Pakistan 'delay let bin Laden escape US raid'

"I doubt all Indians are "gloating" over this news. It's old, for one thing and It isn't in any Indian's best interest to "gloat" about success of Pakistan's terrorists. You might be next, after all. (And I say all this as a friend.) "
Indians might feel good that the US will begin to finally see the truth about pakistan. And when were we next?
We were always first. YOU were next. Remember that after 9/11 Mush gave a public speech in Pak saying he was siding with the lesser evil meaning.. that the greater evil was India. We have ALWAYS been the Enemy number 1 and they are killing us in Kashmir still and you guys just dont get it!

"If the U.S. cuts off Pakistan, Musharaff goes and Pakistan becomes fundamentalist and belligerent, don't you think?
Do you think this will be good for the U.S. and India?"
Mush wont go if US cuts off pakistan. Mush wasnt installed by the US. He installed himself through a coup which incidently the US deplored at the time before 9/11 happened. After 9/11 the US made the folly of feeding the snake hoping to fix the problem against Indias better counsel and now the snake that Mush is.. knows that he needs to keep terrorism alive if he wants american money.
Right now the US policy is too carrot heavy. There is no stick. Show him the stick and once he realizes that International isolation aka saddam will follow unless the genuinely cleans up the country , you will see better results.
We know this very well in India. Also remember it was India that had warned the US about Pak's hand in terror all over this part of the world including afghanistan and the US ignored it to its peril before 9/11. US needs to open its eyes and see who its really allies (shared values) are.

What do I not get?

And when were we next?

My reply to gengis "you might be next" doesn't mean you were NOT first. (It means we have an common enemy.)

I've followed Pakistan's jihadi proxy war in the Kashmir for quite some time. I understand. I *do* "get" it.

But what I don't get? I don't get that India doesn't believe in Arjuna. Chew on that awhile, and then get back to me.

Whats that supposed to mean? US=Arjuna in WOT? I dont think so.

I don't think so either. The statement means that India doesn't equal Arjuna in the WOT. (In my own opinion, of course.)

You carry the name, what does it mean.?

I think I understand.

Mush is.. knows that he needs to keep terrorism alive if he wants american money.

If the U.S. withdraws its support, Pakistan will likely become more belligerent and openly terrorist, with Mush or without. India will bear the brunt of this, possibly at a terrible cost although India will prevail.

It will be a real test of China's true nature, whether it will try to intercede on Pakistan's behalf.

The end result of an Indian victory would leave Pakistan governedless and chaotic. Only India would be in a position possibly to restore order, and probably through at least a de facto absorption of Pakistan.

There are many parallels in this scenario to the U.S. intervention in Iraq (the Devil you know vs. the devils you don't) and Israel (how do you remain a democracy with an emerging majority of hostile Moslems). It would be a difficult task for any country to handle, no less India. Doesn't India have a lot of internal rifts already?

As an Indophile, I am asking you to elaborate on the train of your thinking. It would be nice if the U.S. and India could be fully on board, but I might not be realistic in espousing that. For example, I'm not aware that India has been particularly supportive of the U.S. in Iraq.

US needs to open its eyes and see who its really allies (shared values) are.

Perhaps it is India too that needs to open its eyes and see who its real allies are, and openly declare its shared fundamental values with the U.S. Howze about it?

Pakistan cannot afford to be more belligerent. The Mafia that controls pak knows that very well. Mush is but a stooge of that Mafia. They are not stupid. If one general goes another will take over. The military / ISI combine controls every single nook and cranny of that place. Thats why Mush could take over the country with such ease when he threw out sharif. Learn your history.

Pakistan cannot afford to be more belligerent. The Mafia that controls pak knows that very well.

So U.S. should just cut off arms to Pakistan, as a lawless nation? And U.S. and India confront China to do same, or risk jeopardizing their U.S. trade?

Is this what you espouse? Would Indian gov't really work so closely with U.S., you didn't answer my question about if that is so, has it been reflected in Indian support for U.S. in Iraq? Or do Indians care about aggressor nations only next door to themselves?

"So U.S. should just cut off arms to Pakistan, as a lawless nation? And U.S. and India confront China to do same, or risk jeopardizing their U.S. trade?

Is this what you espouse? Would Indian gov't really work so closely with U.S., you didn't answer my question about if that is so, has it been reflected in Indian support for U.S. in Iraq? Or do Indians care about aggressor nations only next door to themselves?"

Pakistan was ruled by the army since day one. Nothing in Pakistan is stronger than the Army. The Pak army can burn down the jihad factory overnight if they wish to do so, but it would be stupid to destroy their main weapon against India and the very excuse with which they can sucker US for billions of dollars of military aid. Make no mistake Pak army with 0.7 Million troops better equipped than Indian Army is one of the mightiest army in Asia and the Muslim world. Indian Army uses old Soviet weaponry while the Pak army uses the most modern American and Chinese weaponry.

The Mullas can take over Pakistan only if they are from within the GHQ. If and when Musharraf is replaced it will have to be someone from the GHQ. The guy replacing Mushie may well be an anti-American hardliner but he will still be from the Army but remember the Pak army is nothing without America behind them. The Pak army may scare the US government and media into believing that Pakistan is on the verge of going the Iran way but they know thats not possible. The General replacing Mushie may well do some anti-American posturing but without US help they cant budge an inch. In India its well know that Pakistan's belligerence stands on three 'A's : Allah, Army and America. For Pakistan to become a normal/functioning state, all three 'A's (or at least one 'A') will have to go.

"So U.S. should just cut off arms to Pakistan, as a lawless nation?"

Thats the first requirement.

"And U.S. and India confront China to do same, or risk jeopardizing their U.S. trade?"

The confront China will have to be a joint Indo-American-Japanese long term strategy. We would have to confront them economically , strategically and perhaps even militarily. I think these three countries will have to start working in that direction.

"Would Indian gov't really work so closely with U.S., you didn't answer my question about if that is so, has it been reflected in Indian support for U.S. in Iraq? Or do Indians care about aggressor nations only next door to themselves?"

You would remember that India was the first country to pledge complete and unconditional support for the US post 9/11. It was as some had called "giving US a blank check". Just that US refused to encash it thinking Pakistans alliance would be more valuable and so the US government decided to by-pass India.

India was all ready to send army to Afghanistan but the US refused Indian help at Pakistan's behest. Even then it was Indian intelligence that US had to rely on, in Afghanistan it was India backed NA that did the fighting against Taliban.

As for Iraq, asking for Indian help could never have been an option after the US refused Indian help. After all you cannot expect Indian help in Iraq while we fight it out alone in Kashmir. No political party in India would agree to that. America's best chances of getting Indian help in Iraq was when the BJP was in power, now with the present Congress government its next to impossible unless the US makes a paradigm shift in its foreign policy vis-à-vis Pakistan.

"It isn't in any Indian's best interest to "gloat" about success of Pakistan's terrorists. "

Pakistan is lauded as the foremost country on GWOT by the Western media and governments. In many circles comparison is made with India and its said that Pakistan is a bigger ally....."afterall what has India ever done for us".

Well we are gloating now because the West will very soon realise what we have done and what Pakistan has been doing.
The reason why most Americans piss harder on Indians is because deep inside they realise their own folly (of having chosen Pakistan over India) but wont admit. Its a pride thing.

"Btw, Are you personally responsible for your government's foolish mistakes?"

I am not holding you or anyone here personally responsible for anything. I am only expressing my political viewpoints.

I dont think so. This writer has only written stuff that many Indian newspapers have been writing for over a period of time now. In fact many of these behind the enemy lines intelligence stuff first appear in Indian newspapers from where they are picked up by the media from other countries. In fact US relies heavily on indian intelligence as far as jihadi activity in Pakistan is concerned.

"If the U.S. withdraws its support, Pakistan will likely become more belligerent and openly terrorist, with Mush or without"
Mistaken you are. At a time when Mush is going around the world trying to get foreign investment to come into Pak they will get more belligerent? I dont think so. You simply dont understand Pak.
Besides they dont have the balls to take on India without American support. They have simply nothing to Gain. The chinese wont overtly support Pak against India. Their interest is in only creating a lackey state in pak which becomes a customer as well as a conduit for energy and making sure the terrorism out of Pak doesnt hurt them.

After all you cannot expect Indian help in Iraq while we fight it out alone in Kashmir.

I was referring to India publicly expressing support or at least comprehension of U.S. policy in Iraq.

Gengis and arjun, you make a persuasive case for a way in which the U.S. can cut this Gordian knot that ties us to a "failed nation state" in Pakistan.

Arjun says "Learn history." You have to appreciate that for most of its history, particularly during the Cold War, India played the "non-aligned nations" card that made it a de facto ally of the Soviet Union in that global struggle between good and evil, on the gov't level that is (quite a different story on the human level). Pakistan, on the other hand, played an irreplaceable role in the U.S.'s rapprochement with Red China, on the verge of momentous change under Chou En-lai.

You have to remember and appreciate this history because that is what we will have to overcome in order to re-orient U.S. force in southeast Asia through a triumverate of the U.S.-India-and Japan.

The Indian community in the U.S. has to step up its political activity if we are to effect this change. Groups that are pro-Israel and those who want to identify the WOT as a war against an evil Islamic culture should see it in their interests to support you, essentially conducting a pincer movement from West and East against the heart of Islamic fanaticism. I believe that India has historically had an affinity with Persian culture, and also the vestiges of your friendly relations with what used to be the Soviet Union may help to neutralize or enlist respectively those players in the struggle.

What do you think?

I don't disagreee with you Gengis. I just don't like it when People gloat over my misfortune. It isn't a "pride" thing. You see, it IS my misfortune that my blind government supports an unstable terrorist state that soon itself must be brought down. (morally wrong as well) They will be using our own weapons against us. A friend would not gloat.

The question: How many countries will Pakistan will take down with it?

Btw, I do note the India/Pakistan "peace" process going forward. Hindus beware of the train.

"Pakistan, on the other hand, played an irreplaceable role in the U.S.'s rapprochement with Red China, on the verge of momentous change under Chou En-lai."
Do you know why India was non-aligned and had to move closer to the soviets at the time of the cold war? Guess who pushed them closer to the soviets.. it was good old uncle sam.
Find out about how good the relations between US-India were during the kennedy administration. Then when Nixon took over he conspired against India by trying to get closer to the Chinese. Learn about the 1971 India-Pak war over bangladesh genocide and the role played by Nixon in supporting Pak. It has parallels to the Iraq conflict. It was the US reluctance to save lives in Bangladesh siding with its "ally" Pak that eventually forced the Indian hand to move to the soviet camp.

Then when Nixon took over he conspired against India by trying to get closer to the Chinese.

You are too one-sided:

“During his stint at the American embassy in New Delhi, Moynihan became known as a friend of India and continued to take a keen interest in the region even during his senate days. His daughter is also an Indophile and is known for her close ties to the country.”
http://www.rediff.com/us/2003/mar/26ny.htm

“Soon after Pat Moynihan had been appointed Ambassador to India by President Nixon, he learned that a vast sum of Indian rupees had accumulated in a US government account from the sale of American wheat to India. These "PB 484" fund, as they were called, could not be exchanged for dollars, but they could be used to purchase business-class air tickets. So Pat instituted what he called the "Star Series" through which the State Department would buy tickets for his friends willing to give lectures in India.”
http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/diary/moynihan.htm

As one friendly to your argument, I urge you to rachat it down a bit and smooth out the edges in your argumentation, if what you want to do is influence American opinion.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.