Ram Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Its all about strategic advantage- if i put missiles 200 miles from your border, you have far more to worry about than if i put the missile 5000 km away. A few hrs extra in warning wont be enough to stop the missile but its better than a five-minute warning because atleast you can emergency-evacuate critical personnel/equiment that can be carried. That is why Russia is so damn angry- this is no different than the cuban-missile crisis scenario. Evacuate personnel in 5 mins to where ? We are talking about nuclear bombs buddy ! there is nowhere to go ! nowhere to hide ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 The steel mill can churn out as much steel as it can , but the facililty that was specifically built to construct an air-craft can put these things together only at a given pace. There is no way in this planet an air-craft can be built in 6 months. And even if it is possible , what is the point in trying to build an aircraft in 6 months , when the war would be over in 2-3 months ? Why do you argue against facts ? It is a fact that in 'war production' mode, countries can build military harware 20-25 times faster than in pre-war production mode. If you consider that ludicrous ,it obviously means you dont realize the geo-politic and strategic shift these weapons cause to a nation. it is ludicrous because it is a system tht doesnt work very well !The claim that 'no indian will die again in war' is utterly ridiculous to be associated with missile defence. Target your ground structures ? What do you mean ? US's ICBM could do that right from american territory , who/what can stop them ? Launching missiles 100 miles from your border to target is NOT the same as launching missiles it 5000 miles away. It enhances your first-strike capability- missile defence is just the smokescreen for it. And since India does not gain any significant advantage in posessing foreign bases (its two prime adversaries have border with india), it is not of much use to india either. If China launches missiles from tibet to target kolkata or delhi or pakistan lobs nukes from lahore, there isnt a missile defence system fast enough to respond to it. For a country like America, it might even be a worthwhile option, since its very far from its enemies and early warning can do some good- to India, it has very little practical purpose in its current form. We arent going to fight a war with the Russians, for us to handle 15,000 icbms... all at once. Pak at the most has 15-20 nuclear tipped missiles. Again , if the Russians are so confident that their missiles wil get past the American defence, then why do they seem to be bothered so much by it ? There goes your argument ! Sigh...i will end this convo now..you know nothing of what you speak of. Read below for answer : Evacuate personnel in 5 mins to where ? We are talking about nuclear bombs buddy ! there is nowhere to go ! nowhere to hide Sigh...if there is a nuke launched towards washington from 10,000 miles away, it will take a few hours to get there- it will be DETECTED for a few hours before it hits Washington. That is enough window of time to get the president,joint chiefs and basically the top personnel into a plane and out of the blast-zone. Even if someone lobs 100s of nukes at you, you can stay airborne and figure out where else to go. A 5 min warning-time does not allow you to do this and thus presents a significantly bigger threat to the functionality of a nation. THIS is why the Russians are pissed off- America wants to put missiles a few 100 km from Russia- if it decieded to nuke Moscow, Russia has very little time to evacuate even the most choiciest of personnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 I don't know what is being dscussed here but just an addition if I am not mistaken Pakistan is yet to get hands on those F16 and mind you these kinds of verbal sales of f16 has happened many a times.. If u go through the conditions well it looks like they will need approval from US senate (yes little exaggeration :haha:) in order to use those Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 What has this got to do with comparing US to Islamic rulers of past ? And from your own post I gather that the Soviets did not do anything untill 1962 as the key resolutions had been passed much earlier and we had lost the Pok part by 1948/49. You will find from those resolutions that India itself abstained from voting in many of those ... while the USSR was simply absent and you want to blame the USA for it ? Anyone expecting USA to vote with India while Nehruji was sleeping with russians is at best naive.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Spot on. Problem is' date=' [b']hindu fundies get a lot of funding from our NRI bros in US- the money trail to fundies like RSS, Shiv Sena etc. go to NRIs overseas, just like money trail to the mullah in the jama masjids goes to Saudi. I am glad that India and Canada are not involved in the war US started by lying, cheating and being a scumbag. And i am glad that Iraq is turning into a bigger disaster for America than Vietnam, atleast politically. They need to be reminded of the foolishness they bring upon themselves by meddling in stuff it has no clue on. Clinton was absolutely right in not attacking Iraq and unfortunately Dumbya wanted to vent the family fued. yawwwwwwwwwwn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 I dont have a problem with you saying that HE was a muslim - i have a problem when you make comments like this that are not just about 'it is vitally important to state he is muslim' but pot-shotting an entire community: So next time Canada starts investigating the Air India bombing, lets say 'Indian and Canadian born sikhs'. Eh ? Not everybody can put head in sand.. and yes if incidents like air-india bombing becomes as regular as these mofos works then noone is going to stop short of calling it what it was......... Equating an one off incident with a wave quite sleek.. Choose ur comparison with little intelligence u seem to have this tendency to come up with quite crappy ones Veerappan, plying in woods very sparsely populated where there is virtually zero police presence gets equated with srinagar city where not only police but army was present in big numbers.. Somehow both become same.. once again similar crappy comparision is at play here.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 The first vote came in 1948, what grand-standing are you on about? By the way I find it fascinating that you(and BB) fail to realize that USA could not do business with a "Socialist" India but was more than happy to get in bed with "Communist" China. Remember the whole Nixon-Kissinger endeavours? Admit it, it was never about economic philosphy anyway. xx Isi liye kahte hain before discussing sthg little history lesson doesn't hurt.. Nehru became leftist in his grandtstanding way before independence. In fact there is big treatise on how nehru's left leaning drove pakistani landlords in Jinnah's lap.... 1948 Vote is nehru's doing not usa's I don't see any resolution on Hyderabad or Junagahr resoan those cases were dealt by competent leader unlike the good for nothing hopeless romantic (I call tharki) nehru...... Kashmir Fiasco== Incompetent nehru ( nothing less nothing more) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Quite correct. I would also say that Socialism is certainly not as much an evil as it is made out to be. At the time India became Independent Socialism was the way even Western countries went. Welfare state was the norm and even UK became a Capitalist country in true sense in the era of Margaret Thatcher. It is prudent to keep in mind that the countries that are often suggested to be the best as per most Human Indexes are often the Socialist countries like Norway etc. Okay granted it is definitely more Capitalist than Nehru Socialist but the key idea of welfare state remains the same. xxx Welfare state and socialism/communism is different... Let us not put forth village-states example we are talking countries here.. In those tiny village like countries even direct democracy works . Moreover these little island of socalled socialism benefit from the presence of capitalist countries in their neighbourhood. If all of them turn to socialism see how it falls like pack of cards even those village states.. Denmark happy with exporting those cheese all over capitalist state must be praying that these states remains capitalist otherwise subsidy will come for the native dairy industry of the countries they export their goods and then they will see how far socialism helps.. Socialism/communism are parasite ideology which feed upon the growth-orientaetd capitalisim ideology. As long as they remain confined to little village states it's fine and dandy but the moment they spread all over u get USSR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 What a copout answer. If ours and US interest are one and the same , what kind of dividend are you going to reap when US declares Pakistan and Saudi as their closest allies. Your like thinks our interest lies in aligning with the west . The same West which refuses to clamp done on Pakistan which are the root cause of Islamic terrorism in India. I am not naive , you are. You just don't get it , that we cannot align with countries which support are enemies. And you keep harping the same crap that it is in our self interest to align with the West to fight Islamic terrorism . Pray tell me, what kind of fight USA is fighting wherein , it has 20,000 foot soldiers in Afghanistan which is the hot bed of Islamic terrorism and 200,000 thousand soldiers in Iraq which had no connection with Al-qaeda. And for you to suggest that history of 20 years ago in irrelevant is ludicrous to say the least. The so called Islamic terrorism which India faces has got more to do with Pakistan. But , can we take any action against them without Uncle Sam's blessing . Hell NO. Again adding some tid-bits and trying to make sense.. why the hell you guys find it hard to comprehend no freaking country sees with another country eye to eye on every front.. IS it bloody so hard to comprehend. SO I say in matters of taliban our interet are on and same u come up with generalising garbage like our ineterests are one and same suddenly the phrase taliban gets dropped and u start beating ur chest.. Again u are digressinig from the issue I can't change what USa does in IRAq but it does in Afghanistan scale not withstanding is in our favour and my focus is that.. U are suggesting let us sit i the corner like spurned damsel till USA sees eye to eye on every issue with us I find it utterly foolish to say the least.. I believe in make hay while the sun shines.. YEs rightly pointed we can't take any open action against them with or withour uncle sam's nod.. That phase has long gone unless u are willing to risk nuclear war so the only option left in ind/pak case is giving them million cuts in low key affairs like they do. For this u don't need any uncle sam's nod. Besides what are u going to achieve by sititng in the corner all angry. So far noone has put forth even single benefit u can try ur hands on that if u want to.. other than some ego-massage that action which u guys are suggesting serves zilch purpose.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 To highlight that USA always looked after its interest, and we can check our own history for that. Like I have mentioned before, if you consider USA looking after its interest as "right" then the debate about Islamic rule would become irrelevant since Islamic rulers can also raise the same banner of looking after their own "interest". Now that is clutching at straws BB. 62, 71, 48 whatever you consider the bottomline is that USA was at the forefront with regards to any resolution on Kashmir, as a sponsor or a party directly supporting the resolution. Russia on the other hand always backed India, either by veto or by abstaining but never supporting it. Could you find me a single resolution where USSR went against India? On the other hand you have all the proof on how USA/West have behaved with India. xxx U are one of a kind.. so someone says USa looks aftre its own interest and that becomes tanatmount towhatever USa does is right.. Here is the thing those who were receving end of USA's interest first doctrine don't love them now u know why we love islamist mofos.. I am getting sense u belong on sam edais as this psec named Asgar Ali Engineer.. Must read how these cerebrally challenged pinko historian Engineer thinks.. Engineer farts “"No, Tipu was not a religious fanatic. He was a ruler, first and last. And whatever he did, he did to consolidate his rule. If he did humiliate and carry out some atrocities against the Nairs in Kerala, he did it to crush the Nair rebellion that had gained strength as the community was bitterly opposed to Tipu establishing his rule in its territory. He did forcibly convert hundreds of Nairs and other Hindus in Kerala to Islam. But he did this to punish them for rebelling against his supremacy - and changing their religion was the most severe punishment he could inflict on the rebels." Oh! Well – so what did Tipu actually do - QUOTE “excerpts from Tipu's letters as researched by the distinguished Kerala historian K. M. Panicker, which he reviewed in the Bhasha Poshini magazine, August 1923: 1. Letter dated March 22, 1788, to Abdul Kadir: "Over 12,000 Hindus were honoured with Islam. There were many Namboodri Brahmins among them. This achievement should be widely publicised among the Hindus. Then the local Hindus should be brought before you and converted to Islam. No Namboodri Brahmin should be spared. " 2. Letter dated December 14, 1988, to his army chief in Calicut: " I am sending two of my followers with Mir Hussain Ali. With their assistance, you should capture and kill all Hindus. Those below 20 may be kept in prison and 5000 from the rest should be killed from the tree-tops. These are my orders." 3. Letter dated January 18, 1790, to Syed Abdul Dulai: " ...almost all Hindus in Calicut are converted to Islam. I consider this as Jehad." The anthology also quotes from A Voyage to the East Indies by Fra Barthoelomeo, a renowned Portuguese traveller and historian, who was present in Tipu's war zone in early 1790: "First a corps of 30,000 barbarians who butchered everybody on the way ... followed by the field gun unit under the French commander, M. Lally. Tipu was riding on an elephant behind which another army of 30,000 soldiers followed. Most of the men and women were hanged in Calicut, first mothers were hanged with their children tied to necks of mothers. That barbarian Tipu Sultan tied the naked Christian and Hindus to the legs of elephants and made the elephants to move around till the bodies of the helpless victims were torn to pieces. Temples and churches were ordered to be burned down, desecrated, and destroyed. ... Those Christians who refused to be honoured with Islam were ordered to be killed by hanging immediately. These atrocities were told to me by the victims of Tipu Sultan who escaped from the clutches of his army and reached Varapphuza, which is the centre of Carmichael Christian Mission. I myself helped many victims to cross the Varapphuza river by boats." UNQUOTE All very defensible according to this distorter of history... Wonder if this Engineer fellow would support forced conversions to crush the rebellion in Kashmir? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Its precisely this kind of cold-war mentality that is denying India some of the state-of-the-art weapons it so desperately needs. See in matters of defence perhaps it's not prudent to make opurselves dependent on USA but here question is different.. bahti ganga mein hath dhonye ya kinare baith ke royenn.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumble_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Some good responses there Dada :wtg: Jesus Bheem , aligning with Dada again :wink_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Aligning with facts I would say. KR dais is still open just point me one good thing that comes out of spurned-damsel behaviour in matters of real-politic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumble_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Aligning with facts I would say. KR dais is still open just point me one good thing that comes out of spurned-damsel behaviour in matters of real-politic. Where is your sense of humor ?:tounge_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 It has gone south....:giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 U are one of a kind.. Of course I am one of the kind. Not my mistake that you are unable to standout amongst millions. so someone says USa looks aftre its own interest and that becomes tanatmount towhatever USa does is right.. Here is the thing those who were receving end of USA's interest first doctrine don't love them now u know why we love islamist mofos.. Err let me understand you now. You have NIL idea of Indian history, you have NIL response about USA's tracl record on Kashmir, you have NIL rebuttal about Soviet vetoes and YOU have the galls to talk about interest? Why dont you stick to the points, specially about USA's track record vis a vis India than talk out of you know what. I am getting sense u belong on sam edais as this psec named Asgar Ali Engineer.. Must read how these cerebrally challenged pinko historian Engineer thinks.. You are a joke, arent you DR. Better luck next time coming up with some meaningful response. xxx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Jesus Bheem ' date=' aligning with Dada again :wink_smile:[/quote'] Mob mentality dear KR. Birds of the same flock stick together etc etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Anyone expecting USA to vote with India while Nehruji was sleeping with russians is at best naive.... Is that your best shot ace? Why am I not surprised that YOU have sympathies for the very country that made every little bit to intrude into Indian domestic affairs. And unlike your claptrap I have submitted all the UN resolutions you would ever want to see. Go ahead, check them up again and again. Of course it is your personal interest that you will forget that and talk about Nehru's policies!! What was that whole Sanskrit big words you had mentioned some place else - Janani janambhoomisch etc etc-. I can see how you actually take that line. xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Welfare state and socialism/communism is different Cateogrically false. Welfare state is a socialist state. Denmark,Sweden,Norway,Finland, etc. are *OFFICIALLY* socialist states. I think you do not understand the difference between socialism and communism which is why you bring up erroneous voting and capitalistic business model examples. A little bit of education will clear up a lot of your misconceptions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lurker Posted July 4, 2007 Share Posted July 4, 2007 Cateogrically false. Welfare state is a socialist state. Denmark,Sweden,Norway,Finland, etc. are *OFFICIALLY* socialist states. I think you do not understand the difference between socialism and communism which is why you bring up erroneous voting and capitalistic business model examples. A little bit of education will clear up a lot of your misconceptions. No it wont. Ever seen a horse drawing a cart with blinkers on the sides of the eyes to block sight of everything else other than tunnel vision? Well you get the picture. xx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts