Should the Indians attack Pakistan in view of the recent terrorist attacks as john mccain said .
Should the United States Support such a action?
but won't such a attack lead to a World War. the reason is that China supports Pakistan, they will definitely fight for them and if the U.S supports India it might lead to a world war.

Obviously not, the last thing you need is the collapse of Pakistan, the country is already on the brink of being a failed state, the US should support the Pakistani government in its struggle against militants and jihadis.

The main problem there is ISI, it's too powerful and unaccountablem, it operates following its own agenda which more often than not does not correspond with the interests of the Pakistani nation.

Should the Indians attack Pakistan in view of the recent terrorist attacks as john mccain said .
Should the United States Support such a action?
but won't such a attack lead to a World War. the reason is that China supports Pakistan, they will definitely fight for them and if the U.S supports India it might lead to a world war.

Since when is Pakistan responsible for those attacks, and why the fuck would we encourage a war between two of our allies. That's just irresponsible. Particularly when both of those countries are nuclear superpowers.

Obviously not, the last thing you need is the collapse of Pakistan, the country is already on the brink of being a failed state, the US should support the Pakistani government in its struggle against militants and jihadis.

this right here. no one is seriously considering attacking pakistan for the reasons stated above. not even new dehli is crazy enough to risk destabilizing its nuclear armed neighbor.

The fact that the Pakistani is taking a seriously aggressive stance towards India and the U.S for demanding transparency there is a good chance at least India will go to war. Many Pakistani officials have claimed that they are willing to accept help from Al Qeada who are willing to set aside their differences if war ever breaks out. Pakistan knows its place so I don't think they are going to out right declare war, unless they have strong reason to believe that India is planning an invasion. India worries me because they are very emotional about the subject (rightfully so) but those emotions can lead to rash behavior.

I think the U.S needs to stay out of this so long as it doesn't escalate to the point of nuclear threat towards us. We are in economic turmoil right now and we really can't afford another conflict like Iraq. They are making the right moves so far but unfortunately Pakistan is incredibly leery about letting us in to wipe out these insurgents because they feel it will collapse the state. The way we handle this terrorist crisis is sloppy and India doesn't have enough power to do it efficiently so their paranoia is justifiable but still what Pakistan needs to do is cooperate but stand strong. They need to allow India to investigate but only under Pakistans terms.

But I'm going into la la land here because we all know if this investigation is going down it will most certainly involve the U.S and it will most certainly be under our terms. Not India's or Pakistan but ours and ours alone. I'm guessing Pakistan and India are going to enter a war and Pakistan will lose along with India and both entities will be in a state of failure just like Afghanistan. Perhaps a nuke will go off and if that happens there's gonna be hell.

I'm hoping neither goes at each other, they've come close to stand offs before and they are willing to nuke each other.

Even if Obama gives a go ahead for missile attacks on Terrorists hideouts in Pakistan. its biggest ally China will probably launch a counter attack. I am saying this because the Chinese have promised their Pakistani friends that an attack on their soil would mean attack on Chinese Soil.
maybe Obama would not risk such an attack..

Even if Obama gives a go ahead for missile attacks on Terrorists hideouts in Pakistan. its biggest ally China will probably launch a counter attack. I am saying this because the Chinese have promised their Pakistani friends that an attack on their soil would mean attack on Chinese Soil.
maybe Obama would not risk such an attack..


try to imagine china without exporting to america... exactly the government woudl collapse

I hope they nuke each other. Let's get some action up in this bitch, I'm so god damned bored with the world.

Even if Obama gives a go ahead for nuclear missile attacks on Terrorists hideouts in Pakistan. its biggest ally China will probably launch a counter attack. I am saying this because the Chinese have promised their Pakistani friends that an attack on their soil would mean attack on Chinese Soil.
maybe Obama would not risk such an attack..

Corrected. No, it isn't going to happen.

India is already tearing itself apart with Hindu/Muslim conflict. If they engaged in an out and out war with Pakistan they'd have as much reason to worry about some sects of the Islamic Indians inside the country as the Pakistanis.

As to the original question, no. The government of Pakistan is an ally, and we'd do well to keep it that way.

The government of Pakistan is an ally, and we'd do well to keep it that way.

Really...? Our government trades Nuclear technology for mangoes with India and all we do with Pakistan is cross their borders every once and awhile without permission. We are sure doing a lot to keep them as an ally. They don't trust us as much as we don't trust them. Neither side is taking any action to remedy this cold relationship either.

Really...? Our government trades Nuclear technology for mangoes with India and all we do with Pakistan is cross their borders every once and awhile without permission. We are sure doing a lot to keep them as an ally. They don't trust us as much as we don't trust them. Neither side is taking any action to remedy this cold relationship either.

Someone in the current Bush administration trusted them enough to sell them a load of F-16s and thousands of bombs and missiles. On a side note, I think this is one of the few remaining areas of international relations where the UK may actually be an important player. Social and economic ties between Pakistan and the UK are far to great for the UK to even consider backing any war with Pakistan. It is imperative to maintain a united front in the war on terror, and with so many British troops involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, as long as the UK backs Pakistan the US will not sanction any form of out-and-out war against Pakistan, not even through India.

try to imagine china without exporting to america... exactly the government woudl collapse

The US gets fucked badly too. And Wars can still happen with Globalization. the UK and Germany traded a bunch of shit in early 1900s Europe and they got into a war still..

India is already tearing itself apart with Hindu/Muslim conflict.

aren't there also separatist movements in some parts of India that are not heavily religious or focus on that as a piece of nationalism?


As to the original question, no. The government of Pakistan is an ally, and we'd do well to keep it that way.

the Government of India is ALSO an Ally. Both nations HATE each other and have fought several wars with each other.

I think this is one of the few remaining areas of international relations where the UK may actually be an important player. Social and economic ties between Pakistan and the UK are far to great for the UK to even consider backing any war with Pakistan. It is imperative to maintain a united front in the war on terror, and with so many British troops involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, as long as the UK backs Pakistan the US will not sanction any form of out-and-out war against Pakistan, not even through India.

The US went against the UK and France during the Suez incident in the 1950s because Nasser wanted to ally with the USSR and the USSR backed up Nasser when he seized the canal. The US threatened to dump all their T-Bills (right term right) they had for the UK, which would fuck their economy more, as it was STILL recovering from WW2. When the UK and France didn't stop when the USSR threatened entering the war, the US used that as a last resort. the UK and France pulled out

Really...? Our government trades Nuclear technology for mangoes with India and all we do with Pakistan is cross their borders every once and awhile without permission. We are sure doing a lot to keep them as an ally. They don't trust us as much as we don't trust them. Neither side is taking any action to remedy this cold relationship either.

No you idiot...that's just political drama....

I mean if pakistan openly allows US troops and / or planes to cross the border and into pakistan to attack talibans, Musaraf would be seen as a spineless head of state and pro-jihadihits riot and insurgency would ensue...

To maintain the illusion of "power", he had to pretend as if he's strongly opposed to the US intrusion, and pretends he's trying to "solve" this issue with all diplomatic means at his disposal ... in a way that can be seen as "maintaining" pakistanian sovereignty in the eyes of the more moderate, and secular pakistanian populations.....

While his secret services/intelligence officers (w/e they call it in pakisthan) maintain a steady streams of informations to the american side for actions to be taken.....

it's all an illusion....my yellow friend...

Even if Obama gives a go ahead for missile attacks on Terrorists hideouts in Pakistan. its biggest ally China will probably launch a counter attack. I am saying this because the Chinese have promised their Pakistani friends that an attack on their soil would mean attack on Chinese Soil.
maybe Obama would not risk such an attack..

[a] Credible source to support your claim or GTFO.

[2] AFAIK, China has always maintained the non-intervention policy.

aren't there also separatist movements in some parts of India that are not heavily religious or focus on that as a piece of nationalism?



I don't know if you're referring to any specific groups, but the whole Kashmir mess isn't just limited to religion.



the Government of India is ALSO an Ally. Both nations HATE each other and have fought several wars with each other.


I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that the West will back neither in a war.


The US went against the UK and France during the Suez incident in the 1950s because Nasser wanted to ally with the USSR and the USSR backed up Nasser when he seized the canal. The US threatened to dump all their T-Bills (right term right) they had for the UK, which would fuck their economy more, as it was STILL recovering from WW2. When the UK and France didn't stop when the USSR threatened entering the war, the US used that as a last resort. the UK and France pulled out

The point is that in the 1950's during the Suez canal crisis the UK wasn't engaged in a war on America's side. The US had leverage over the UK because the UK relied so much on the Marshall Plan for rebuilding the country. Today, the leverage works the other way, although to a lesser extent.

No you idiot...that's just political drama....



Whoa, it seems like I struck a nerve with you on this one. No shit sherlock... no shit its all political. Thats why Pakistan joined with the US for the War on Terrorism in the first place. Which is completely contradictory to the belief of the people in Pakistan. Maybe not all the people, but definitely that one area where any kid walking on the street knows how to replicate an AR-15 in his village hut.

http://www.vbs.tv/video.php?id=494769783

http://www.vbs.tv/video.php?id=494769783

That was insane. I knew the weapons trade was big in rural Pakistan but, the scale of that arms market was pretty eye-opening.

Whoa, it seems like I struck a nerve with you on this one. No shit sherlock... no shit its all political. Thats why Pakistan joined with the US for the War on Terrorism in the first place. Which is completely contradictory to the belief of the people in Pakistan. Maybe not all the people, but definitely that one area where any kid walking on the street knows how to replicate an AR-15 in his village hut.

http://www.vbs.tv/video.php?id=494769783

Read and UNDERSTAND or go back to china you chink !

fak king y-mee glens.

That was insane. I knew the weapons trade was big in rural Pakistan but, the scale of that arms market was pretty eye-opening.

On that same site, the journalists actually got into North Korea with their cameras. Its insane how sheltered the people in North Korea are and unaware of how the rest of the world has been moving forward without them. I love those guys for covering stories that mainstream news reporters are too scared shit less to cover.

We need someone to invade Pakistan as a proxy. India will suffice nicely.

We can soften up Pakistan's defenses with stealth aircraft, and India invades from the east. When Pakistan's attention is drawn, then we move in from Afghanistan and take the frontier provinces.

India acquires new territory and takes over the mop-up operations.

Terrorism problem solved.

Can someone please clarify the situation for me; I'm not as involved in Sub-Continental politics as much as I'd like.

The whole issue between the two nations is Kashmir, right? The Chinese are collaborating with the Pakistanis to develop military, scientific and nuclear technology, and we're doing likewise with India.

What does each side want, and what the fuck is the problem? Is there something valuable in Kashmir, like oil or gold, or is this all just for the saffron?

What does each side want, and what the fuck is the problem? Is there something valuable in Kashmir, like oil or gold, or is this all just for the saffron?

It's strategically important becuase it forms the watershed. Some very large rivers which are important for agriculture in both India and Pakistan originate in this region, and whoever controls Kashmir controls the others' waters supply. Another significant reason for the conflict is simply that Kashmir is a large place. It's particularly important for Pakistan to control at least a segment of Kashmir becuase it gives them a land border for free trade with the Chinese.

..... land border for free trade with the Chinese.

arrrrrr hahahahahhhahaa. Have you been at the border recently ?

do you even know what's the terrain like over there ???? or maybe you are suggesting pakistan is going to have a "free trade" with china via mules ??

arrrrrr hahahahahhhahaa. Have you been at the border recently ?

do you even know what's the terrain like over there ???? or maybe you are suggesting pakistan is going to have a "free trade" with china via mules ??

Perhaps you should do a little more research into the Kunjerab Pass.

Perhaps you should do a little more research into the Kunjerab Pass.

*researching*

http://www.ease.com/~randyj/ph_18/r18_122_Karakm_04.jpg

Yea...I'm sure a 5000 ft hi highway would facilitate free trade very well....

*researching*

http://www.ease.com/~randyj/ph_18/r18_122_Karakm_04.jpg

Yea...I'm sure a 5000 ft hi highway would facilitate free trade very well....

It would if the Bin Laden construction company continues building its roads.

It would if the Bin Laden construction company continues building its roads.

I see what you did there :D

I don't know if you're referring to any specific groups, but the whole Kashmir mess isn't just limited to religion.

I don't know the specific groups but I though there were secessionist groups in India regarding various regional groups

I'm not disputing that, I'm saying that the West will back neither in a war.


okay.


The point is that in the 1950's during the Suez canal crisis the UK wasn't engaged in a war on America's side. The US had leverage over the UK because the UK relied so much on the Marshall Plan for rebuilding the country. Today, the leverage works the other way, although to a lesser extent.

okay.


The whole issue between the two nations is Kashmir, right? The Chinese are collaborating with the Pakistanis to develop military, scientific and nuclear technology, and we're doing likewise with India.

What does each side want, and what the fuck is the problem? Is there something valuable in Kashmir, like oil or gold, or is this all just for the saffron?

Kashmir is part of the problem, but there's also the fact that both sides genuinely hate each other over religious differences and other stuff like that.

*researching*

http://www.ease.com/~randyj/ph_18/r18_122_Karakm_04.jpg

Yea...I'm sure a 5000 ft hi highway would facilitate free trade very well....

On the outside chance that you're not trolling, pehaps you should also look into the importance of improvements to the Karakoram Highway, the Sino-Pak Road Agreement, the Pakistan-China Friendship and Cultural Complex and the Free Trade Agreement in Goods and Investment between the two countries. Roads and railways in this region are recieving a great deal of investment from both Pakistan and China; it is clear they are trying to build closer economic ties, and that the Pakistani controlled Kashmir region is a key part of their plan.

On the outside chance that you're not trolling, pehaps you should also look into the importance of improvements to the Karakoram Highway, the Sino-Pak Road Agreement, the Pakistan-China Friendship and Cultural Complex and the Free Trade Agreement in Goods and Investment between the two countries. Roads and railways in this region are recieving a great deal of investment from both Pakistan and China; it is clear they are trying to build closer economic ties, and that the Pakistani controlled Kashmir region is a key part of their plan.

l-m-a-o-r-o-t-f

I thought as much.

I don't think the US government should do shit. They always seem to make the situation worse, regardless of the circumstances.

Except the invasion of iraq. That was made of win.

India is well prepared for battle. But it's not as simple as that. India is the second largest growing economy in Asia, and fourth in the world. War would mean serious set backs in it's GDP, escalated commodity prices. Given the current world economy scenario, it means getting completely f*cked.
Furthermore, it has serious implications on areas like Tourism. For ex., as I type, the England cricket team is touring India right now. It wouldn't be morally correct to attack while there are foreign nationals/diplomats (important ones: the bag-packers wouldn't mind it) are in their(our ;) ) soil, so an evacuation plan should be made.

Remember in Mumbai (Referring to the terrorist attack), at the Nariman house, where the Rabi and his family was taken hostage, and then killed? You think Israel will let that pass?
BOOM!
India attacks Pakistan: BOOM! Israel will join in. If the USA wants to win the war against terrorism anytime soon, the finale is here, it's upto them to decide.
AFAIK India has 4/4 wins against Pakistan.

India is well prepared for battle. But it's not as simple as that. India is the second largest growing economy in Asia, and fourth in the world. War would mean serious set backs in it's GDP, escalated commodity prices. Given the current world economy scenario, it means getting completely f*cked.
Furthermore, it has serious implications on areas like Tourism. For ex., as I type, the England cricket team is touring India right now. It wouldn't be morally correct to attack while there are foreign nationals/diplomats (important ones: the bag-packers wouldn't mind it) are in their(our ;) ) soil, so an evacuation plan should be made.


It would also have serious setbacks on outsourcing.

Oh wait, yeah. War-time.

I think America has made a pretty shitty name for itself in The Mid-Eastern Arabic nations. Therefore, America should just stay quite and help no one but stress that they resolve issues peacefully. The last thing we need is another conflict to make us all the more overstretched.

I think America has made a pretty shitty name for itself in The Mid-Eastern Arabic nations. Therefore, America should just stay quite and help no one but stress that they resolve issues peacefully. The last thing we need is another conflict to make us all the more overstretched.

Nah, we need a big motherfucker of a war to give the economy a kick in the rear. Stimulate production, etc etc.

Invade india. I was never a fan.

If Pakistan collapses we are officially boned.

Nah, we need a big motherfucker of a war to give the economy a kick in the rear. Stimulate production, etc etc.

Invade india. I was never a fan.

You know for quite sometime, I always thought that War was good for the economy. Its only good if you are winning and if it is short but long drawn out wars are expensive and are a fuckin cancer on the health of the nations economy. In retrospect, Pakistan did help us when we wanted to get into Afghanistan, so shouldn't we side with Pakistan being they helped us within this decade? On top of that the less pissed off Muslims the better, you know? I still think we shouldnt get invovled but if needed to than I pick Pakistan.

You know for quite sometime, I always thought that War was good for the economy. Its only good if you are winning and if it is short but long drawn out wars are expensive and are a fuckin cancer on the health of the nations economy. In retrospect, Pakistan did help us when we wanted to get into Afghanistan, so shouldn't we side with Pakistan being they helped us within this decade? On top of that the less pissed off Muslims the better, you know? I still think we shouldnt get invovled but if needed to than I pick Pakistan.

Not to be belligerent, but you seem un-informed of your own country's foreign policy, besides having an aberrated sense (if not of complete ignorance) of the issues that are emerging from half-way around you. But to explain the situation in a well adapted way: Let's make the following assumptions: USA = India
(Consequently, these are the equations that are formulated)
9/11/2001 terrorist attacks in the USA = 11/26/2008 terrorist attacks in India.
In the event of which:
USA attacks Afghanistan = India (would like to) attack Pakistan.
In the event of which:
UK, NATO, etc help USA in the war = USA helps India (in the war, which is the object of the topic).
According to your theory on the Indian equivalent, when superposed on the USA equivalent on the L.H.S, the UK, NATO, allies, should have, along with Afghanistan, attacked the USA post 9/11.
Have some considerations for the American citizens that were victim to terrorists in Mumbai: the least you could do would be think before you post.

Have some considerations for the American citizens that were victim to terrorists in Mumbai: the least you could do would be think before you post.

I can't believe this has happened; I have found a situation where I agree with Ann Coulter. The empathetic argument (I'll leave you to guess where I'm placing the emphasis on that word :p) has no place in discussion. Presenting Johnny-no-legs to argue your case shows weakness in the conviction you hold in your arguement and a desire to flout reasoned debate.

The very premise of USA = India in this situation on which you based your post is flawed. The biggest flaw in this is that the Pakistani terrorists were not state sponsored, in fact they are state outlawed by Pakistan. While the Pakistani goverment continues to accept economic incentives to comply with Western anti-terrorism requests India cannot "= USA".

Listen, America is fucked. We not only have many enemies in the Muslim World but our government makes things worst with each passing day. We need to be able to show a peaceful flag in the Arab world if we are to disarm support for future terrorists. Perhaps the one calling ignorant should stop caring about other countries and being overwhelmed with emotion and actually use common sense and realize that the larger conflict has only existed because of our War on Terror.

EVERYONE, the US can mae the choice to not support anyone in a war.

Thank you

Guys... guys....

SHIT IS ABOUT TO HIT THE FAN (http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/12/26/india.pakistan.tensions/index.html)

:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(:(

I just hope New Delhi has the tact the Colombian government had a couple months back when Venezuela moved troops to its border. If not... better hope they don't launch nukes. :(

Pakistan is Fail.