Mujraparty
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 18, 2011
- Messages
- 1,754
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Next front in Americas war
- Thread starter S.M.R
- Start date
nwmalik
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 23, 2008
- Messages
- 611
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
World war 3 or not.
dont care.
But it will be our war and if it happens then as they say all is fair in war.
They will come on their choice but will leave when we are done.
We will fight with what we have and what we can get.
When war comes to neighbourhood then your house will also burn. This is just for some of our indian friends who have given some pathetic comments.
dont care.
But it will be our war and if it happens then as they say all is fair in war.
They will come on their choice but will leave when we are done.
We will fight with what we have and what we can get.
When war comes to neighbourhood then your house will also burn. This is just for some of our indian friends who have given some pathetic comments.
Devil Soul
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2010
- Messages
- 22,931
- Reaction score
- 45
- Country
- Location
asad71
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 24, 2011
- Messages
- 6,863
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
The fol NPR report shows what is unveiling. WCC/USA want to patch up with the Arabs and Muslims. Once Palestinians and Israelis agree to agree, half the current issues would be solved. Therefore, Imperial America must look for another foe to fight. Without fighting the empire will weaken, get rusty and be overcome by another emerging empire. Not Pakistan; India be aware.
Arab World Offers Obama Rhetorical Tightrope
by ALAN GREENBLATT
May 18, 2011
In his speech addressing the Muslim world on Thursday, President Obama will attempt partially to close the gap between U.S. ideals about democracy and its strategic interests in the Middle East and North Africa. It won't be easy.
Obama is using the occasion of the death of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden to recalibrate the United States' relationship with the Muslim world. It's a hopeful moment, both because of that triumph against terrorism and because of the push for democracy seen throughout the region this year.
In a conference call with reporters Wednesday, senior administration officials outlined a package of economic aid that Obama will announce officially. The package, primarily geared to help Egypt and Tunisia, will include approximately $1 billion in debt relief; an additional $1 billion in loan guarantees; and additional funds available through multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
Come Back Thursday
NPR.org will stream President Obama's speech live Thursday morning and will have reaction from the U.S. and abroad to the address. You also can submit questions to a Twitter follow-up interview with Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes.
Despite the relatively modest sums, the officials said they hoped that such support would wed economic reforms to democratization, pointing to earlier efforts at economic modernization programs in the former communist bloc countries as a model.
"It's important to note that the political movements we've seen are rooted in part in a lack of opportunity in the region," one senior administration official said. "We see this as a critical window of time to take some concrete actions."
Still Some Constraints
But Obama will remain constrained in terms of how much political and diplomatic support he can promise to democracy movements. The U.S. maintains relations with numerous autocratic leaders across the region. And it is not going to intervene militarily to protect citizens, as it did in Libya, in places such as Syria, observers suggest.
"Nothing should be said or promised in the speech that won't be delivered on," says Micah Zenko, a fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations.
Arab Spring: Key Dates
- May 15: Palestinians protest throughout Israel and on its borders
- April 23: Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh agrees to a deal to step down but hadn't done so as of May 18
- March 19: U.S. and NATO allies begin bombing campaign in Libya
- March 15: Protests in Syria begin to escalate in several cities
- Feb. 17: Riot police launch a deadly nighttime raid against protesters in Bahrain
- Feb. 11: Hosni Mubarak steps down as Egyptian president
- Jan. 14: President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali flees Tunisia
- Dec. 17: Mohamed Bouazizi, a Tunisian street vendor, sets himself on fire, setting off wave of protests
So, while Obama is likely to express support for democracy and reiterate that the U.S. is not at war with Islam, it's unlikely that he will unveil a grand new strategy toward the region. Instead, the U.S. will continue to weigh its responses to calls for change on a "country by country" basis, says Marina Ottaway, director of the Middle East program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Issues That Could Be Addressed
Obama will have to address the latest tensions between Israel and the Palestinian leadership, Zenko says. Palestinians attempted to cross into Israel en masse from bordering nations Sunday, triggering a sometimes violent response from Israel.
Fatah, which governs the West Bank, recently reached an accord with Hamas, the party that controls Gaza. Even after the deal, Hamas leaders said they will continue to refuse to recognize Israel.
That puts Obama in a tough spot. Recognizing any government that Hamas would take part in would be unacceptable to Israel, while refusing to do so "is going to enrage the Arab world," says Ottaway. "It's going to be a very difficult balancing act for Obama."
In addition to the perennial difficulties of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Obama is expected to address the shifting political realities around the Arab world, which present their own challenges.
The U.S. has long maintained relations with "friendly tyrants" in the region, says Noureddine Jebnoun, a professor at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies at Georgetown University. Such relationships have gotten closer since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Jebnoun says, creating what he calls a "vicious circle" of autocrats suppressing their populations in the name of security.
Pledging Support For Democracy
Bin Laden's death creates the opportunity to rethink such relationships, Jebnoun says, particularly in nascent democracies such as Tunisia.
"What people fail to realize is that all of these revolutions for freedom and human dignity completely take the wind out of the sails of extremists like al-Qaida," says Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). "The only reason a tiny minority of the population supported them is that when there was no political outlet, it drove people to extremism."
For all the talk about the U.S. being a spent power and not being relevant, people are concerned about what this particular president says.
- Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress
Support for democratic aspirations is what Middle Eastern and North African citizens want to hear in the wake of the so-called Arab Spring, says Adeed Dawisha, a political scientist at Miami University of Ohio.
"We should as a nation keep barking at that and keep showing the Arabs and Muslims how excited we are by this," Dawisha says, "rather than continue to be somewhat torn between supporting the movements and being somewhat diplomatic to our friends who are autocrats."
contd/--
Arab World Offers Obama Rhetorical Tightrope
by ALAN GREENBLATT
May 18, 2011
In his speech addressing the Muslim world on Thursday, President Obama will attempt partially to close the gap between U.S. ideals about democracy and its strategic interests in the Middle East and North Africa. It won't be easy.
Obama is using the occasion of the death of al-Qaida leader Osama bin Laden to recalibrate the United States' relationship with the Muslim world. It's a hopeful moment, both because of that triumph against terrorism and because of the push for democracy seen throughout the region this year.
In a conference call with reporters Wednesday, senior administration officials outlined a package of economic aid that Obama will announce officially. The package, primarily geared to help Egypt and Tunisia, will include approximately $1 billion in debt relief; an additional $1 billion in loan guarantees; and additional funds available through multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
Come Back Thursday
NPR.org will stream President Obama's speech live Thursday morning and will have reaction from the U.S. and abroad to the address. You also can submit questions to a Twitter follow-up interview with Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes.
Despite the relatively modest sums, the officials said they hoped that such support would wed economic reforms to democratization, pointing to earlier efforts at economic modernization programs in the former communist bloc countries as a model.
"It's important to note that the political movements we've seen are rooted in part in a lack of opportunity in the region," one senior administration official said. "We see this as a critical window of time to take some concrete actions."
Still Some Constraints
But Obama will remain constrained in terms of how much political and diplomatic support he can promise to democracy movements. The U.S. maintains relations with numerous autocratic leaders across the region. And it is not going to intervene militarily to protect citizens, as it did in Libya, in places such as Syria, observers suggest.
"Nothing should be said or promised in the speech that won't be delivered on," says Micah Zenko, a fellow with the Council on Foreign Relations.
Arab Spring: Key Dates
- May 15: Palestinians protest throughout Israel and on its borders
- April 23: Yemeni President Ali Abdullah Saleh agrees to a deal to step down but hadn't done so as of May 18
- March 19: U.S. and NATO allies begin bombing campaign in Libya
- March 15: Protests in Syria begin to escalate in several cities
- Feb. 17: Riot police launch a deadly nighttime raid against protesters in Bahrain
- Feb. 11: Hosni Mubarak steps down as Egyptian president
- Jan. 14: President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali flees Tunisia
- Dec. 17: Mohamed Bouazizi, a Tunisian street vendor, sets himself on fire, setting off wave of protests
So, while Obama is likely to express support for democracy and reiterate that the U.S. is not at war with Islam, it's unlikely that he will unveil a grand new strategy toward the region. Instead, the U.S. will continue to weigh its responses to calls for change on a "country by country" basis, says Marina Ottaway, director of the Middle East program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Issues That Could Be Addressed
Obama will have to address the latest tensions between Israel and the Palestinian leadership, Zenko says. Palestinians attempted to cross into Israel en masse from bordering nations Sunday, triggering a sometimes violent response from Israel.
Fatah, which governs the West Bank, recently reached an accord with Hamas, the party that controls Gaza. Even after the deal, Hamas leaders said they will continue to refuse to recognize Israel.
That puts Obama in a tough spot. Recognizing any government that Hamas would take part in would be unacceptable to Israel, while refusing to do so "is going to enrage the Arab world," says Ottaway. "It's going to be a very difficult balancing act for Obama."
In addition to the perennial difficulties of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, Obama is expected to address the shifting political realities around the Arab world, which present their own challenges.
The U.S. has long maintained relations with "friendly tyrants" in the region, says Noureddine Jebnoun, a professor at the Center for Contemporary Arab Studies at Georgetown University. Such relationships have gotten closer since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, Jebnoun says, creating what he calls a "vicious circle" of autocrats suppressing their populations in the name of security.
Pledging Support For Democracy
Bin Laden's death creates the opportunity to rethink such relationships, Jebnoun says, particularly in nascent democracies such as Tunisia.
"What people fail to realize is that all of these revolutions for freedom and human dignity completely take the wind out of the sails of extremists like al-Qaida," says Ibrahim Hooper, national communications director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). "The only reason a tiny minority of the population supported them is that when there was no political outlet, it drove people to extremism."
For all the talk about the U.S. being a spent power and not being relevant, people are concerned about what this particular president says.
- Brian Katulis, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress
Support for democratic aspirations is what Middle Eastern and North African citizens want to hear in the wake of the so-called Arab Spring, says Adeed Dawisha, a political scientist at Miami University of Ohio.
"We should as a nation keep barking at that and keep showing the Arabs and Muslims how excited we are by this," Dawisha says, "rather than continue to be somewhat torn between supporting the movements and being somewhat diplomatic to our friends who are autocrats."
contd/--
asad71
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 24, 2011
- Messages
- 6,863
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
contd/---
Case-By-Case Basis
But the U.S. is likely to remain torn in just that way. Supporting democracy and nonviolent change will continue to be the default stance of the Obama administration. At the same time, the U.S. will measure its response to protest movements in individual countries based on its own strategic interests, experts say, which may include maintaining good relations with leaders who are the protesters' targets.
While agreeing that democracy promotion should be the foundation of U.S. strategy in the region, Jebnoun says that "the United States cannot indiscriminately promote democracy to supplant its strategic allies."
The fact that the U.S. has offered varying degrees of practical and even rhetorical support to the protest movements in various Middle Eastern and North African countries has left the Obama administration open to charges of inconsistency, says Ottaway, of the Carnegie Endowment.
"I don't think that will change, in practice," she says. "The question is, at the rhetorical level, is [Obama] going to offer a broader endorsement of the Arab Spring, even if that leaves him open to criticism later?"
Rhetoric Vs. Policy
Obama has the opportunity to reshape the American image in the Muslim world, not just because of bin Laden's death and the Arab Spring, but also because of the chance that the U.S. will wind down its presence in Afghanistan and Iraq. But Muslims will be looking to see progress not just in those wars but in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well, says Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR.
"We welcome any time any politician speaks out positively in favor of better relations with the Muslim world and repeats the fact that we're not at war with Islam," Hooper says. "Having said that, it's important he tie any outreach to actual policies on the ground. Rhetoric is nice, but policies are even better."
But Obama's rhetoric — and perhaps this speech in particular — will be monitored carefully throughout the Muslim world, says Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. Thursday's speech may ultimately amount to no more than a sweeping restatement of policy, he says, but it will be important at that level nonetheless.
"It's important to highlight that, particularly during the transitions in Egypt, people in the region were closely watching and monitoring almost every utterance of the U.S.," Katulis says. "For all the talk about the U.S. being a spent power and not being relevant, people are concerned about what this particular president says."
Case-By-Case Basis
But the U.S. is likely to remain torn in just that way. Supporting democracy and nonviolent change will continue to be the default stance of the Obama administration. At the same time, the U.S. will measure its response to protest movements in individual countries based on its own strategic interests, experts say, which may include maintaining good relations with leaders who are the protesters' targets.
While agreeing that democracy promotion should be the foundation of U.S. strategy in the region, Jebnoun says that "the United States cannot indiscriminately promote democracy to supplant its strategic allies."
The fact that the U.S. has offered varying degrees of practical and even rhetorical support to the protest movements in various Middle Eastern and North African countries has left the Obama administration open to charges of inconsistency, says Ottaway, of the Carnegie Endowment.
"I don't think that will change, in practice," she says. "The question is, at the rhetorical level, is [Obama] going to offer a broader endorsement of the Arab Spring, even if that leaves him open to criticism later?"
Rhetoric Vs. Policy
Obama has the opportunity to reshape the American image in the Muslim world, not just because of bin Laden's death and the Arab Spring, but also because of the chance that the U.S. will wind down its presence in Afghanistan and Iraq. But Muslims will be looking to see progress not just in those wars but in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict as well, says Hooper, the spokesman for CAIR.
"We welcome any time any politician speaks out positively in favor of better relations with the Muslim world and repeats the fact that we're not at war with Islam," Hooper says. "Having said that, it's important he tie any outreach to actual policies on the ground. Rhetoric is nice, but policies are even better."
But Obama's rhetoric — and perhaps this speech in particular — will be monitored carefully throughout the Muslim world, says Brian Katulis, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress. Thursday's speech may ultimately amount to no more than a sweeping restatement of policy, he says, but it will be important at that level nonetheless.
"It's important to highlight that, particularly during the transitions in Egypt, people in the region were closely watching and monitoring almost every utterance of the U.S.," Katulis says. "For all the talk about the U.S. being a spent power and not being relevant, people are concerned about what this particular president says."
rajusri
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2011
- Messages
- 790
- Reaction score
- 0
What is that? Do you think it is called war? No. Delegates from both countries visits and talk about cooperation. US helps Pakistan many ways. just yesterday a US ship given to Pakistan inducted. But war with US will be different.
xTra
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 4, 2011
- Messages
- 2,215
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Do you think Amerika need to attack Pakistan to destroy it, there are many other ways around.
JonAsad
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2007
- Messages
- 14,178
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
I will not use the word "destroy"- i iwll not go that far- but
as i have mentioned it- let me say again- "our hud haram amriki phitos"- let me add to it- "our hud haram amriki phito generals and politicians" are enough to ensure that we dont prosper and remain amrikan slaves forever--
Tshering22
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2010
- Messages
- 18,431
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Don't you think they have learnt anything from Soviet Collapse? If so then you are totally wrong. Balochistan is not their concern. They are simply taking financing from China and continuing the war. The economics and military for them are inter-mixed.
These are the people that are ruining you and you still think that US is the threat.
T-Rex
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2008
- Messages
- 9,989
- Reaction score
- -11
- Country
- Location
There are some a$$holes who think their ugly face gets hidden the moment they point fingers at maulavis.
Respect4Respect01
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2010
- Messages
- 3,899
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
it will take them about 50 more years to just get rid of about 15000 terrorists. then they have to fight Pakistan, but usa wont be superpower till then anyways.
asad71
PROFESSIONAL
- Joined
- May 24, 2011
- Messages
- 6,863
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
Americas Next Target: Indian military bases
A classified report commissioned by the United States Department of Defense, states that the country wants access to Indian bases and military infrastructure with the United States Air Force specifically desiring the establishment of airbases in India.
The report on the future of Indo-US military relations, being distributed among decision-makers in the United States and made available to a handful of senior members of the Indian government, also speaks of the USAF's desire for 'having access closer to areas of instability'. "American military officers are candid in their plans to eventually seek access to Indian bases and military infrastructure. India's strategic location in the centre of Asia, astride the frequently traveled Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOC) linking the Middle East and East Asia, makes India particularly attractive to the US military," the report says. The report can be distributed only with the permission of Director, Net Assessment, Office of the Secretary of Defence. The report is the most comprehensive picture of American perspective of its military relation with India and its future aspirations. To some extent it also uncovers Indian military thinking vis-à-vis the US. It has quoted US lieutenant generals as saying that the access to India bases would enable the US military 'to be able to touch the rest of the world' and to 'respond rapidly to regional crises'.
The report, prepared by Juli A MacDonald, an associate at Booz Allen Hamilton, for the department of defence, is based on interviews of 42 key Americans, including 23 active military officers, 15 government officials and four others. In India MacDonald met 10 active Indian military officers and five government officials besides several members of the National Security Council, and outside experts advising the government. For understandable reasons, none of the individuals are identified by name, but by their ranks or other positions. The report points out that many American military planners are thinking about 'different sets of allies and friends for addressing a future strategic environment in Asia that may be dramatically different from today'. "For many, India is the most attractive alternative. For this reasons, several Americans underscored that eventual access to Indian military infrastructure represents a critical 'strategic hedge' against dramatic changes in traditional US relationships in Asia," the report says.
A South Asia Foreign Area Officer of the US state department has been quoted as saying that India's strategic importance increases if existing US relationships and arrangements in Asia fails. He cites three key possibilities for that: If US relations with other traditional allies (eg Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia) becomes more acrimonious or politically uncomfortable for both parties; or if access rights that the United States takes for granted become more restrictive; or if our traditional relationships collapse resulting in a US military withdrawal. The FAO, who is specialises on South Asia and among those few American diplomats who can converse in Hindi, says, "The United States needs to develop alternatives in Asia. India is the optimal choice if we can overcome the obstacles in building the relationship."
An American Colonel says, "The US Navy wants a relatively neutral territory on the opposite side of the world that can provide ports and support for operations in the Middle East. India not only has a good infrastructure, the Indian Navy has proved that it can fix and fuel US ships. Over time, port visits must become a natural event. India is a viable player in supporting all naval missions, including escorting and responding to regional crises. In the same vein, the US Air Force would like the Indians to be able to grant them access to bases and landing rights during operations, such as counter-terrorism and heavy airlift support." It is significant that during the 1991 Gulf War-I, India provided refuelling facility to US warplanes. And during Operation Enduring Freedom, several US warships used Indian facilities for rest and recuperation. As part of Operation Enduring Freedom, Indian naval ships provided escorts to merchant vessels from North Arabian Sea till Strait of Malacca in the most active cooperation with US navy in history. In fact, it is in naval cooperation that America sees the immediate future of Indo-US military relations. It is not just access to bases and ports that the US military hopes to get in India, but also training facilities in India.
A common theme among high-ranking American officers is that the US military would benefit from training with Indians, particularly if the training could occur on Indian territory. "India has a variety of landscapes, from ice-clad mountains to deserts, and it would help the Americans because military training ranges shrinking and becoming increasingly controversial in the United States," the report says. And for the US navy training with Indian navy is the best way to become 'proficient in the Indian Ocean region', the report adds. The American decision-makers 'believe that the military relationship should result in shared technology and capabilities, and ultimately they would like to be able to respond jointly to regional crises'.
Such American dreams are sure to set off significant political resentment as it would offset India's long held tradition of non-alignment, especially its military neutrality. In real terms it would indicates how India, thrust strategically into the Indian Ocean, could emerge as America's key ally in Asia as the continent goes through a historic political churning.
-----------
An old article, but America always takes time in such activities.
A classified report commissioned by the United States Department of Defense, states that the country wants access to Indian bases and military infrastructure with the United States Air Force specifically desiring the establishment of airbases in India.
The report on the future of Indo-US military relations, being distributed among decision-makers in the United States and made available to a handful of senior members of the Indian government, also speaks of the USAF's desire for 'having access closer to areas of instability'. "American military officers are candid in their plans to eventually seek access to Indian bases and military infrastructure. India's strategic location in the centre of Asia, astride the frequently traveled Sea Lanes of Communication (SLOC) linking the Middle East and East Asia, makes India particularly attractive to the US military," the report says. The report can be distributed only with the permission of Director, Net Assessment, Office of the Secretary of Defence. The report is the most comprehensive picture of American perspective of its military relation with India and its future aspirations. To some extent it also uncovers Indian military thinking vis-à-vis the US. It has quoted US lieutenant generals as saying that the access to India bases would enable the US military 'to be able to touch the rest of the world' and to 'respond rapidly to regional crises'.
The report, prepared by Juli A MacDonald, an associate at Booz Allen Hamilton, for the department of defence, is based on interviews of 42 key Americans, including 23 active military officers, 15 government officials and four others. In India MacDonald met 10 active Indian military officers and five government officials besides several members of the National Security Council, and outside experts advising the government. For understandable reasons, none of the individuals are identified by name, but by their ranks or other positions. The report points out that many American military planners are thinking about 'different sets of allies and friends for addressing a future strategic environment in Asia that may be dramatically different from today'. "For many, India is the most attractive alternative. For this reasons, several Americans underscored that eventual access to Indian military infrastructure represents a critical 'strategic hedge' against dramatic changes in traditional US relationships in Asia," the report says.
A South Asia Foreign Area Officer of the US state department has been quoted as saying that India's strategic importance increases if existing US relationships and arrangements in Asia fails. He cites three key possibilities for that: If US relations with other traditional allies (eg Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia) becomes more acrimonious or politically uncomfortable for both parties; or if access rights that the United States takes for granted become more restrictive; or if our traditional relationships collapse resulting in a US military withdrawal. The FAO, who is specialises on South Asia and among those few American diplomats who can converse in Hindi, says, "The United States needs to develop alternatives in Asia. India is the optimal choice if we can overcome the obstacles in building the relationship."
An American Colonel says, "The US Navy wants a relatively neutral territory on the opposite side of the world that can provide ports and support for operations in the Middle East. India not only has a good infrastructure, the Indian Navy has proved that it can fix and fuel US ships. Over time, port visits must become a natural event. India is a viable player in supporting all naval missions, including escorting and responding to regional crises. In the same vein, the US Air Force would like the Indians to be able to grant them access to bases and landing rights during operations, such as counter-terrorism and heavy airlift support." It is significant that during the 1991 Gulf War-I, India provided refuelling facility to US warplanes. And during Operation Enduring Freedom, several US warships used Indian facilities for rest and recuperation. As part of Operation Enduring Freedom, Indian naval ships provided escorts to merchant vessels from North Arabian Sea till Strait of Malacca in the most active cooperation with US navy in history. In fact, it is in naval cooperation that America sees the immediate future of Indo-US military relations. It is not just access to bases and ports that the US military hopes to get in India, but also training facilities in India.
A common theme among high-ranking American officers is that the US military would benefit from training with Indians, particularly if the training could occur on Indian territory. "India has a variety of landscapes, from ice-clad mountains to deserts, and it would help the Americans because military training ranges shrinking and becoming increasingly controversial in the United States," the report says. And for the US navy training with Indian navy is the best way to become 'proficient in the Indian Ocean region', the report adds. The American decision-makers 'believe that the military relationship should result in shared technology and capabilities, and ultimately they would like to be able to respond jointly to regional crises'.
Such American dreams are sure to set off significant political resentment as it would offset India's long held tradition of non-alignment, especially its military neutrality. In real terms it would indicates how India, thrust strategically into the Indian Ocean, could emerge as America's key ally in Asia as the continent goes through a historic political churning.
-----------
An old article, but America always takes time in such activities.
Tshering22
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 19, 2010
- Messages
- 18,431
- Reaction score
- 4
- Country
- Location
^^ Ohhh we're shaking in our boots...
suryakiran
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2007
- Messages
- 249
- Reaction score
- 0
After Pakistan, they want India as an 'ally'. No thanks uncle...
Co-operation and joint exercises are fine. But a big NO for bases for US forces in any corner of the country in any form.
Co-operation and joint exercises are fine. But a big NO for bases for US forces in any corner of the country in any form.
Similar threads
