Page 38 of 57 FirstFirst ... 29303132333435363738394041424344454647 ... LastLast
Results 556 to 570 of 853

Thread: Stone pelting a conspiracy by Pakistan and its agents in Kashmir

  1. #556
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,501
    Pakistan ‘most dangerous country’ in the world, says ex-US defense secretary Mattis

    Former US defense secretary James Mattis has said he considers Pakistan as the “most dangerous country” he dealt with it in a long career spanning decades in the military and as a member of President Donald Trump’s cabinet, because of the level of radicalization of its society and its nuclear weapons.

    Mattis, who left the Trump administration in January, also slammed Pakistan’s obsession with India, saying it “views all geopolitics through the prism of its hostility toward India” and that has also shaped their policy on Afghanistan as the “the Pakistan military wanted a friendly government in Kabul that was resistant to Indian influence”.

    He has long years of experience dealing with Pakistan and South Asia, first as a top US Marine Corps commandeer in Afghanistan, head of US central command and then as secretary of defense.

    Of all the countries I’ve dealt with, I consider Pakistan to be the most dangerous, because of the radicalization of its society and the availability of nuclear weapons,” Mattis has written in “Call Sign Chaos”, an autobiography that hit the stands Tuesday. “We can’t have the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal in the world falling into the hands of the terrorists breeding in their midst. The result would be disastrous.

    Pakistan has the world’s fastest growing nuclear arsenal, with a substantial quantities of tactical weapons that its leaders have publicly boasted about, including a member or Prime Minister Imran Khan’s cabinet recently. And Mattis writes, echoing a longstanding US concern, “We can’t have the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal in the world falling into the hands of the terrorists breeding in their midst”

    He went on to castigate Pakistani leaders, in an indirect comment on the current Imran Khan government, saying “they don’t have leaders who care about their future”.

    Mattis also framed US-Pakistan relations as a continuing narrative afflicted by differences and distrust. “We could manage our problems with Pakistan, but our divisions were too deep, and trust too shallow, to resolve them,” writes.

    That was the reason why, Mattis contends, President Barack Obama did not inform Pakistan of the US Navy SEALs raid that found and killed Osama bin Laden in May 2011. Mattis, a Marine Corps general, was then head of the US central command that has oversight over American military operations in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

    “And that is the state of our relationship to this day,” Mattis writes in obvious implications for the current attempts by the Khan government to reset ties with the United States by persuading the Taliban, using Pakistan’s clout with them, to participate in peace talks as President Trump pushes to end the Afghanistan war, the longest in US history.
    There goes Pak propaganda about how ISI helped US get Laden.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  2. #557
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,501
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  3. #558
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    Assuming you've gone through the Shimla Agreement in earnest, taking over PoK posts that facilitate infiltration was on the cards in 2001, before 9/11. I don't see anything wrong with the same plan as of today. This is not Kargil, if we rant that PoK is our land, then we are not the aggressor. Plus, this is not about taking whole of PoK, just the posts from where infiltrations take place. 4 or 5 posts at a time, until terrorism stops, or PoK comes under the control of India.
    Why does this story by Happymon come out now? Does it mean an operation Kabaddi like action is no longer feasible ?

    Paks now have parity over on their side.

    Maybe back in 2001 this was not the case ? i don't know

    So if we take over a few posts, they will throw all they can to get them back.

    The bottom line is how well can we hold onto them. Is 4 or 5 posts worth the effort.

  4. #559
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,953
    We've started putting out our version of the story. Notice the emphasis on development.



    $40 bn spent there over the last fifteen years (O..o)
    Last edited by Double Edge; 04 Sep 19, at 17:35.

  5. #560
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,501
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    Why does this story by Happymon come out now? Does it mean an operation Kabaddi like action is no longer feasible ?

    Paks now have parity over on their side.

    Maybe back in 2001 this was not the case ? i don't know

    So if we take over a few posts, they will throw all they can to get them back.

    The bottom line is how well can we hold onto them. Is 4 or 5 posts worth the effort.
    The article came out to let the Paks know, we've had a plan.

    How many PA soldiers per post? 7-8. Okay, let's assume 20 for arguments sake. When they violate LoC firing mortars and artillery, that is the time when terrorists are infiltrating. The people who man those posts go up to probably 30. If we have to take over 5 posts, how many special forces personnel do we need per post? At the max, 20.

    20 Indian special forces Vs 30 PA regulars - 1 post. Plus, the element of surprise.

    Since it should be done in a single night. We attack & capture 5 posts. Jets/AWACS in the air to create an ADIZ. Choppers flying in SAM batteries, artillery, food and regular troops to be placed on those posts. What will the Paks do? What has ever the PA been able to do? Like now, they'll scream they've been raped.

    I don't know if it's worth the effort, but I know if this is done, PA will think twice before trying to infiltrate terrorist from other posts. And knowing them, they will continue with this failed policy of supporting terrorism, so other posts are on the anvil in the future, at a time we choose.

    Put the armoured corps on stand by if the Paks try any mischief, though I doubt they will. The Pakistan Army doesn't have the motivation to fight India. They can only kill innocent Balochis and Pashtuns and send in terrorists. This is not Vajpayee's government now.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  6. #561
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    I don't know if it's worth the effort, but I know if this is done, PA will think twice before trying to infiltrate terrorist from other posts. And knowing them, they will continue with this failed policy of supporting terrorism, so other posts are on the anvil in the future, at a time we choose.
    That's the desired outcome we want.

    Must kick this idea around some and see what responses turn up.

  7. #562
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,501
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  8. #563
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    The article came out to let the Paks know, we've had a plan.

    How many PA soldiers per post? 7-8. Okay, let's assume 20 for arguments sake. When they violate LoC firing mortars and artillery, that is the time when terrorists are infiltrating. The people who man those posts go up to probably 30. If we have to take over 5 posts, how many special forces personnel do we need per post? At the max, 20.

    20 Indian special forces Vs 30 PA regulars - 1 post. Plus, the element of surprise.

    Since it should be done in a single night. We attack & capture 5 posts. Jets/AWACS in the air to create an ADIZ. Choppers flying in SAM batteries, artillery, food and regular troops to be placed on those posts. What will the Paks do? What has ever the PA been able to do? Like now, they'll scream they've been raped.

    I don't know if it's worth the effort, but I know if this is done, PA will think twice before trying to infiltrate terrorist from other posts. And knowing them, they will continue with this failed policy of supporting terrorism, so other posts are on the anvil in the future, at a time we choose.

    Put the armoured corps on stand by if the Paks try any mischief, though I doubt they will. The Pakistan Army doesn't have the motivation to fight India. They can only kill innocent Balochis and Pashtuns and send in terrorists. This is not Vajpayee's government now.
    This ain't the movies. So many things wrong here. Even if this succeeds, it's a one off. What then? Back to square one.

    Do you know how insurgencies win wars? They outbleed you. That's their strategy. You get tire of bleeding, not because you have no more blood to bleed but they still want to bleed. It doesn't matter if you kill 3 of them for one of you. They still want to bleed and bleed and bleed until you don't want to bleed anymore. It ain't worth it.

  9. #564
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,953
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    This ain't the movies. So many things wrong here. Even if this succeeds, it's a one off. What then? Back to square one.

    Do you know how insurgencies win wars? They outbleed you. That's their strategy. You get tire of bleeding, not because you have no more blood to bleed but they still want to bleed. It doesn't matter if you kill 3 of them for one of you. They still want to bleed and bleed and bleed until you don't want to bleed anymore. It ain't worth it.
    We capture a few posts. Do you not think this acts as some deterrent against losing further posts ?

  10. #565
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,501
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    This ain't the movies. So many things wrong here. Even if this succeeds, it's a one off. What then? Back to square one.

    Do you know how insurgencies win wars? They outbleed you. That's their strategy. You get tire of bleeding, not because you have no more blood to bleed but they still want to bleed. It doesn't matter if you kill 3 of them for one of you. They still want to bleed and bleed and bleed until you don't want to bleed anymore. It ain't worth it.
    I go through a situation, think about it, tear my hairs out, only to have it shot down by you. I never said you're wrong, I value your arguments. So, what to do? Maybe you don't want to give a solution here, as you're ex-mil, but a few pointers will not harm anybody. Show me a way, give me an idea, then let me think about it.
    Last edited by Oracle; 04 Sep 19, at 19:46.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  11. #566
    Senior Contributor Oracle's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    5,501
    DE, the Colonel is right. What next? Capturing, say 5 posts, doesn't act as a deterrence. Pakistan will continue with their state policy of supporting terrorism. Next we should capture the next 3 posts from which infiltrations occurs. This is a hard military response, not deterrence. But every time we make such a move, and if we're successful, we get closer to Pak land. That's something the Paks will have to think about.
    Last edited by Oracle; 04 Sep 19, at 20:06.
    Politicians are elected to serve...far too many don't see it that way - Albany Rifles!

    Loyalty to country always. Loyalty to government, when it deserves it - Mark Twain!

  12. #567
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    We capture a few posts. Do you not think this acts as some deterrent against losing further posts ?
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    I go through a situation, think about it, tear my hairs out, only to have it shot down by you. I never said you're wrong, I value your arguments. So, what to do? Maybe you don't want to give a solution here, as you're ex-mil, but a few pointers will not harm anybody. Show me a way, give me an idea, then let me think about it.
    They're OUTposts. Keyword. OUT. They're meant to be warning/trip wire to indicate the direction of an enemy's advance. Their loss DO NOT signal a reduction in military power. The men in those outposts are meant to fight for their survival, NOT TO STOP the infiltration. That is the job of the RRF or better yet, directing artillery fire.

    Commandoes are not supermen ninjas practicing jedi mind tricks putting Pakistani sentries to sleep. If that outpost just launch an inflitration or expecting a returning brick, you can be sure that they will be high alert; not to mention tripwires, mines; motion sensors that they surrounded themselves with. Even 22SAS readily states that there are jobs that line regiments can do a lot better than them and one of them is the heavy engagement. Those commandoes ain't going to stop the RRF coming down the road; especially when it is backed by artillery.

    The main weapon of those outposts is the radio. All they have to do is to get one signal out and the entire mission has failed. Doesn't matter if you occupy the place, you're not going to keep it

  13. #568
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,953
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    DE, the Colonel is right. What next? Capturing, say 5 posts, doesn't act as a deterrence. Pakistan will continue with their state policy of supporting terrorism. Next we should capture the next 3 posts from which infiltrations occurs. This is a hard military response, not deterrence. But every time we make such a move, and if we're successful, we get closer to Pak land. That's something the Paks will have to think about.
    Capturing 5 posts with the intent to hold them.

    If we can hold them then we gain. They will resist though to which you said we can handle it.

    The idea works i think so long as we hold.

    They will still try to send people over then we take over more.

    The Israelis in 2006, set up a DMZ 15 miles deep in Lebanon to prevent rocket attacks. Terrain is very different compared to here. DMZ won't work.

  14. #569
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    9,953
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    They're OUTposts. Keyword. OUT. They're meant to be warning/trip wire to indicate the direction of an enemy's advance. Their loss DO NOT signal a reduction in military power. The men in those outposts are meant to fight for their survival, NOT TO STOP the infiltration. That is the job of the RRF or better yet, directing artillery fire.

    Commandoes are not supermen ninjas practicing jedi mind tricks putting Pakistani sentries to sleep. If that outpost just launch an inflitration or expecting a returning brick, you can be sure that they will be high alert; not to mention tripwires, mines; motion sensors that they surrounded themselves with. Even 22SAS readily states that there are jobs that line regiments can do a lot better than them and one of them is the heavy engagement. Those commandoes ain't going to stop the RRF coming down the road; especially when it is backed by artillery.

    The main weapon of those outposts is the radio. All they have to do is to get one signal out and the entire mission has failed. Doesn't matter if you occupy the place, you're not going to keep it
    This is the key point. My doubt was how well we can hold otherwise the objective is lost. If say their RRF comes in before we can reinforce.

    Your main point here is we would be throwing in too much for what we can gain.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 04 Sep 19, at 20:50.

  15. #570
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,542
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    This is the key point. My doubt was how well we can hold otherwise the objective is lost. If say their RRF comes in before we can reinforce.
    What is the point of re-enforcing? You've just punch through 5 OPs, if you're not going all the way through to the coy garrison, then get your ass out of there because you're not stopping the counter-attack.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. India and Pakistan in Kashmir border skirmish
    By Mohan in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 312
    Last Post: 02 May 13,, 13:15
  2. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 20 Sep 10,, 13:21
  3. Levitating stone !!!
    By sun in forum World Affairs Board Pub
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 30 Dec 08,, 08:55
  4. Indian Kashmir 'more free' than all of Pakistan: report
    By Archer in forum International Politics
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 01 Feb 07,, 04:27

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •