I know...and I do not believe India was needed for what we did in Iraq anyway. We got the job done, even though Obama has ended it prematurely. The US needs to make sure the Pakistani nukes do not fall into fundamentalist Islamic hands. That’s the only reason we have anything to do with them and we should have ended that a long time ago.
There’s a lot of Pakis who do not want the fundis/radicals in charge and they fight them too...but we need to figure out a way to take care of their nuclear weapons. I am sure there are all sorts of contingencies written up and hopefully some day the opportunity will present itself.
But, all said, that is the real “gotcha” about Pakistan and nothing more.
Bush government did ask for Indian help in Iraq and India turned down the request.
As for Pakistan, India is very realistic about how much US is willing (or unwilling) to do to keep a check on Pakistan. India very well understands US position, however that does not mean India agrees with it.
A consequence of that realization is that India has been exploring other strategic options even as she maintains a healthy defense ties with the US. The whole excitement over “new chapter” in US-India strategic relationship started under Bush government has died down over a period of time and it has nothing to do with Obama’s perceived slight of India. That is too simplistic an explanation. To be honest, Obama hasn't done much that is different from Bush. US foreign policy vis-à-vis Pakistan has always been disastrously stupid, toxic, unimaginative and most importantly dangerously destabilizing for the whole region. The same old lame explanation from US about “the need to engage Pakistan” never worked well to win over India in the past and isn't likely to win over India anytime in the future. US foreign policy needs to be more imaginative in terms of how they need to deal with Pakistan. You cant have both India and Pakistan. US needs to make up her mind about what she wants.