India - Superpower retreat: Bowing to Nuclear blackmail

TImes of India ^ | June 4,2002 | K SUBRAHMANYAM

[GOP_1900AD]

Nehru was of the Soviet bootlicker Bandung rabble rouser generations who formed an anti-Western cabal 1947 - 1990s. The current folks in power in India are the "anti-Bandung" crowd - hard core anti-Communists. Times have changed with India more than they have with either the despicable ChiCOMs or the lying Russians. We are idiots to trust Putin, fund Jiang and to coddle Beijing vassal Musharraf while spitting on our new rightist friends in India. Political correctness and indeterminate geopolitical thinking have destroyed the West's ability to see who should be our allies, and, who are, or soon will be, parts of the next Axis.

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Carry on Jeeves. You're right, no wonder I couldn't find it in my electronic dictionary:

Wodehouse (w¢d´hous´), P(elham) G(renville)
1881-1975
British writer known for his humorous novels and stories that feature the aristocrat Bertie Wooster and his butler Jeeves.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition copyright © 1992 by Houghton Mifflin Company.

They forgot to mention: "and the patron saint of India."

[swarthyguy]

He is a funny writer, IMO. ANd very British.

[DeaconBenjamin]

Bowing to your greater knowledge and expertise in this area, you can, no doubt, explain to me what options exist to Musharraf, and why they would each be an improvement. I would also enjoy your insights as to whether you prefer Pakistan as a democracy, or as a military dictatorship.

[swarthyguy]

It's a coordinated Arabislamist strategy to keep the US off balance. Israel flares up, then India, distracting the US from pursuing its aims to get rid of the threat. And then there's the Gordian knot of Saudi money and influence. THe Russian oil deal is a good start, but we're beholden to the Saudis right now and unwilling to confront them.

[ReveBM]

I read somewhere (groan, maybe it was in DEBKA) that the US troops/CIA in Pakistan have plans to sieze Pakistan's nuclear weapons in the event they try to use them. How difficult or possible is this?

Also, aside from punitive raids against terrorism into Kashmir, would it really be possible or beneficial for India to try to destroy Pakistan? Is it possible that India might start out with a punitive raid but have a more far-reaching campaign in its back pocket if things get really hairy?

If India and Pakistan go into a nuclear conflict, and lose 20 million per side, does that really change their relationship to the United States that much? Pakistan can't blame us because we didn't start or create India's enmity for them. India can't blame us because we didn't support the Pakistani nuclear program.

If nuclear war occurs, and the market goes down 20%, I'm probably going to be in there buying with both fists. Heck, I might even buy one of the India stock funds like the India Fund or the India Growth Fund. I can't buy the Pakistan Investment Fund anymore, it was liquidated.

[Mike K]

Didn't they imply that by saying we wouldn't want to lose Seattle because of Taipei?

As I remember it, a Chinese general specifically mentioned that we wouldn't want to trade Los Angeles for Taipei. Clinton was okay with the trade as long as he could get some of them cute little Chinese babes.

[swarthyguy]

How about a real crackdown on terrorists instead of house arrests and a revolving door policy.

And Pakistan, neither, break it up into a rump Pakistan and allow the parts that wish to join india or be independent the option to do so. It created the Taliban, has offered alqaeda a haven and engages in terror act against its neighbor using the presence of the US as a shield to prevent the indians from conduction operations to take out terrorist hideouts.

[swarthyguy]

Hope the plans are in place. India's already backing down anyway, from US pressure and the fear of a nuclear holocaust. The jihadis will resume attacks after a short break and the 'cycle of violence' will continue.

Perhaps you should look into jihadi futures; they look very promising.

[mikeIII]

Perhaps you should look into jihadi futures; they look very promising.

Now, now. You're begining to sound as despondent as this author!

[cicero's_son]

...we're beholden to the Saudis right now and unwilling to confront them.

The Saudi--and for that matter, the Islamists--are the least of our worries.

The real threat is Chinese expansionism in Central Asia.

[Aaron_A]

Re: Musharraf's loyalty, don't bet the farm on it.
http://www.dawn.com/events/speech/20010919/index.htm

Re: alliances, they evolve (get over it).

Lord Palmerston

"We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow."
-- March 1, 1848, remarks in the House of Commons defending his foreign policy.

[swarthyguy]

But he didn't really mean that speech. It was for domestic consumption and to appease the mullahs so he could cooperate with the US. I like the references to the tried and true Mucca/Medina strategy. Some things never change.

[MissAmericanPie]

Can someone explain to me where the War on Terrorism went? Why has Bush not told both India and Pakistan that we plan to have a presence in Kashmir looking for Ben Ladin, who is most likely hold up there with Al Queda and Taliban?

Neither country would dare launch an attack while our troops are in there.

At the very least inform both countries that if we don't have their cooperation in digging terrorists out of Kashmir that it will be us that nukes it out of existance and they can squabble over the remains.

[swarthyguy]

That would be great. The alqaeda and friends are in the Kashmir/NWPakisan area. If the US wants to go in, fine. But the US does have a party willing to shoulder the burden since Mush has shown himself incapable of or unwilling to crack down hard, thereby giving them a whole winter to regroup, needle india and hide behind the protection of the pakistani military, whose mid-junior level officers and even senior ones, are strongly supportive of the islamist ideology.

[swarthyguy]

Hey, maybe Musharraf will come back from Almaty a changed man.

[MissAmericanPie]

I just read on another thread that the Pentagon is going to sell Saudi Arabia medium range missiles. Can you stand it?

They finance and promote 9-11, tell us to stuff it in our War on Terror, and I don't know what Prince Abdullah said to Bush at the ranch, but the War on Terror ended that very day.

[swarthyguy]

AS if there's a dime's worth of difference between the Saudis, the Palestinians and the Pakistanis in terms of ideology. Masquerading as secularists, financing and implementing terror strategies, fooling all those gullible enough to believe them.

[swarthyguy]

I think it was the Kuwaitis in that report but what's the difference. The only hope is the Bush speech at WestPoint but as the country (US) starts to rip itself apart over various issues, i keep dreaming what if we had a formal declaration of war on the saudis at least to cut off all this funding and the wink and a nod to terrorists.

We even buy that Osama's estranged from his Saudi family. I did, but not anymore; that was to give the saudis a level of plausible deniability. The meaning of family ties in that society make that disownment a joke and for western consumption only.