We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan

[harish]

Well whether it is understood or not, we have No First Use as part of our doctrine, and you do not. We can debate the semantics or assign reasons thereof to no realistic conclusion. Be that as it may, I am embarrassed to point out that there will be no one alive on your side to actually need to be bothered about prevailing winds from the Bay of Bengal either.

 

[Iggy]

The fact is that we're doing EVERYTHING we can within our legal and practical ability to rid our country of the terrorist threat. You insisting that we're doing 'nothing' does not make it true, it only demonstrates how unwilling you are to acknowledge Pakistan's ground realities. Nationalist hate is blinding you to the sacrifices the Pakistani nation is making to rid the region of this menace, your agenda is political and directed against the Pakistani state and the Pakistani people and not the terrorists who attacked Mumbai and who also had links with segments of India's domestic populace.

Going by your logic, just because there are dozens of terrorist organizations in India, this 'validates' all assertions that the Indian establishment provides support to all of them. Don't let your judgment be so clouded by nationalistic sentiment and such blatant biases please.

I hope to see a higher quality of discourse from a senior member such as yourself in the future.

With due respect to your nation the actions against most of the terrorists are taken only after US pressure and bombs started exploding inside Pakistan..before that not a single genuine steps were taken against terrorism in Pakistan..and there were no actions against terrorist organisations which work against India as of now..there were no crack down on organisations like JuD aka LeT ..they are still actively collecting money in Pakistan and their leader are calling jihad against India..

On tape: Hafiz Saeed threatens India with jihad: India Today - Latest Breaking News from India, World, Business, Cricket, Sports, Bollywood.

 

[TechLahore]

Let us please not be irrational and speak about guts or the lack thereof with reference to India not attacking Pakistan when there was clear reason to. What would Pakistan have done had India launched a full scale attack? Fight back of course right? And on the evidence of the last few times you have fought back, you would have lost. Again. Which is where the strong temptation to use the last ace up your sleeve would have come. And we all know what that would have meant. So can you blame India or fault its guts for not attacking you? Please be reasonable and not sound like a schoolboy thumbing his nose at a classmate daring him to fight. Because with India and Pakistan today, you are just not going to get out of it with a simple bloody nose like before.

It's not a question of guts. It's a question of viable options that have a realistic probability of achieving intended results. On this plane, there are basically two options. War or Diplomacy. The third option, as was being discussed in a different thread, is Indian covert action on Pakistani territory. The problem with this option is that Pakistan already believes India is sponsoring terrorism on Pakistani soil (let's not get into why or why not, the point is this is the perception of both the Pakistani government and the people), any escalation in Indian covert action on Pakistani soil will be responded to in kind... perhaps in an even more extreme fashion. This will have the effect of dragging India into a low-intensity conflict where you might see covert strikes occurring every day or other day in major Indian cities. This is exactly what the Indian government wants to avoid.

Obviously, the issue with all-out war is that we will all be eliminated, so it doesn't appear to be a reasonable way to resolve our differences.

Personally, I am not a big fan of talks either until there is a fundamental change viz 63 year old core issues that have shaped all subsequent Pak-India discussions/disagreements.

So where that leaves us, I think, is that there can be diplomatic pretense, but there can't really be a significant response from the Indian side. All the possible options available (as discussed above) lead to a worsening of the situation from the Indian pov. I think that's why you see the GoI pay lip service but not actually engage in any meaningful action. Again, not a guts issue, more an options issue.

 

[karan.1970]

It's not a question of guts. It's a question of viable options that have a realistic probability of achieving intended results. On this plane, there are basically two options. War or Diplomacy. The third option, as was being discussed in a different thread, is Indian covert action on Pakistani territory. The problem with this option is that Pakistan already believes India is sponsoring terrorism on Pakistani soil (let's not get into why or why not, the point is this is the perception of both the Pakistani government and the people), any escalation in Indian covert action on Pakistani soil will be responded to in kind... perhaps in an even more extreme fashion. This will have the effect of dragging India into a low-intensity conflict where you might see covert strikes occurring every day or other day in major Indian cities. This is exactly what the Indian government wants to avoid.

Obviously, the issue with all-out war is that we will all be eliminated, so it doesn't appear to be a reasonable way to resolve our differences.

Personally, I am not a big fan of talks either until there is a fundamental change viz 63 year old core issues that have shaped all subsequent Pak-India discussions/disagreements.

So where that leaves us, I think, is that there can be diplomatic pretense, but there can't really be a significant response from the Indian side. All the possible options available (as discussed above) lead to a worsening of the situation from the Indian pov. I think that's why you see the GoI pay lip service but not actually engage in any meaningful action. Again, not a guts issue, more an options issue.

Agree to the above analysis except the bold part. In my view, if that happens ( i mean extreme covert action by Pakistan in India) and even if pakistan believes it is a response to a covert action by India, we will end up in a full blown war scenario.. Cant comment nuclear or otherwise though..

 

[TechLahore]

Agree to the above analysis except the bold part. In my view, if that happens ( i mean extreme covert action by Pakistan in India) and even if pakistan believes it is a response to a covert action by India, we will end up in a full blown war scenario.. Cant comment nuclear or otherwise though..

Precisely. You can rest assured that covert action by India in Pakistan will be responded to vigorously, therefore the scenario you are painting will likely materialize. Which is why all-out war and diplomacy appear to be the only two viable choices for India.

 

[Kasrkin]

Well i had a different perception of you before 26/11 and after coming here i have a different one, however my present comments and opinions have been influenced by the following

Please understand that I don't really care how and why you've come to hold such unrefined sentiments in regards to my country. Having a balanced take on things is your own responsibility. If you choose or are obliged to be so selective and narrow in your analyzation of things then that is not the fault of anyone else, not me or Pakistan.

I don't have time or the need (I feel) to address the factors you say are responsible for leading you believe that Pakistan is not fighting the terrorists. That is simply below my energies. Suffice to say that this 'blatant non-compliance' of promises is all in your head.

Why do we have to explain ourselves and throw light at all we have done for you? Your argument is not factual, therefore there is no need to address it with comprehensive facts. Its never 'guilty until proven innocent', you need to back up your astoundingly ignorant claims of Pakistan doing nothing before we have to prove that we're doing anything.

Your views and understanding is very polarized. You may not be an extremist in the sense that we commonly refer to, but your views are not much more balanced or independent. Please try to examine the other side yourself before expecting us to do it for you, I'm sure that you will come across many things that will give you pause for thought since you say you are so neutral.

 

[Kasrkin]

With due respect to your nation the actions against most of the terrorists are taken only after US pressure and bombs started exploding inside Pakistan..before that not a single genuine steps were taken against terrorism in Pakistan..and there were no actions against terrorist organisations which work against India as of now..there were no crack down on organisations like JuD aka LeT ..they are still actively collecting money in Pakistan and their leader are calling jihad against India..

Action was, is and will be taken against the terrorists, period. Everything else i.e. importance of US pressure is irrelevant. US involvement in the region is an intense and complex matter. US pressure will always be present. However, Pakistan always acts in what is in her best interest, with or without US pressure. That is something that has been acknowledged by the US. If we act, we acted, thats the end of it. This in no way credits the argument that Pakistan has not acted.

There is a crackdown on LeT/JuD. It has been going on for a decade now. The fact that these organizations are not destroyed or are able to resurface in some form does not substantiate the arguments that no crackdown has taken place. By their very nature, these organizations and their splinter groups will be hard to completely eradicate. Almost impossible if the underlying causes are not addressed. India is only making things worse by this militaristically confrontational approach which is annoying many Pakistanis who can see their country struggling against terrorism and being bullied by an old rival at the same time.

Lastly, as a matter of forum policy we do not consider India Today to be anywhere near a credible or reliable source of information in regards to Pakistan. Their biases are comically apparent, as has been exposed. Use neutral sources where possible to anchor your arguments. What is clearly blatant and crude Indian political rhetoric cannot be counted as an impartial source of information.

 

[sensenreason]

Please understand that I don't really care how and why you've come to hold such unrefined sentiments in regards to my country. Having a balanced take on things is your own responsibility. If you choose or are obliged to be so selective and narrow in your analyzation of things then that is not the fault of anyone else, not me or Pakistan.

I don't have time or the need (I feel) to address the factors you say are responsible for leading you believe that Pakistan is not fighting the terrorists. That is simply below my energies. Suffice to say that this 'blatant non-compliance' of promises is all in your head.

Why do we have to explain ourselves and throw light at all we have done for you? Your argument is not factual, therefore there is no need to address it with comprehensive facts. Its never 'guilty until proven innocent', you need to back up your astoundingly ignorant claims of Pakistan doing nothing before we have to prove that we're doing anything.

Your views and understanding is very polarized. You may not be an extremist in the sense that we commonly refer to, but your views are not much more balanced or independent. Please try to examine the other side yourself before expecting us to do it for you, I'm sure that you will come across many things that will give you pause for thought since you say you are so neutral.

I believe that the belief in Pakistan (and rightly so) that India cannot go to war with Pakistan (a short low intensity conflict) is reducing India's policy options and emboldening the anti-India (ie majority) there...for this and only this reason; India must build capability to exercise this action to put fear in the Pak policy makers mind of Indian action and that alone can change the terror policy of Pakistan and roll back the camps etc...

 

[PakSher]

Yes, had India not built the 22 terrorist training camps to train the Bengali Muqti-Bani Terrorists in East Pakistan to attack Pakistan Army, it would not have been in this situation. Had India not trained LTTE and their suicide bombers, Rajiv Ghandhi would have been alive, had India not did a military campaign against its citizen Sikhs and their holy places, Indra Ghandhi would have been alive. India needs to change it policies, if it wants other nations to respect its sovreignity. India does not exercise it so that is why India reeps what it sows. India will also fail in Afghanistan no matter how much money it spends there.

 

[PakSher]

Regarding India telling my country how they will deal with Pakistan, we will cross the bridge when we come to it. If there is a situation that we have a real threat from India, we will preempt and destroy those Indian assets on the ground before they can even take off in the air. In retaliation if India comes back with ballistic or nuclear missiles, we will have a matching response for it.

 

[ajpirzada]

I believe that the belief in Pakistan (and rightly so) that India cannot go to war with Pakistan (a short low intensity conflict) is reducing India's policy options and emboldening the anti-India (ie majority) there...for this and only this reason; India must build capability to exercise this action to put fear in the Pak policy makers mind of Indian action and that alone can change the terror policy of Pakistan and roll back the camps etc...

nop. 1: its the belief that india is only trying to ridicule pakistan when we are already stuck in a mess on our western border.
2: and also the perception of india pretending to be the nice guy while supporting covert activities at the same time. after all you did the same during 1971 and siachin war.

together these two factors are emboldening the anti-india sentiment here in pak.

 

[Spitfighter]

Precisely. You can rest assured that covert action by India in Pakistan will be responded to vigorously, therefore the scenario you are painting will likely materialize. Which is why all-out war and diplomacy appear to be the only two viable choices for India.

Tech, congrats on becoming a mod.

Here's what I said in another thread in my reply to Jana.

India cannot fight a protracted war with Pakistan, hence we have to limit our battles, what better way to limit the battle then to fight in Kashmir? Pakistan has ventured into Kashmir itself on several occasions assuming, of course, that the battle will be contained. The IA can deploy a force the size of the entire PA in Kashmir and still have enough to defend the IB (international border), thereby tying down a size able chunk of the PA and making AK that much more vulnerable.

Will use nuclear weapons in Kashmir? against what it considers its own territory? Will Pakistan launch a nuclear weapon on Delhi if the IA runs over Kashmir? if so, what will happen after the nuclear weapon is launched?

Super powers have shuddered at the very idea of nuclear war, Pakistan will not launch a nuclear weapon against Indian civilian targets (or military ones for that matter) unless it feels its existence is threatened. In any case the world will not stand by and watch while all this is going down, all India has to do is hold a major part of Kashmir (including AK) when we come to the negotiating table, an option Pakistan will surely exercise before it decides to nuke a stronger rival.

 

[karan.1970]

nop. 1: its the belief that india is only trying to ridicule pakistan when we are already stuck in a mess on our western border.
2: and also the perception of india pretending to be the nice guy while supporting covert activities at the same time. after all you did the same during 1971 and siachin war.


together these two factors are emboldening the anti-india sentiment here in pak.

Are there any neutral sources for the bold part above??

 

[karan.1970]

We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan

=

Typical idiotic flame..

When you have nothing substantial to contribute and are feeling a little left out because of that, it gives rise to posts like these.. Takes care of the feeling of inferiority for some time, but on a longer term, learn to do some research on the net and contribute. The feeling of fulfillment will last longer..

 

[Spitfighter]

nop. 1: its the belief that india is only trying to ridicule pakistan when we are already stuck in a mess on our western border.

A mess that India has nothing to do with. Pakistan would've hammered India diplomatically had we really been stirring up trouble in Pakistan's tribal regions.

Pakistan created the mess on its western border, albeit unintentionally. Anti-India organizations like the LeT OTOH were nurtured for a single purpose, to wage war on India. India believes that Pakistan has done close to nothing to uproot India specific terrorist organizations. Short of war, diplomatic pressure (for what its worth) is about the only leverage we have on Pakistan.

2: and also the perception of india pretending to be the nice guy while supporting covert activities at the same time. after all you did the same during 1971 and siachin war.

together these two factors are emboldening the anti-india sentiment here in pak.

I think it has more to do with self righteousness.

Pakistan isn't the victim here, your hands are anything but clean. What about '65, '99, Punjab & Kashmir?