US must convince India to move troops from LoC

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Back to the topic please.

 

[Zob]

@MALAY

They did mate. As did another variable. Since the starting of the 90's, India kept getting stronger and stronger. India was no longer being bound by the parity of Pakistan. Pakistan could not keep up. In the real world, the stick matters more than morals. A strong India had thus the influence, to force matters down other govt's throats as well.

OHHHH boy there is a saying in urdu NAYE NAYE FAKIR HOYE HOO BHEEK MANGNEE KI JALDI HAI....let me translate...YOU HAVE JUST BECOME POOR YOU ARE DESPRATE TO START BEGGING SOON.....listen my friend you know when PAKISTAN got parity with india once and for all it was back in may 1998...after we did our nuclear tests!!! after than conventional war became obsoloete for both nations!!

Pakistan's economy only started growing 2000 onwards. The attack was in 2002. Barely a difference. India at that time was also growing mate. Need i remind you, India was growing much much faster than Pakistan. Thus as India has grown, the budget available for the military has grown as well. Everything you mentioned about Pakistan, double it for India, then think of the following:

Why then i can ask you, would India attempt such a thing which would push her to a near war with Pakistan.

well do i have to answer this honestly....just now u sated that india was becoming powerful and could force its decisions "DOWN THROATS OF NATIONS" well you did it to show that we are economically,militarialy powerful and you thought after doing this and having a military stand off you would "FORCE US" to give up on kashmir...but sorry no plans work as you wish it would!!

So according to you, because India did not attack Pakistan after 26/11, that too was staged by India for global consumption?

Btw, a war would have stopped India's growth, dont you think so? Where we are today, it is because India has not gone to war. One of the things i'l point out-the book-"the world is flat", Thomas Freidman(IIRC) says that companies like GM, etc are the reasons why India didnt goto war in 2002. They forced the GoI to tone down, as their investments would get harmed and they would have to move.

And are you disregarding the article posted above, ISI chief himself saying that Jaish was involved. Now tell me, is the JeM an Indian controlled group?

INDIA didnot go to war because they realised that no matter how strong india is...conventional power is not an issue this is not 65,71,84.....and well as for JEM being funded well neither india nor the world say Jaish was being funded by pakistan government no proof came of that....so I GUESS YES YOU GUYS ARE FUNDING IT.....why u may ask i have replied to it before please read my earlier posts!!!

 

[Zob]

bottom line is and ofcourse lets get back to the thread INDIA removes its forces from LOC stops trying to force things down countries "throats" and trust me pakistan and india can build mutual trust to fck these extremists coming from afghanistan....i won't call them terrorists because hey TALIBAN didnot attack no one it was AL QAEDA... but having said that TALIBAN are extremeists and should be dealt with but as long as india doesn't straighten up and fix its attitude at LOC...trust me peace will be illusive!!!

 

[Nihat]

bottom line is and ofcourse lets get back to the thread INDIA removes its forces from LOC stops trying to force things down countries "throats" and trust me pakistan and india can build mutual trust to fck these extremists coming from afghanistan....i won't call them terrorists because hey TALIBAN didnot attack no one it was AL QAEDA... but having said that TALIBAN are extremeists and should be dealt with but as long as india doesn't straighten up and fix its attitude at LOC...trust me peace will be illusive!!!

I really , really don't understand what is the problem with India's attitude towards the LoC , If Pak wants to shift or move army or do whatever it wants then do it , who is stopping you. If Pak is paranoid that India will attack them if they move troops then so be it , it's not India's problem anyway.

Our problem is Infiltration and militancy and we need to counter it at all costs , if they really are local Kashmiri fighters then PAk has nothing to do with them , it's our Internal problem.

IA has not stopped Pak from fighting Taliban , if PA or top leaders want then they can flush out a few thousand armed militants in a couple of days using 2 or 3 brigades. If will power on the other side of the border is lacking , we can't do anything about it.

Pak should take care of it's own problems and India should do the same for itself , all this LoC non-sense are just delaying tactics and mindless paranoia.

 

[Nomad]

Originally posted By Enigma 947

Coming this from a yank(or you are just another indian), doesn't surprises me at all.
For people like you, any and all the freedom movements of this world are some kind terrorist outfits, and not to mention, a threat to the american national security. The only legit freedom/independent movement that this world had was from YOU people!

What difference does is make whether I am from the moon. Just deal with the points. By your above statements you must love all freedom movements. So you must support the freedom movements in Balochistan and Sri Lanka. If you don't then you are also picking your own freedom movements. I do not support any freedom movements that slaughter innocents as part of the struggle. You on the other hand justify the slaughter and every one else must agree with you.

Sorry sir we never wanted Afghanistan, execpt for a friendly regime which was threat to NONE! Now how could you see that, you know what peace actually 'bites' you people!

Now that is exactly what every country wants. So what would be wrong in India pulling the same stunts you did in Afghanistan to have a peaceful pakistan which is a threat to no one.

Well try to compare the efforts put by the ISAF and our forces, also don't forget to compare the casualty graph, and it would be better to compare the success rate between the your forces and our military.

If we keep in mind the resources and the money that we have and national support(the opposition from our countrymen actually) in view you don't even come near us. With all thos billions, colitions and the public/world support, what exactly had you acheived as of yet?

My country did not declare war on Afghanistan because we were bored. Of the money spent Afghanistan is more of a livable place than it was under your Taliban. It takes time to turn around a hellhole. At least now the soccer fields are no longer celebrate the Taliban national sport of public beheading. If you are not careful that may happen in FATA. If you have any stat on your success compared to ISAF please let me know.

You finger someone he will get something up your ***, simple as that. The thing is that if you can't sustain a blow, then also don't punch someone at the first place. You pissed off the extrimist Muslims and they gave you a hard time(though i am not in theor fovor, none is), the indians suppressed the Kashmiris, they have to commit troops in 6 figures there, so if you can bear something, simply don't ask for it.

India has been sustaining blows over Kashmir for well over 20 years and I think its well over 30,000 dead soldiers. I am not seeing India packing up and leaving so I would say they can take some serious blows. From a fingering point of view I have not observed them fingering you on ***, or China on Aksai Chin. They may be retuning something up the *** in Balochistan though I don't have any proof.

The bottom line is if the Kashmiris want freedom they need to fight for it. I can see a small minority of Kasmiris wanting that anymore. But if the Pashtun, Balochi's Sindi's and anyone else is involved please do not call it a freedom struggle but a "Land Grab".

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I can see a small minority of Kasmiris wanting that anymore.

The obvious answer to that is then why the continued feet dragging on resolving the dispute with Pakistan by conducting a plebiscite, by picking one option out of multiple variations on the original UNSC resolutions that have been suggested.

 

[Xeric]

What difference does is make whether I am from the moon.

Yes it makes a difference, why are you afraid of showing your actual self?

Just deal with the points.

Ya! doing exactly the same.

By your above statements you must love all freedom movements. So you must support the freedom movements in Balochistan and Sri Lanka. If you don't then you are also picking your own freedom movements. I do not support any freedom movements that slaughter innocents as part of the struggle. You on the other hand justify the slaughter and every one else must agree with you.

Yes we love every freedom movement that is JUSTIFIED!!(i think if brains are used this one word-justified-would make many things clear)
But yes no one supports blood shed and slaughter, nor you neither do we. Don't just work on assumptions over here.

Now that is exactly what every country wants. So what would be wrong in India pulling the same stunts you did in Afghanistan to have a peaceful pakistan which is a threat to no one.

A few questions here:
First, Which stunt did Pakistan pull? Care to elaborate

Second, And if you think india is trying to make Afghanistan a better and safe place, then sir i really doubt your grip on international politics.

And lastly, how can india make Pakistan a better place? By capturing us? or by snatching away Kashmir, or may be by fueling the Baluchistan insurgency? Or may by having a pro-india, anti-Pakistan govt in Afghanistan which would always and continuously pose us a threat on our western border?

i like the way you think dude.

My country did not declare war on Afghanistan because we were bored.

Well sorry to say but it seems kinda the same.

Of the money spent Afghanistan is more of a livable place than it was under your Taliban.

One, Afghanistan was NEVER under us.
Two, why don't you get a luxury apartment booked in Afghanistan if you consider it a livable place
Three, by only controlling Kabul after 8 years if you think that you gave gained laurels, then you are sadly mistaken.

It takes time to turn around a hellhole.

Yeah right!
Why don't you give the similar adivce to your policy makers when they ask us to do more?

At least now the soccer fields are no longer celebrate the Taliban national sport of public beheading.

Bravo!
What an achievement.
Yes it donlt happen in one of the Kabul's stadiums but others(the country outside Kabul where you drastically lack control) and the ones in Pakistan have started doing the same.
Thanks for your wonderful GWOT!!

If you are not careful that may happen in FATA. If you have any stat on your success compared to ISAF please let me know.

Everyone knows it except the blind West! or may be you dont want to know it, that's more plausible.

India has been sustaining blows over Kashmir for well over 20 years and I think its well over 30,000 dead soldiers.

Who asked them you jump in this sh!t at the first place, why dont they leave us alone? i guess they will live longer then.

I am not seeing India packing up and leaving so I would say they can take some serious blows.

Ok! but what about you?
How many more blows before you finally give it up?

From a fingering point of view I have not observed them fingering you on ***, or China on Aksai Chin. They may be retuning something up the *** in Balochistan though I don't have any proof.

Here comes the slip of tongue, come on, i know you alsi have the proof

The bottom line is if the Kashmiris want freedom they need to fight for it.

They are doing exactly the same! And then also dont complain of india suffering like 30,000 casualties as you have mentioned above. They also have to fight it out, they ain;t getting it placed on a plate!

I can see a small minority of Kasmiris wanting that anymore. But if the Pashtun, Balochi's Sindi's and anyone else is involved please do not call it a freedom struggle but a "Land Grab".

Come again please!
Did i miss something somewhere? or may be you have taken more 'blows'

 

[MastanKhan]

Nomad quote


" What difference does is make whether I am from the moon. Just deal with the points ".


Hi,

It sounds like such an innocent statement---now doesn't it. But your background makes you who and what you are and want to be.

I personally would want to know your age group and what you do for a living---maybe not exactly---just some basic ideas---so that when I talk to you---at least I can have an intelligent conversation---that will also help me in how to address you and how to approach you. Thankyou.

Baluchistan is not a freedom movement but rather insurgency funded by india to create instability in the region to benefit it.

Baluchistani people were a willfull partner in joining pakistan at the time of partition---unrest in baluchistan is caused by two tribal leaders of mari and bugti clan---kashmir on the other hand was a disputed territory right from the word go---even though the kashmiri people muslims in majority were to go with pakistan---.

The bottomline is that india will have to pull its millitary back from the borders and stop funding the terrorist organizations in baluchistan.

 

[1712]

I think India has invested too much in Kashmir (both monatarily and with the lives of our soldiers). Its impossible to back down now. Decades of bleeding India inturn resulted a radical culture in the host country. But we did-not gave an inch. Will see what else Pakistanis can do.

"The bottomline is that india will have to pull its millitary back from the borders"

Far from bottomline, no-one even dares think in that direction here.

 

[EyelessInGaza]

How does a pull back by IA - with all the shifting definitions I have seen in this thread - in Kashmir become a valid quid pro quo for the Pakistan Army shifting forces to the West?

One, can Pakistan guarantee that there will be no infiltration in Kashmir after the IA pulls back? I think not.

Two, is a pullback by the IA supposed to neutralize the possibility of an Indian thrust into Pakistan? Does anyone really think that India is going to mount an offensive at this of all times? Not even considering the fact that this would be military adventurism at its worst, you think the current geo political dynamic would even permit India to make such a move? Simply put, America would hand us our a$$es to us in a heart beat for muddying the waters.

Three, how is a withdrawal in Kashmir even linked to what is a near critical internal security situation on Pakistan's western borders, once that is in the best interest of GOP to tackle? What you're saying, in essence, is that if other parties don't help us elsewhere (i.e. Kashmir), we will not help ourselves here (i.e. the West). Does not make sense.

 

[Hellfire]

The obvious answer to that is then why the continued feet dragging on resolving the dispute with Pakistan by conducting a plebiscite, by picking one option out of multiple variations on the original UNSC resolutions that have been suggested.

Agnostic

Granting your POV for a minute, IMO I think even if we were to go down that line (which is rare at best) the present situation (in terms of Talib menace)does not allow a power vaccum to be developed. As such you need numbers on the ground to ensure secure environs.

Its too late in the day to go that route. Instead, since there is a ceasefire in force across the LoC, I think PA can safely withdraw its troops to a certain extent for utilisation elsewhere.

Lots of posters have claimed that the nukes held are ultimate guarantee and (contrary to my belief) PA will use it without hesitation. So you have a guarantee in those itself for ensuring there is no Indian interference in the event of PA troops being withdrawn.

Also why are you focusing along J&K? You have plenty of troops for that. Why not divert from Punjab sector where the excellent planning by your PWD of canals has ensured that attacks by Indian strike corps in event of a major war can be effecitively dealt with minimal troop employment.

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

In this context ---
_____________________

Infiltration up to pre-peace talks level
Infiltration up to pre-peace talks level

New Delhi:


Cross-border infiltration has seen an increase of late. “The infiltration figures for March this year are much higher, higher than the last and previous years, and it is almost back to the 2003 level before the peace process started,” said a source privy to the information and New Delhi’s assessment of the situation on Tuesday.

 

[Hellfire]

EyelessInGaza


One, can Pakistan guarantee that there will be no infiltration in Kashmir after the IA pulls back? I think not.

Oh yes. PA can guarantee that trust me on this one. You withdraw IA from there and next day you will find not a single act of violence, and if any that shall be suppressed by overwhelming force by PA. There is a very significant difference between Indian and Pakistani Psyche. While our Foreign Minister Pranab Mukherjeee said preemptive strikes were not undertaken against camps in Kashmir under Pakistani control as we "respect sanctity of human life", GoP tries to placate and then shoves a hard bamboo up collective ***** if not adhered too. GoI - we make a mockery of ourselves. Its the approach which is stronger and more decisive in PA which I admire.

Two, is a pullback by the IA supposed to neutralize the possibility of an Indian thrust into Pakistan? Does anyone really think that India is going to mount an offensive at this of all times? Not even considering the fact that this would be military adventurism at its worst, you think the current geo political dynamic would even permit India to make such a move? Simply put, America would hand us our a$$es to us in a heart beat for muddying the waters.

As of today, US will gladly support it. Had India decided to strike post 26/11, they would have at best remained neutral if not joined in with India along with Israel, UK, and others. NATO forces are 'bogged down' as per general public perceptions in Europe and mainland US. These countries (aprat from US) have no interest in looking outside their own borders. So its a dicey situation for the respective governments which are being increasingly seen as being US lackey.

 

[RULER]

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?

its pakistan or usa that must give assurance to india that infiltrators are not going to enter from *** in india bcoz india never beliefs to have peace deal with terrorists. that such deal will be again be an augmented towards larger troops as in the case of pakistan swat ,buner and you know india will also not get aid of billlions to remove them as is the case with pakistan

 

[Rabbit.Rabbit]

Hellfire, if the IA withdraws then either the PA or the head of the LeT will be sitting in Srinagar.

PA is in no position to offer any such guarantees. They have lost control over the Kashmir-oriented groups.