US plan to improve Afghan intelligence operations branded a $457m failure

[Double Edge]

He's advocating we send 2 or 3 divisions of our army to Afghanistan for re-construction & pacification after their elections on Sept 28

He points out we need Afghanistan if we want to recover PO J&K.

He wants us to withdraw Nehru's petition to the UN and go with the 1935 constitution of India.

He wants US recognition of the entire J&K and access to their toy shop in exchange.

If the US has got itself into a mess in Afghanistan maybe we can help. But he wants the recognition of J&K up front.

He wants closer relationship with the US.

He thinks after this things will be good for India.

If we have direct access maybe we will succeed where the Americans for the best part of two decades could not because the Paks wouldn't let them succeed.

[Double Edge]

I've said i felt a bit rankled by the things Trump said. He pretty much called us out.

Make such a big song & dance around the world about terrorism but where is the commitment of blood & treasure

How much skin do we have in this fight ?

I don't know what the answer to this question is. I've heard suggestions that we train Afghans in India and arm them.

They know their land better than we do.

I'm also not clear whether the Americans obstructed any further involvement by India in the early days or whether we remained non-committal. My sense is it was always the latter.

[Oracle]

Pakistan minister predicts war with India in October-November

[Oracle]

I've said i felt a bit rankled by the things Trump said. He pretty much called us out.

Make such a big song & dance around the world about terrorism but where is the commitment of blood & treasure

How much skin do we have in this fight ?

I don't know what the answer to this question is. I've heard suggestions that we train Afghans in India and arm them.

They know their land better than we do.

I'm also not clear whether the Americans obstructed any further involvement by India in the early days or whether we remained non-committal. My sense is it was always the latter.

Americans never asked Indian land for WoT. India was ready to offer all help to US. Musharraf sensed that, and he quickly offered Paks services to US. Had Musharraf not offered Pak to the US, the end results could have been very different today.

I agree with Swamy, that we should have a military presence in Afghanistan. But where is the money? If America write cheques, India should hire Balochis, Pashtuns and build up a force of some 1000s and hit the Taliban/Al-Qaida/LeT/JeM etc. During night time, the forces should be free to cross over and kill anyone they deem fit.

[Double Edge]

Pakistan minister predicts war with India in October-November

Swami is saying we should threaten to blockade Karachi after they closed their entire airspace to us.

So its one rhetorical counter after the other.

[Oracle]

Swami is saying we should threaten to blockade Karachi after they closed their entire airspace to us.

So its one rhetorical counter after the other.

Swamy is a hot headed person. Without war breaking out we cannot enforce a blockade. Everybody (P5) will scream at us. We do the same that Pak does. Pay them back in the same coin. I want our DM to announce that times are terrible and that India is making 500 nukes. Let the PA piss their pants, and take their country to the brink of collapse while chasing mirages with whatever penny they have left in their savings account.

Btw, US to keep 8,600 troops in Afghanistan after deal with Taliban, says Trump

[Oracle]

He's advocating we send 2 or 3 divisions of our army to Afghanistan for re-construction & pacification after their elections on Sept 28

He points out we need Afghanistan if we want to recover PO J&K.

He wants us to withdraw Nehru's petition to the UN and go with the 1935 constitution of India.

He wants US recognition of the entire J&K and access to their toy shop in exchange.

If the US has got itself into a mess in Afghanistan maybe we can help. But he wants the recognition of J&K up front.

He wants closer relationship with the US.

He thinks after this things will be good for India.

If we have direct access maybe we will succeed where the Americans for the best part of two decades could not because the Paks wouldn't let them succeed.

#1. We, India and US, look at Pakistan from entirely different perspectives. America is scared of Pak nukes falling in the hands of jihadis, China gobbling up Pakistan, or some other doomsday scenario. India is not.

#2. India should hire dissidents (Balochs, Ahmadiyya, Shias, Pashtuns), and create separate divisions for them to fight in Afghanistan. I am pretty sure, many of them would be overjoyed to fight under the Indian flag, and pay back decades of torture and killing. All those ethnicities should be declared freedom-fighters.

#3. Yes, only if US recognizes entire J&K to be ours (it's ours by law, but some feel good factor kicks in), and opens up their arsenal with discounts. US should also write a part of the cheque.

#4. Immunity for people who fight under the Indian flag. No ICJ, no Amnesty, no hypocritical stuff.

#5. War could reach Pakistan from Afghanistan. This ought to be made clear. War could reach China too, this ought to be made clear too, so that we have backing from US and NATO.

What else did I forget?

[Double Edge]

Americans never asked Indian land for WoT. India was ready to offer all help to US. Musharraf sensed that, and he quickly offered Paks services to US. Had Musharraf not offered Pak to the US, the end results could have been very different today.

Not land, the question is were we ready to offer boots on the ground ?

Forget Iraq. Just for Afghanistan.

Swamy is a hot headed person. Without war breaking out we cannot enforce a blockade. Everybody (P5) will scream at us.

Was watching a discussion on News X about what he said. There was one general on the panel. He was the only one saying what you did. The rest were arguing, shouting and what not.

We do the same that Pak does. Pay them back in the same coin. I want our DM to announce that times are terrible and that India is making 500 nukes. Let the PA piss their pants, and take their country to the brink of collapse while chasing mirages with whatever penny they have left in their savings account.

Ideas to bankrupt them is one avenue we should pursue.

Btw, US to keep 8,600 troops in Afghanistan after deal with Taliban, says Trump

hehe yessssss!!

[Oracle]

Not land, the question is were we ready to offer boots on the ground ?

Forget Iraq. Just for Afghanistan.

You mean sending in a few divisions of the IA to help US on WoT? I don't honestly know. Never thought about it. But now that you asked, we have to find out, and who better than the Colonel. I'll do my own search though.

Was watching a discussion on News X about what he said. There was one general on the panel. He was the only one saying what you did. The rest were arguing, shouting and what not.

I have left watching news on TV long time back. I read news, and then do my own analysis.

Ideas to bankrupt them is one avenue we should pursue.

Already started. Look at the Paks of today. The PA has an inflated military budget, while every social and economic indicators have been falling. The boost, however, was given on 2016/Nov, when then DM (ManoharP) said - why should India bind itself to NFU. And now Rajnath said the same. India is not moving towards abolishing NFU, but these statements from the top of the political hierarchy are cleverly scripted to send panic in Pak camp. Pakistanis are not known to be sane or to think straight. They will be outspending whatever they have on building more low-yield nukes. Nuke warheads are cheaper than ballistic missiles, which cost a lot, then there is the cost of maintenance. If we wait another decade, Pakistan Army would have failed Pakistan completely.

Insha-e-Allah-e-Pakistan-e-Laden!!!

hehe yessssss!!

Well, POTUS changes his mind frequently. So.....

[Double Edge]

You mean sending in a few divisions of the IA to help US on WoT? I don't honestly know. Never thought about it. But now that you asked, we have to find out, and who better than the Colonel. I'll do my own search though.

People point to our lack of success in Sri Lanka during the 80s and then say if the Americans could not after all this time then why would we do better.

The general here describes two schools of thought, one that says better we fight them there than over here and the one he subscribes to which is that it will be unsustainable. Will require us to send more and more troops. It will be a logistical nightmare. He prefers bringing Afghans over to India, training them and sending them back with weapons & artillery as complete packages. Augmenting the Afghan govts military capabilities. Those soldiers will be supported financially from India. In the Afghan army they do 5 to 7 year term and are done after. He's advocating giving them pensions so there is a motivated group of people to fight. Cannot resolve the conflict there because its not possible to isolate the battle field. This is how the Soviets & Americans lost. Both times support came from Pakistan and we're not going to be able to go into Pakistan and clean out the Taliban there either. Sri Lanka won against the LTTE in the end because they isolated the battle field. Nothing goes in or comes out.

Listen further and you will learn than Katju is categorically opposed to Indian boots on the ground there. As he puts it anyone that knows Afghanistan would realise this. He was our ambassdor there once and negotiated with Doval for the release of hostages. He says the experience would be worse than what happened in Sri Lanka.

Well, POTUS changes his mind frequently. So.....

Problem with this is the Taliban want all foreign troops out before coming on board. So it's not clear how Taliban agrees now that he said he will keep some back.

I have left watching news on TV long time back. I read news, and then do my own analysis.

There's good discussion programs out there.

[Oracle]

[Oracle]

People point to our lack of success in Sri Lanka during the 80s and then say if the Americans could not after all this time then why would we do better.

The general here describes two schools of thought, one that says better we fight them there than over here and the one he subscribes to which is that it will be unsustainable. Will require us to send more and more troops. It will be a logistical nightmare. He prefers bringing Afghans over to India, training them and sending them back with weapons & artillery as complete packages. Augmenting the Afghan govts military capabilities. Those soldiers will be supported financially from India. In the Afghan army they do 5 to 7 year term and are done after. He's advocating giving them pensions so there is a motivated group of people to fight. Cannot resolve the conflict there because its not possible to isolate the battle field. This is how the Soviets & Americans lost. Both times support came from Pakistan and we're not going to be able to go into Pakistan and clean out the Taliban there either. Sri Lanka won against the LTTE in the end because they isolated the battle field. Nothing goes in or comes out.

Listen further and you will learn than Katju is categorically opposed to Indian boots on the ground there. As he puts it anyone that knows Afghanistan would realise this. He was our ambassdor there once and negotiated with Doval for the release of hostages. He says the experience would be worse than what happened in Sri Lanka.


Problem with this is the Taliban want all foreign troops out before coming on board. So it's not clear how Taliban agrees now that he said he will keep some back.


There's good discussion programs out there.

Ok, so I talked with a member of staff, and US never requested Indian boots on the ground in Afghanistan, prior or post 9/11. If it's hidden in some classified document, no one really knows.

We'd do better because we know the enemy better. Our intel is better now compared to the ragged 80s. We have assets in all major terrorist organizations of Pakistan. Comparing 80s and now is silly. One should always learn from his mistakes. Smart people learn from other people's mistakes.

What we can instead do is, pick up Afghans, and train them here in India. But an Afghan with just an AK-47 is a dead Afghan. Afghanistan's military needs to be built. We and also America should build their land forces and air force, with tools that the Pakistanis fear. In return India and America get mining rights of gold, rare-earth minerals etc in Afghan land, to offset the cost. We can also keep some 100s special forces there for night raids deep inside Pakistan. From both sides of the border, we screw them.

Soviets and Americans lost because of Pakistan. And yeah, US' fluctuating policies (Iraq war in 2003). Focus should be on 1 issue at a time.

[Double Edge]

Ok, so I talked with a member of staff, and US never requested Indian boots on the ground in Afghanistan, prior or post 9/11. If it's hidden in some classified document, no one really knows.

They didn't request is only half the answer. Did we offer and get rebuffed ? Did we offer anything at all ?

Our willingness to participate is the point of contention here.

We'd do better because we know the enemy better. Our intel is better now compared to the ragged 80s. We have assets in all major terrorist organizations of Pakistan. Comparing 80s and now is silly. One should always learn from his mistakes. Smart people learn from other people's mistakes.

Cannot isolate the battlefield as the General pointed out.

What we can instead do is, pick up Afghans, and train them here in India. But an Afghan with just an AK-47 is a dead Afghan. Afghanistan's military needs to be built. We and also America should build their land forces and air force, with tools that the Pakistanis fear. In return India and America get mining rights of gold, rare-earth minerals etc in Afghan land, to offset the cost. We can also keep some 100s special forces there for night raids deep inside Pakistan. From both sides of the border, we screw them.

Soviets and Americans lost because of Pakistan. And yeah, US' fluctuating policies (Iraq war in 2003). Focus should be on 1 issue at a time.

How much gets revealed is to be seen. Likely we will be covert.

[Oracle]

They didn't request is only half the answer. Did we offer and get rebuffed ? Did we offer anything at all ?

Our willingness to participate is the point of contention here.

I don't think we offered Indian boots. America was pissed that time, India probably, at the max offered unconditional support, and if the Americans needed - bases for the American military inside India as staging points. That's how I see it.

Cannot isolate the battlefield as the General pointed out.

???

How much gets revealed is to be seen. Likely we will be covert.

???

[Double Edge]

I don't think we offered Indian boots. America was pissed that time, India probably, at the max offered unconditional support, and if the Americans needed - bases for the American military inside India as staging points. That's how I see it.

I don't think they needed any basing in India. But i'd be surprised if they turned us down if we offered. Who would turn down support after being attacked.

Unless the Paks made it clear we could not be involved

???

Unless you can seal off the Afghan - Pak border you have not isolated the battle field or next best.

???

Bharat referred to us courting factions within the Taliban already. He's speculating.