Posted on 05/17/2002 5:32:26 PM PDT by TheConservator
Home Minister LK Advani's expression of "deep disappointment" with the US in Parliament was matched by tough language to US Ambassador Robert Blackwill behind closed doors.
In meetings on Friday with National Security Advisor Brajesh Mishra and Foreign Minister Jaswant Singh, Blackwill was told the US had failed to fulfil promises to restrain Pakistan from supporting terrorism. India, therefore, would take "appropriate action". A similar message was given to US Secretary of State Colin Powell when he spoke to Singh earlier.
Blackwill's assurances that the US saw the fight against Kashmir militancy as part of the global war on terrorism received a sceptical response.
India said Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf had done nothing concrete to rein in terrorists — despite US promises to the contrary. India showed evidence that cross-border terrorism had increased after Pakistan pledged to fight terror.
Blackwill's request for more time to get Pakistan to comply was rejected.
Blackwill expressed US President George W Bush's concerns about tensions escalating into a full-scale war. India, he was told, would not take rash decisions but as a sovereign country it reserved the right to act on its security needs. India was urged not to break diplomatic relations with Pakistan.
Following these exchanges, there was a ratcheting up of diplomatic activity in the city.
Blackwill and senior US embassy officials reviewed the situation late into the night and consulted with Washington. There was speculation that besides Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, expected in South Asia in the next fortnight, Powell may also fly here.
I hope that the Indians do what they must to protect their citizens in Kashmir, whether it be the forced relocation of Muslims in Kashmir to Pakistan, or making attacks into Pakistan. We--as in the targets of Muslim jihad--must press the attack, and stop simply parrying.
I don't. India has the 4th largest enconomy in the world, a military many times larger than Pakistan's, and has been on a war footing, preparing to take on Pakistan for many years.
And India has been victorious in previous conflicts with Pakistan.
I'll take that bet...
You seem to be under the impression that the US has cornered the market on Jedi knights who can use the Force to find the nukes and safely take them out right under Pakistan's nose. We can't even find a pissant little twerp like Mulla Omar! Or maybe you were thinking of our super secret forces that did so well in Somalia? ... or Beirut? ... or Dahrain?
We have some of the bravest soldiaers in the world, and some of the most dedicated people devoted to defending this sountry. But they are human, not supermen. They can't see through walls, they can't hear conversations from miles away, and they can't always find their target. Because they are human.
If diplomatic efforts fail to prevent these two nations from going to war then we can only stand by and hope our geographic isaolation still provides us some measure of security.
Sorry to disappoint the gloom_and_doomers but no fire this time around. Indian politicos are playing to the Hindu street.
Better now than when the giant Muslim population has more nukes.
Yes, people will die. Yes, a catastrophy. Yes, it is coming, and better to get it over with now, against this 12th century religion of die hards. They already have displayed many times that they will do whatever it takes to convert us all backwards. Veils and stoning, anyone?
Time for Janet Reno response.
OBL is either dead or hiding like a scared rabbit. He's not capable of doing anything anywhere.
As you can see, the Pakistanis have no strategic depth. 
In my view, the Indian army would concentrate its armor in the southern plains of Pakistan. The northern, hilly and mountainous region, containing Islamabad, would be siezed by Indian Mechanized Rifle divisions or regular infantry while the armor rolled south.
The Indians would attempt to locate the Pakistani nuclear warhead stockpile (such as it is) and sieze it with airborne troops (India's equivalent of the SAS, I suspect). They would hope against hope that they could sieze as many mobile missiles as possible, but I doubt that they could succeed against determined Pakistani resistance.
My take is that India would advance to the Indus River and hold, investing Islamabad and forcing the Government to retreat to Karachi or Quetta in the highlands. India hopes at that time to dictate terms. Methinks, however, that they are in for a big, terrible surprise.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
That depends on your definition of victorious. Pakistan still controls much of the territory India claims as its own.
U.S. Must Not Train Indian Military
The U.S. Must Remain Neutral in South Asia
Pak Alert Network - Peace Volunteers Updated on 2002-05-11 18:58:48
Instead of focusing on the need for peace in South Asia, India and the United States have begun their first joint military exercises this week.
The two countries are engaged in Exercise Balance Iroquois in the northern Indian town of Agra, 650 km from the Pakistan border. India is currently involved in a tense military standoff with Pakistan.
Moreover, troops from India and the USA are also scheduled for joint mountain-warfare exercises in Alaska. These exercises will further enhance the skills of the Indian army on icy, mountainous terrain. India and Pakistan have been engaged in an ongoing battle high atop the Siachen Glacier in Kashmir's north since 1984 when India occupied the area.
Despite Pakistan's unwavering support of America in its war against terrorism, America is now training India on how better to attack Pakistan. What a way to say thank you!
Action Requested
Please phone, fax, or email Carl Levin, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee and Joseph Biden, Jr., Chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee and demand a halt to these military war games.
Talking Points
Be Polite but Firm
- Pakistan has been one of America’s closest partners in its war against terrorism.
- It is vital that if the United States cannot be a promoter of peace in the region, it should, at the very least, maintain neutrality.
- Any conflict between India and Pakistan has the potential to become nuclear and lead to the annihilation of millions of innocent people. By remaining neutral, America can have more influence in preventing such catastrophe.
For right now rhetoric from Indian political leaders is not enough to get people to worry/anticipate about the possibility of war.
India has to follow a series of drastic political actions before they will launch any cross border action. I'm sure one of the threads with the whole Indian plan which included abrogating the Indus Water Treaty is around somewhere in freep archives.
Thank you very much.
If India were to undertake a limited anti-terrorist operation in Kashmire, there is the possibility that they could further weaken al-Queda, as long as we have troops on the other side of the battle lines to catch the fleeing "jihadists". They have proven themselves to be extremely adept at fleeing the battlefield, with only the French as their only peers.
If China, were to somehow become involved, it could cost China dearly as well, as India may lose a conventional exchange with China, and may alos "lose" a nuclear exchange with China, China, although the winner, would be dramatically weakened with a confrontation with India.
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.