants had infiltrated into India in March.

Sources in the government said the infiltration was being supported by the Pakistani establishment.
Army on high alert, claims terrorist waiting across to infiltrate

So i guess that ends speculation whether US will make India remove some amount of troops from the border. It seems apparently more troops are being sent to the border.

 

[Nomad]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomad View Post
What difference does is make whether I am from the moon.
Yes it makes a difference, why are you afraid of showing your actual self?

Since Mastan Khan had more detailed questions about me I will answer in his post.

Quote:
By your above statements you must love all freedom movements. So you must support the freedom movements in Balochistan and Sri Lanka. If you don't then you are also picking your own freedom movements. I do not support any freedom movements that slaughter innocents as part of the struggle. You on the other hand justify the slaughter and every one else must agree with you.
Yes we love every freedom movement that is JUSTIFIED!!(i think if brains are used this one word-justified-would make many things clear)
But yes no one supports blood shed and slaughter, nor you neither do we. Don't just work on assumptions over here.

I am not getting your logic here. You accused of the US of supporting some freedom movements we think are just, and calling every one else a terrorist. By your logic I assumed you supported all freedom movements. When I asked you about freedom movements in Balochistan and Sri Lanka you did not answer the question but you said you supported movements "Yes we love every freedom movement that is JUSTIFIED!!". My question is justified by whom?. If you want to pick and choose which movement is justified and which is not then don't criticize some one else who does the same.
I said I will not support any freedom movements that slaughters innocents for their cause. You agreed. Then how can you support the Kasmiri separatist movement that have slaughtered so many innocent Kasmiri muslims, sikhs, pandits, and depopulated the entire Kasmir valley of Kashmiri pandits.
Now if you make a statement like " Only freedom movements I support are justifed, and perfectly legit no matter how many innocents are killed." Then there will not be arguments from me.

Quote:
Now that is exactly what every country wants. So what would be wrong in India pulling the same stunts you did in Afghanistan to have a peaceful pakistan which is a threat to no one.
A few questions here:
First, Which stunt did Pakistan pull? Care to elaborate

Second, And if you think india is trying to make Afghanistan a better and safe place, then sir i really doubt your grip on international politics.

And lastly, how can india make Pakistan a better place? By capturing us? or by snatching away Kashmir, or may be by fueling the Baluchistan insurgency? Or may by having a pro-india, anti-Pakistan govt in Afghanistan which would always and continuously pose us a threat on our western border?

The "Stunt" I meant was the support you gave to the Taliban to have proxy control of Afghanistan. The GOP was well aware of the brutality of the regime the daily slaughter of their citizens, the blowing up of the Bamiyan Buddahs, the support of airplane hijacker etc...... You justification was you wanted an "Afghanistan that was a threat to no one" It is from this non threating Afghanistan that the World trade center bombing were planned and executed. All you wanted was an Afghanistan that was no threat to you, and you did not care if it was a threat for the world.

India is pitching in to help in Afghanistan. India definitely has its own selfish reason for doing so (and i believe all countries do). The CAR have huge reserves of energy India desperately needs. India has decent relationships with them, and they have the potential to be good trading partners of India. Since access to them is blocked thru Pakistan, India is looking for access thru Iran and Afghanistan. Therefore it is in India's interest to see Afghanistan stable. I do not see where a pro India Afghanistan should be anti Pakistan.

As far as Pakistan goes, I was using your same logic you used to keep Afghanistan as your proxy. India has no benefits in occupying any territory of Pakistan even ***, the downside will make it a very unwise choice.

As far as Kashmir, I do not think even if India loses another 100,000 soldiers it will give up Kashmir. Pakistan's singular focus on an Azad Kashmir has caused major intrinsic damage to Pakistan. The first is a succession of incompetent leaders who could bring up Kashmir when their incompetence was questioned. Second an army who brings up Kashmir to suck up more funds, and keep a grip on the civilian government. Third culture of Jihadi's that started with the Afghan war has flourished so much so it is threatening to engulf the country.

 

[Xeric]

I am not getting your logic here. You accused of the US of supporting some freedom movements we think are just, and calling every one else a terrorist. By your logic I assumed you supported all freedom movements. When I asked you about freedom movements in Balochistan and Sri Lanka you did not answer the question but you said you supported movements "Yes we love every freedom movement that is JUSTIFIED!!". My question is justified by whom?. If you want to pick and choose which movement is justified and which is not then don't criticize some one else who does the same.
I said I will not support any freedom movements that slaughters innocents for their cause. You agreed. Then how can you support the Kasmiri separatist movement that have slaughtered so many innocent Kasmiri muslims, sikhs, pandits, and depopulated the entire Kasmir valley of Kashmiri pandits.
Now if you make a statement like " Only freedom movements I support are justifed, and perfectly legit no matter how many innocents are killed." Then there will not be arguments from me.

One, Where did i said that the US have been supporting freedom movements?

Two, i said justified, well having said that, everyone (who has a brain) knows which one is JUST or otherwise....the ones who have been forced to comply if ask for freedom may be justified, a movement resulting from a forced occupation is justified, the ones whose land have been encroached would yield a justified liberation!

Palestine, Kashmir etc etc can be a few examples.

But the ones which have been instigated by 'outer' hands, funded by enemies, and in short any movement that have been 'started' by outsiders to intimidate a particular country would not be justified by anyone!

Balochistan is a classical example! unless the US makes it a justified claim

The "Stunt" I meant was the support you gave to the Taliban to have proxy control of Afghanistan.

Which freaking support dude?
We did what you wanted us to do. This is a guud way to throw your own f!lth on someone else!

The GOP was well aware of the brutality of the regime the daily slaughter of their citizens, the blowing up of the Bamiyan Buddahs,

Sorry sir we dont overthrow governments and regimes, which simply can't, that's something the Yanks have mastered, so please you keep on doing it.

BTW, who told you to leave us and Afghanistan in that mess on the very first day when the last Russian soldier left Afghanistan. Had you been so worried about the 'brutality' you should have listened to Charlie Winston!!

Why did you screwed the end game in Afghanistan? Who told you to do so?

You justification was you wanted an "Afghanistan that was a threat to no one" It is from this non threating Afghanistan that the World trade center bombing were planned and executed. All you wanted was an Afghanistan that was no threat to you, and you did not care if it was a threat for the world.

Well first i seriously doubt that it was planned in Afghanistan, that's a separate debate and i am not getting carried away on this thread!

Second, refer to my above reply about who left who and who screwed who. It's all your own fault! i'll prove it of you want.

India is pitching in to help in Afghanistan. India definitely has its own selfish reason for doing so (and i believe all countries do). The CAR have huge reserves of energy India desperately needs. India has decent relationships with them, and they have the potential to be good trading partners of India. Since access to them is blocked thru Pakistan, India is looking for access thru Iran and Afghanistan. Therefore it is in India's interest to see Afghanistan stable. I do not see where a pro India Afghanistan should be anti Pakistan.

As far as Pakistan goes, I was using your same logic you used to keep Afghanistan as your proxy. India has no benefits in occupying any territory of Pakistan even ***, the downside will make it a very unwise choice.

As far as Kashmir, I do not think even if India loses another 100,000 soldiers it will give up Kashmir. Pakistan's singular focus on an Azad Kashmir has caused major intrinsic damage to Pakistan. The first is a succession of incompetent leaders who could bring up Kashmir when their incompetence was questioned. Second an army who brings up Kashmir to suck up more funds, and keep a grip on the civilian government. Third culture of Jihadi's that started with the Afghan war has flourished so much so it is threatening to engulf the country.

The rest is just a rant and doesn't merit a reply!!
Thanks

 

[Nomad]

Originally posted By MastanKhan

Nomad quote


" What difference does is make whether I am from the moon. Just deal with the points ".


Hi,

It sounds like such an innocent statement---now doesn't it. But your background makes you who and what you are and want to be.

I personally would want to know your age group and what you do for a living---maybe not exactly---just some basic ideas---so that when I talk to you---at least I can have an intelligent conversation---that will also help me in how to address you and how to approach you. Thankyou.

Baluchistan is not a freedom movement but rather insurgency funded by india to create instability in the region to benefit it.

Baluchistani people were a willfull partner in joining pakistan at the time of partition---unrest in baluchistan is caused by two tribal leaders of mari and bugti clan---kashmir on the other hand was a disputed territory right from the word go---even though the kashmiri people muslims in majority were to go with pakistan---.

The bottomline is that india will have to pull its millitary back from the borders and stop funding the terrorist organizations in baluchistan.

Mr. MastanKhan

Since you and some others want to know more than I wrote in my introduction and since you asked so politely I cannot refuse.

I was born in Kuwait and am 45yrs old. I am a christian, a US citizen and am in the wholesale business. I have spent time in India and have traveled a bit. I hope this helps.

I have to say your logic moves to the beat of a different drummer. I just can't figure out the beat or the drummer. So we are going to have some arguments but lets keep it fun.

 

[Nomad]

Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim

The obvious answer to that is then why the continued feet dragging on resolving the dispute with Pakistan by conducting a plebiscite, by picking one option out of multiple variations on the original UNSC resolutions that have been suggested.

I think the time for a plebiscite is long gone. It is like whipping a dead horse. It is never going to happen. Both India and Pakistan should move on from here. Pakistan should keep "Azzad Kashmir. China Aksai Chen, and India the rest. After a period of calm then the decision should be made how the Kashmiris on both sides can be integrated.
This way both Pakistan and India can focus on developing their countries and their areas of Kashmir. This way each country can do their best for the people of Kashmir.

 

[Hellfire]

EyelessInGaza




Hellfire: I genuinely doubt if the US is going to support an Indian strike into Pakistan, when chances are that any such act by the IA can turn in to an all out war and end in a nuclear tea party.

Totally my personal opinion. Its based on the fact that Pakistan, in case of a first strike by India (and I have earlier posted quite frequently that it can be done in unconventional background) may just retaliate across the board ...with nukes and send one US way too in afghanistan in an attempt to drag it in on its side. This slimmest of possibilities may just cause enough US concersn for it to move to counter Pakistani attepmts to use nukes in early stages itself. Please discount it in case of any Pakistani attempts at provoking incidents as then India will still be bound to limit the war into a localised area in time and not escalate.

Apart from the obviously catastrophic consequences for the region, even the most tentative of IA incursions will give PA the perfect and utterly undeniable 'excuse' not to clean out it's own backyard in the West. Which significantly dilutes the primary objective of the US, which is Afghanistan. And the US isn't going to support any action that is deleterious to it's interests

oh trust me US would love India in afghanistan too to help out ...... its difficult going there for them ...... and they need all the help that they can get.

 

[Hellfire]

wrong thread

 

[Zob]

Totally my personal opinion. Its based on the fact that Pakistan, in case of a first strike by India (and I have earlier posted quite frequently that it can be done in unconventional background) may just retaliate across the board ...with nukes and send one US way too in afghanistan in an attempt to drag it in on its side. This slimmest of possibilities may just cause enough US concersn for it to move to counter Pakistani attepmts to use nukes in early stages itself. Please discount it in case of any Pakistani attempts at provoking incidents as then India will still be bound to limit the war into a localised area in time and not escalate.

what do you think we will nuke the US troops to get them on our side...i seriously don't know who sounds scary the taliban or you...

oh trust me US would love India in afghanistan too to help out ...... its difficult going there for them ...... and they need all the help that they can get.

Oh trust me US knows that if it even asks INDIA for help what consequences would be from across the border....

 

[Hellfire]

Zob

what do you think we will nuke the US troops to get them on our side...i seriously don't know who sounds scary the taliban or you...

no you wont. but the threat is enough to make US sweat, aint it? and you know how those paranoids in Pentagon will think, that our forces in Afghanistan may be nuked etc etc ......

Me scary?

Oh trust me US knows that if it even asks INDIA for help what consequences would be from across the border

you do get what I say ..... you just love to play with sentences and stretch them right?