Pakistani Connection

[gs]

I hope there is no full-scale conventional war. Both countries use old-school techniques and weapons, and will result in a WW I style trench battle leading to a stalemate with hundreds of casualties on each side. Wondering if launching Brahmos cruise missiles deep into Pak territory to hit the training camps (with US consent ofcourse) amount to war?? Since artillery exchanges on border are pretty common and so far havent led to full blown wars, what happens if we take this up a notch and hit them harder/deeper in POK or Pak where the training camps are located??

[fineleg]

I hope there is no full-scale conventional war. Both countries use old-school techniques and weapons, and will result in a WW I style trench battle leading to a stalemate with hundreds of casualties on each side. Wondering if launching Brahmos cruise missiles deep into Pak territory to hit the training camps (with US consent ofcourse) amount to war?? Since artillery exchanges on border are pretty common and so far havent led to full blown wars, what happens if we take this up a notch and hit them harder/deeper in POK or Pak where the training camps are located??

Yes. what'dya think?

[gs]

Yes. what'dya think?

Not so sure. Pak treats Pok like a sh.thole and dont give a crap about Kashmiris or Kashmiriyat. So if Pok is hit, would they raise the stakes and hit India, say somewhere in Punjab/Rajasthan? Would they risk a full blown war? Would they be willing to invite an Indian armored thrust in Punjab/Rajasthan/Gujarat sectors? A lot of food for thought. And maybe we take a leaf off of the Pak book of diplomacy, wipe off the Indian insignias on the missiles and completely deny that they were launched from India. Then ask for proof if allegations are made. They dont have satellites nor spy planes, and hence cant prove sh.t.

[Rajiv]

OK, forget war - the troops movement to the border will almost kill Pakistan economically, they will literally be bankrupt with no money fro already Bankrupt Uncle Sam India will suffer the same, the stock market ,foreign investment will just dry up like anything - the escalation can be devastating financially and it will be "hum to dobenge, tumko bhi le doobenge sanam"

[gs]

OK, forget war - the troops movement to the border will almost kill Pakistan economically, they will literally be bankrupt with no money fro already Bankrupt Uncle Sam India will suffer the same, the stock market ,foreign investment will just dry up like anything - the escalation can be devastating financially and it will be "hum to dobenge, tumko bhi le doobenge sanam"

Good point. Let's just buy some state of the art exorbitantly priced expensive weapons from the West. Push Pak into an arms race and see how long it lasts.

[chanakya]

Hey BossBhai nice to see you here again. Also I think it must be noted that more than just destabilizing India we have another scenario. Attacks on the US and England also have become very difficult, so they go to the new war ground which never retaliates, but is of significant importance -- India.

[Rajiv]

:hysterical: Made in China - 3 months Warranty

[Willow_on_fire]

Hey BossBhai nice to see you here again. Also I think it must be noted that more than just destabilizing India we have another scenario. Attacks on the US and England also have become very difficult, so they go to the new war ground which never retaliates, but is of significant importance -- India.

true

[gs]

Yeah, only the weapons come with a Chinese user-guide though :winky:

[chanakya]

Not so sure. Pak treats Pok like a sh.thole and dont give a crap about Kashmiris or Kashmiriyat. So if Pok is hit, would they raise the stakes and hit India, say somewhere in Punjab/Rajasthan? Would they risk a full blown war? Would they be willing to invite an Indian armored thrust in Punjab/Rajasthan/Gujarat sectors? A lot of food for thought. And maybe we take a leaf off of the Pak book of diplomacy, wipe off the Indian insignias on the missiles and completely deny that they were launched from India. Then ask for proof if allegations are made. They dont have satellites nor spy planes, and hence cant prove sh.t.

umm they do have an atom bomb :(

[DomainK]

OK, forget war - the troops movement to the border will almost kill Pakistan economically, they will literally be bankrupt with no money fro already Bankrupt Uncle Sam India will suffer the same, the stock market ,foreign investment will just dry up like anything - the escalation can be devastating financially and it will be "hum to dobenge, tumko bhi le doobenge sanam"

Good idea. Lets get them bankrupt. Lets make them spend all their money in defense and intelligence. The poorer they are, the safer are innocent people around the world.

[Chandan]

Yes. And they were hit by the very same triad of people who USA had raised over the years - ISI/Taliban/Osama. Since 911 it has gone after Taliba and Osama and to do that it needed ISI which used to be the conduit for CIA with these groups. Not surprisingly ISI has played both sides' date= and continue to do so.

If so, why can't USA rein it?

USA has its own priorities. It realizes very well that Pakistan is the factory of terrorism in the world. However if it pushes it too hard there would be a big, and powerful, failed state in the region. Also this will only make USA further alienated in the Muslim world. Pakistan, for all its drawbacks, remains a good ally precisely because it has Muslim population. USA works with India because of what we stand for and the future. It stands with Pakistan because of its past and the fear of what-if. xx

Another article confirming this theory: The Times December 1, 2008 Mumbai attacks ‘were a ploy to wreck Obama plan to isolate al-Qaeda’ The carnage may have been an attempt to put Pakistan and India at each other’s throats and kill US hopes for the region Jeremy Page in Mumbai, Tom Coghlan and Zahid Hussain Relations between India and Pakistan were on a knife edge last night amid fears that Delhi’s response to the Mumbai attacks could undermine the Pakistani army’s campaign against Islamic militants on the frontier with Afghanistan. Officials and analysts in the region believe that last week’s atrocities were designed to provoke a crisis, or even a war, between the nuclear-armed neighbours, diverting Islamabad’s attention from extremism in tribal areas bordering Afghanistan and thus relieving pressure on al-Qaeda, Taleban and other militants based there. One analyst even described the attacks as a “pre-emptive strike†against Barack Obama’s strategy to put Pakistan and Afghanistan at the centre of US foreign policy. The United States and its allies now face a balancing act in supporting India’s efforts to investigate the Mumbai attacks, without jeopardizing Pakistan’s crucial support for the Nato campaign in Afghanistan. India’s government, facing an election by May, is under enormous pressure to respond to the attacks, which it believes was carried out by the Pakistani militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba, possibly with the help of al Qaeda. Lashkar-e-Taiba was also blamed for an attack on the Indian parliament in December 2001, which prompted India and Pakistan to mass troops on each other’s border, almost triggering their fourth war since independence in 1947. As the US announced Condoleezza Rice, the Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would travel to India on Wednesday in a show of "solidarity," India's deputy interior minister said today all the attackers were from Pakistan. "The terrorists who have been killed in these encounters in Mumbai in the last few days were of Pakistani origin," said Shakeel Ahmad. However he stopped short of blaming the Pakistan government outright, telling the BBC: "We are not saying that it is sponsored by the Pakistan government." The Indian government is now considering a range of responses, including suspending its five-year peace process with Pakistan, closing their border, stopping direct flights and sending troops to the frontier, according to Indian officials and analysts. Pakistan’s government, meanwhile, has been rallying support in telephone calls to opposition politicians, as well as to officials in China, the United Arab Emirates and the EU. It has also made it clear that if India again masses troops on the border, Pakistani forces would be diverted away from the tribal areas, allowing militants there to focus on Afghanistan. “The next 48 hours are critical in determining how things unfold,†a top Pakistani security official told reporters. “We will not leave a single troop on the western border if we are threatened by India.†His warning, highlighting the international implications of the Mumbai attacks, was clearly designed to encourage the United States and its allies to temper India’s response. The United States has forged a new strategic partnership with India since 2004, but has closer and older ties to Pakistan, a key Muslim partner in the War on Terror. Pakistan has deployed more than 100,000 troops along its porous border with Afghanistan, where US and Nato forces are fighting against the Taleban, al Qaeda and other militants. Some 35,000 of those Pakistani troops are involved in the fight against al Qaeda and Taleban militants who have been sheltering in Pakistan’s northern tribal areas since late 2001. Withdrawing those soldiers would undermine their progress, especially since Pakistan launched its biggest offensive to date against the militants in the tribal region of Bajaur in September. “We are highly encouraged by the Pakistani military progress,†said Colonel Gregg Julian, a U.S. military spokesman. “It is creating pressure on al Qaeda from two sides and it is getting very difficult for them right now. We would hope that they are able to keep up that pressure.†Pakistani officials and analysts said that withdrawing troops would also benefit local militant groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammed. “The withdrawal of troops will give a huge space to the militants,†said Hasan Askari Rizvi, a Pakistani defence analyst and former professor at Punjab University. “The main objective of the militants involved in the Mumbai attack was to destablise the region… They will thrive in the event of war between the two countries [india and Pakistan].†The two groups were originally founded by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence agency as deniable proxies to be sent to fight Indian forces in the disputed region of Kashmir. They have been blamed for numerous attacks on Indian targets. However, Western intelligence agencies have recently perceived a growing nexus between these and other, militant groups such as the Pakistani Taleban and al Qaeda. In June, it was reported that some 300 militant leaders from a number groups including Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad met in the Pakistani garrison city of Rawalpindi. There they reportedly agreed that while the Kashmir struggle remained important, their primary focus should be the fight against international forces in Afghanistan. Just a few weeks later, nine US soldiers were killed in an attack on a combat outpost at Wanat in the Afghan border province of Nuristan that displayed unusual military competence. Intelligence reports subsequently assessed that the assault included a significant Lashkar-e-Taiba element, as well as al Qaeda fighters. The growing relationship between al Qaeda and Lashkar-e-Taiba may explain the scale and sophistication of the Bombay attacks, said Dr Kanchan Lakshman of the South Asia Terrorism Portal. “It would also suggest why they targeted Americans, British and Israelis,†he said. He added that he had heard from an Indian intelligence official that the Mumbai attack had been funded by Saudi money, again suggesting an al Qaeda link. Other Indian analysts said the attack appeared to be an attempt to undermine US policy towards India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. “There’s a lot of clamour for action against Pakistan from India,†Pratap Bhanu Mehta, the head of the Centre for Policy Research. “This attack was not just an attempt to scuttle India’s peace process with Pakistan. It was in many ways a pre-emptive strike against [barack] Obama’s strategy for the region.†The U.S. President elect has proposed increasing troop levels in Afghanistan and stepping up the pressure on Pakistan to attack militants on its territory. In exchange, he has suggested appointing an special envoy to help resolve Pakistan’s territorial dispute with India over Kashmir. A crisis in India-Pakistan relations would scupper both plans. Doctor Antonio Giustozzi, an expert on Afghanistan at the London School of Economics, said Washington could weather such a crisis, but concurred on the militants’ aims. “I think that the terrorists have made a calculation that aims to worsen relations between India and Pakistan and embarrass the Pakistan government, in the hope that the Indians make an uncontrolled response,†he said. That, he said, would “strengthen the militants’ hand and compromise the campaign by Islamabad against extremists by diverting troops back to the Indian border.†---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Still I'm confused why USA would let terrorist outfits like LeT and JeM grow if it is determined to fight terrorism! And now there are reports/evidences that these two groups are getting support and training from Al-Quieda as well which USA has been trying to wipe out since last 7 years. Why will it not pressurize Pak to clean up these two outfits and others like it from its country? What is stopping it from doing so? And how will/can it stop ISI from playing both roles, ie supporting USA in fighting against AQ as well as supporting and nurturing these terrorist groups? At the same time, declaring war on Pak will be playing into terrorists' hand. So what should India do to protect itself from being a soft target of these groups who attack at will to achieve 'other' results? Somehow it seems to me that US's role is somewhat conflicting here.

[punjabi_khota]

Zardari starting to talk sense http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/dec/01mumterror-zardari-says-militants-did-the-mumbai-attack.htm Spare us, militants may have done it, says Zardari Warning that militants have the power to precipitate a war in the region, President Asif Ali Zardari [images] has asked India to "resist striking out at his government" should investigations show that "Pakistani militant groups" were responsible for the attacks in Mumbai. The Pakistani President said his country should not be punished for the three-day terrorist rampage in Mumbai that killed around 200 people including foreigners. Zardari asked Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [images] to "resist striking out at his (Pakistan's) government should investigations show that Pakistani militant groups were responsible for the attacks", the Financial Times reported. The President warned that provocation by rogue "non-state actors" posed the danger of a return to war between the nuclear armed neighbours. "Even if the militants are linked to Lashker-e-Taiba, who do you think we are fighting?" Zardari told the daily, referring to Pakistan's operations against al-Qaeda and Taliban [images] on the border with Afghanistan. "We live in troubled times where non-state actors have taken us to war before, whether it is the case of those who perpetrated (the) 9/11 (attacks on the US) or contributed to the escalation of the situation in Iraq," Zardari said. "Now, events in Mumbai tell us that there are ongoing efforts to carry out copycat attacks by militants. We must all stand together to fight out this menace."

[punjabi_khota]

Atleast, it is a start.

[Kartikey]

If we can show the Americans evidence of Pak involvement, then they will not support Pak and we will be free cuz countries like Britain follow the US blindly. The only cause for concern will be our Chini brothers, they r big allies of Pak although i think they may stay quiet.

[Kartikey]

OK, forget war - the troops movement to the border will almost kill Pakistan economically, they will literally be bankrupt with no money fro already Bankrupt Uncle Sam India will suffer the same, the stock market ,foreign investment will just dry up like anything - the escalation can be devastating financially and it will be "hum to dobenge, tumko bhi le doobenge sanam"

We've gotta praise Vajpayee, i mean he was the guy who invited Pak to an arms race with us knowing they do not have the money to keep up. Yet the idiots didnt spend money on their people and instead tried to compete with us and thats why they're ****ed.

[Willow_on_fire]

well...zardari is a newbie...he needs time to make some money off a failed country like pakistan...so he's just asking more time.

[chanakya]

nukes, I am not too sure. But to blow a hydrogen bomb u need an atom bomb. An atom bomb is big and heavy, not the easiest thing to carry around. Can it be detonated from far, I believe so yes. Electronics can do the trick. BUt with something like a nuke smuggling in will not be easy... and if caught then you can easily trace back. Plus if that happens, then India will have no choice but to nuke Pakistan off the globe. I presume even the hardliners are not that stupid.

[Chandan]

How much can you believe from this article: Mumbai attacks: Jihadists see "invasion" as a triumph In India, some already call it the "Invasion of Bombay" and their country's 9/11 moment. This is no exaggeration. For, although the deadly raids on India's economic capital did not claim as many lives as 9/11 did in New York, the psychological impact is likely to be as potent. By Amir Taheri Last Updated: 9:39AM GMT 30 Nov 2008 The "invasion" showed that Islamic terror is capable of organising military-style operations against major urban centres in "infidel territory". Since 1993 when they first gathered in Khartoum, the Sudanese capital, to discuss global strategy, Islamic terrorists have come up with a number of theories on how to defeat the "infidel" and achieve world conquest. Osama bin Laden had theorised that the "infidel", led by the United States, would crumble after spectacular attacks designed to cripple its economy, just as the Meccan "infidel" government did when the Prophet Muhammad crushed its resistance with deadly raids, "Ghazwas", against its trade routes. However, 9/11 did not lead to an "infidel" retreat. On the contrary, the "Great Satan" hit back, destroying the structures created in Afghanistan to sustain global terror. That persuaded some al Qaeda leaders that a new strategy was needed. Ayman al-Zawahiri, al Qaeda's number two, started advocating one in 2003, arguing that the Jihad should first target Muslim countries where it had a chance of toppling the "impious" regimes. Three years later, another theoretician of Jihad, Sheikh Abu-Bakr Naji, proposed his new strategy. This suggests that low intensity war be extended to anywhere in the world with a significant Muslim presence. India, where Muslims account for more than 15 per cent of the population, and Bombay, where 25 per cent of the population is Muslim, are prime candidates for testing that theory. Naji's theories are spelled out in his book 'Edarat al-Wahsh' (Governance in the Wilderness). The idea is to render places not under "proper Islamic rule" into wildernesses in which no one is safe. The "infidel" and the "impious Muslim", leaving their homes every morning, should be unsure whether they would return in the evening. Naji recommends kidnappings, the holding of hostages, the use of women and children as human shields, exhibition beheadings, suicide bombings and countless gestures that make normal life impossible for the "infidel" and "impious Muslims". Whoever organised the "Invasion of Bombay" must have read Naji with care. For the operation amounted to smorgasbord of terror tactics served at the same banquet. Seizure of territory, holding of hostages, suicide attacks, regular military assaults, and exhibition killing were on show for more than 48 hours. Islamists see the "Invasion of Bombay" as their victory. In their websites yesterday, many called it "Clear Victory" (Fath al-mobeen), a term used to designate the Prophet's earliest victories. The Jihadists have reason to feel triumphant. They showed that they were still capable of hitting hard and on a grand scale, continuing the chain of their "triumphs" in New York, Madrid and London. They showed that they are able to change tactics and adapt to new circumstances. They made a mockery of the much advertised "counter-terrorism cooperation" between Washington and New Delhi by showing that Indians were not any safer as a result of their government's alliance with the American " Great Satan". The utter confusion of Indian counter-terrorist units, rushing about like headless chickens, seen live on TV by millions, must have been greeted by Jihadists with their usual war cry of "Allah Akbar!" (Allah is the Greatest). Just a few weeks ago, Jihadism was in retreat. It had lost its bases and safe havens in Afghanistan, was under attack in Pakistan's tribal area, and all but abandoned by the new leadership in Islamabad under President Asif Ali Zardari. Appeals on Jihadist websites for money indicated a cash flow problem while denunciation of Jihadi methods by some leading Muslim theologians affected the flow of new "Volunteers for Martyrdom". The "invasion" may help ease pressure on Jihadists nested in Pakistan's tribal area by diverting public attention to India and the dispute over Kashmir. More importantly, perhaps, the attacks showed the vulnerability of Indian democracy and economic growth which some Muslim intellectuals have been promoting as models for Islamic nations. The Jihadi response is categorical: Only Islam is the solution! (Al-Islam how-al hall). The "invasion" is certain to persuade some former donors to resume disbursing "zakat" or religious tax that as pious Muslims they feel they should pay for Jihad. It may also attract new recruits, especially among young Muslims of Asian and North African origin in Western Europe. If the attacks succeed in wrecking Zardari's efforts at peacemaking while derailing rapprochement between Washington and New Delhi, the "invasion" could also produce an unexpected diplomatic fruit for the Jihadis. This was a bad week for opponents of Islamic terror. India, Pakistan and other governments concerned should do nothing to make it worse. *Amir Taheri is author of 'Holy Terror: Inside the World of Islamic Terrorism'. His new book, 'The Persian Night', will be published next month. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do these Jihadis have websites too? And yet nothing is being done to them by the entire world? Unbelievable!!

[Ram]

Pakistan has no option but to play the innocent victim. And to be fair to 'em, even the Indian govt. has so far only said the terrorists have 'Pakistani origins' and have stopped short of pinning the entire blame on the Pakistani establishment.