What's new

US must convince India to move troops from LoC

Well then enigma, you and I are in agreement. Even I feel that Pakistan does not need to move its troops away from the eastern borders in order to fight the Taliban. It has a large enough standing army to do both at the same time.
 
.
Well then enigma, you and I are in agreement. Even I feel that Pakistan does not need to move its troops away from the eastern borders in order to fight the Taliban. It has a large enough standing army to do both at the same time.

Comments reserved.:azn:
 
.
But if india decides to move away, we would be happy to replicate, as this would be in the intrest of both the countries-but wait, why don't we solve the Kashmir and Sicahen issue first-just a though.

and how do you propose that? withdrawl of india forces from all areas?
 
.
Absurd suggestion. The guy wants India to act directly against its own interests (esp. in light of massive infiltration in recent months ) so that Pakistan be persuaded to act in its own interests?

You're making the erroneous assumption that Pakistan considers the Taliban of greater self-interest than the Kashmir/India issue.

The US self-interest is the Taliban and they hold influence over India. I'm sure India would not like to see the Taliban succeed either as it will eventually reach out and touch them.

But at the end of the day we're talking about the American self-interest here and how much India wants to be on good terms with the US (which is also in India's self-interest).
 
.
You're making the erroneous assumption that Pakistan considers the Taliban of greater self-interest than the Kashmir/India issue.

No, I'm stating a plain fact that the Taliban is infact a far greater threat to Pakistan than any attack form India, irrespective of what Pakistan considers it.

The US self-interest is the Taliban and they hold influence over India. I'm sure India would not like to see the Taliban succeed either as it will eventually reach out and touch them.

Indian self interest lies in the preservation of Pakistan as a bulwark against the Taliban, along with the immediate interest in protecting its own borders from infiltration. Neither one can be given up for the other.

But at the end of the day we're talking about the American self-interest here and how much India wants to be on good terms with the US (which is also in India's self-interest).

Rest assured that any decisions on Kashmir rest entirely on domestic politics rather than American interests. The Americans realize this, hence they have not dared to explore the idea of appeasing the Pakistanis on kashmir as a way to get them cracking against the Taliban.
 
Last edited:
.
and how do you propose that? withdrawl of india forces from all areas?

Well Mr Burn in Hell, sorry , hell fire, what i said was , "if india 'decides' to pull out troops, then we would be happy to do the same"
i never said that india should do it alone or for that matter pull them out from everywhere.

Let's talk professional, both the countries will agree upon the modus apprendai together and then decide on something viable, only if they decision of withdrawal of troops is made at home, but frankly speaking that's not my say, i am not a supporter of this action, there is no need for such a 'bold' step.
 
. .
Hey but at the current scenario, what exactly is the level of threat that pakistan is facing from its eastern border ??? And is it like the entire pakistan armed forces is in the eastern border????

It appears that in Buner/Swat the fight is only company/battalion strength. Pakistan army can easily afford 10 times that without affecting deployment on the east.
 
.
MastanKhan;363892]Hi Agno,

Thankyou very much for that post. India is used to add deceptive issues, fake encounters to bring out its troops on the border to divert pak army's attention away from the north to the south.

It happened right at the climax of the american incursion into afghanistan---when the pak army was ready to chase down the al qaeda---the indians staged a fake encounter at its parliament and ran their forces down to the pakistani border for a war---which ended in a stalemate---eye to eye for over a year.

Pakistani millitary's attention was withdrawn from herding al qaeda to facing india----al qaeda conveniently found safe havens and Bin Laden and Zwaheri disappeared. How convenient for them

Why would indian army stage a barging in towards the pakistani border right at that critical moment when pak army was about to neutralize al qaeda / defeating al qaeda on the slopes of hindu kush.
There's another thread, where the pakistanie member blames United States for al-queda escape thru Tora Bora. What is What here Mr. Mustan? Is it US or India that Al-qaeda found a safe haven in your country? Why not point the finger at yourself, that you had 7 years of killing al-qaeda members in your country, NO. We cannot blame the Pakistan establisment, they where fooled into it!!!



Analytically, in such a scenario---india would have lost every initiative that it had taken over pakistan for the last many years---al qaeda gone, Bin Laden Killed as well as Zwaheri---america would be happy----pakistan would be in the good books one more time---more aid---better infra strutucture---more hi-tech and modern weaponery---it all pointed towards a losing preposition for india.

Once again here comes out the hand out bowl!!!!

Why not say Pakistan would had a better chance of building it's own future, if there where no islamist fundamentalist in our country. Why depend on other countries, why not have the mentallity of self-reliance.


An in-active india would have been the biggest looser out of this game. The indians took out the gamble---staged a fake encounter at its parliament---got the pak army engaged on a different front.

The end results---the paks were taken for fools---they diverted their attention from al qaeda. That is all india wanted---then the next step that india took was to make pakistan a pariah nation---exporter of terrorists----the paks fell into the trap one more time. Now the world started going against them. As they drew their attention away from al qaeda and got entangled in other issues, the web of deception took away the sense of proper reasoning comprehension away from them.

India made Pakistan a pariah nation and exporter of terrorist, What? You clearly did that to yourself. India is only interested in making itself grow economically, it has no interest in your internal affairs of what mullah's your fighting, long it does not effects it's citizens.

The paks got themselves entangled into every worthless issue that the paks could face except for the real problem that was right in front of their faces.

Pakistan should have rataliated in the world media against india---that india was no friend of the u s a---by marching its forces on the pakistani border---india has hindered in the war against terror on a mega mega scale. Pakistan had al qaeda by the tail---and indian incursion forced them to let go of al qaeda.

The u s lawmaker is right in demanding that indian move its armies back---indian army has no threat from pak army---there is no purpose for the indian army to be at the borders. It serves no purpose other than to be a hinderance against the war on terror.

By its actions of marching onto the pak indian borders in a show of war, india has aided and abbetted the terrorists in gathering momentum and gaining strength.

India is not a pushover, no country has right to tell what and what it should not do, period. India has every right to be at the border, Pakistan has clearly shown that!!! Until you do not close the terror camps (Which you call them freedom fighter), India will not move. Stop the insurgencency!!, stop the proxy war in Afganistan!!, and lastly Stop blaming India for all your ails.

Thanks.
 
Last edited:
.
LOC border is a totally seperate issue to Pakistans massive internal threat.

LOC is a hot disputed border and troop withdrawl cannot and will not happen.

Pakistani Army if ordered to go into SWAT can and will crush this rebellion. BUT many believe the Army & isi ACTUALLY support the Talibanisation of Pakistan OR should i say elements in the Army.

Could lead to a escalation or even civil war.
 
.
If the IA presence on the LOC is reduced the following will happen:
1. An immediate increase in cross border infiltration (may or maynot be with a lot of covering fire).
2. Another terrorist incident with IA troops going back to the border.
3. PA troops in the east being pulled back from the fight.
4. Masta Khan comming up with another implausbly convoluted theory about how PA was almost finishing of the Taliban when India staged another attack on it self , and now Pakistan is even deeper in the Sh*thole.

Instead IA troops should remain on the border (let more of the Ajmal Kumar types try the slo boat from Karachi).

Have an understanding with the US that there will be no unilateral action across the LOC (I don't see any logical reason why India would want to anyway). Then if GOP and PA takes somes serious action against this cancer in their midst, then further cosideration should be given to any troop drawdown.
 
.
Hi,

Pakistan had no way of benefitting from the attack on the indian parliament. It was only and only india---that would benfit from that attack----india has played this treacherous game of killing its own and attacking their own sites to take advantage away from india.

If some of you indian members and readers didn't think that their govt was capable of doing that---now is the time to learn something different. Your govt is capable of committing these atrocities and more so---now is the time to accpet what you had feared in your hearts for so long.

First major case was in kashmir----when about 38 sikhs were killed at the time of Bill Clinton's visit to india and pakistan. Traditionally the islamic millitants had never targetted sikhs in such a mass scale before this attack. The sikhs were never a target of the muslim millitant seperatists. India cried the crocodile tears and Bill Clinton plyed like a fool into india's hand. When he went on to visit pakistan---he never shook hands with Musharraf.

In the indian parliament scenario----india had been left out of the war on terror by the americans----there was nothing that india had to offer or to participate in. When india saw pakistani influence growing hard upon the americans and the americans started towing pakistani line---india decided to do something serious to take the attention away from pakistan---divert pakistan's attention away from what it was doing---so they faked this attack on their own parliament. Only a fool could believe that it was not a fake.

Right after the attack---india did what it wanted to---divert the attention of pak army from al qaeda---take them away from their primary task and get bogged down on the other border---now india had the oppurtunity of gettiong world's attention away from pakistan and getting it focussed upon india---a massive troop movement towards pakistani border that just stopped short of a few yeard to 10 miles away from the international border.

Why would india want to move its troops at such a critical moment for america and pak army on the afghanistan front.

Truly---whomsoever in the indian intelligence agencies planned this attack on the indian parliament, did come out with a master stroke of genius---kudos to him / her---you did a great job for your country---hats off to you. I wish that there were someone like you on the pakistani side as well.
 
.
Well Mr Burn in Hell, sorry , hell fire, what i said was , "if india 'decides' to pull out troops, then we would be happy to do the same"
i never said that india should do it alone or for that matter pull them out from everywhere.

Let's talk professional, both the countries will agree upon the modus apprendai together and then decide on something viable, only if they decision of withdrawal of troops is made at home, but frankly speaking that's not my say, i am not a supporter of this action, there is no need for such a 'bold' step.

ah enigma

you may consider yourself enigmatic but your soulutions are far from same and be rest assured will burn in hell long after anyone else:cheers:

the question was pertaining to solution of Kashmir and siachen first as you had suggested and I had asked you to please elaborate as to how?

Any concrete suggestions or do we all mortals wait for the solution to another enigma sequence being chjurned out by you?
 
.
Mr. Mastan Khan

What else can I debate about after that! By the way you do have all the evidence or links for these conspiracy theory. Right!!
 
.
It appears that in Buner/Swat the fight is only company/battalion strength. Pakistan army can easily afford 10 times that without affecting deployment on the east.

wtf


a higher ratio of troops have to be inducted taking into account the topography and number of militants in region. the mentioned stregth IMO is too less.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom