India - Pakistan Standoff 2019
- Thread starter nair
- Start date
- Status
The Big Short - 2007 Subprime crisis could happen because of the fraud perpetuated by Goldman Sachs and other banks using the mandate from politician (read Bush Jr) and FED's backing it; trapping AIG and the bogus rated CDOs it sold to Investors worldwide. ICICI was a victim too with losses accumulating up to $4billion. All of this caused the meltdown because it had reached a critical mass where the chain reaction triggered by Subprime crisis could not be arrested and there were Shylock(s) waiting to get their pound of flesh from those they had intentionally thrown under the bus.
China's case is very different. It is very close to that of what the East India Company did. There is no transparency of the banks. There is no rule of law. There is no respect of human life, to control the situation, if need be they can repeat the Great Leap (to death) 10 times over. 1.4 billion people are subservient to the whims of just one man sitting at the top of the pyramid. China is and will successfully surf through the rough weather, since it hoards the petro-dollars, which is where it derives its main power and is the default power of the world. CNY is simply used as a paper for local bartering within China - from soaps and toiletaries to buying (99 years lease) apartments.
So Rahul Gandhi is suggesting that the then Vajpayee government should not have done what it did. What RaGa is suggesting that he would have allowed the passengers to die, thus getting the title of a Mass Murderer, a bigger title competing with his berthen Masood Azhar and Hafiz Saeed.
Here is the basic principle : An economy becomes sick when it starts to produce and hoard things which are not needed by consumers and neglects to produce things which are needed. Ask @Nilgiri
Oh and one more thing! It is always "Its different" while it remains exactly the same thing. And no, no one is different enough to bypass basics of economy. Not Japan and Not US. Of course, we are yet to see what becomes of China, but then, No apple till date has been able to avoid law of gravitation, no matter how different it looks.
I remember this incident very clearly and the role played by Congress sponsored media. They created a narrative that the people in the aircraft were more important than the interest of the nation. They forced BJP Govt to release these guys and Congress was at the forefront in forcing this decision on BJP.
BJP should dig out that clip and expose RaGa's insensitivity to Indian lives
May be Rahul Gandhi can lead by example and start by explaining why was India partitioned in the first place? Why we had to fight a war in '62 and lose it? Why in Shimla Agreement, extremely mild terms were imposed on Pakistan? Why in 80's Pakistan's nuclear program was not attacked? Or Why the hell we adopted a failed socialist economy.
Including setting up demonstrations outside of Vajpayee's house. And the selfish people were so stupid and unconcerned with the national interest, that when widows of martyrs, like Sq. Ldr Ajay Ahuja's wife (Kargil was still quite recent) were called to speak to the crowds and convince them not to force the Gvt's hand; they all began insulting and attacking the widows.
Nah, just until they kill Azhar/inflict serious damage on Pakistan & its terror infrastructure.
Then they will say, it is because we pressurized the govt. this happened. So truly the credit should be RG's. Point is you can spin everything in the world if you want to as long as the target audience is gullible enough.
Its quite natural for a gandhi family guys to confuse Negotiation as dealmaking
. Here is wat it actually means Dealmaking : The one quattarochi uncle or Robert Vadra does.
Negotiating : Effort done 2 release hostages held by terrorist after due consultation with all political parties .
I think since the ABV bus trip to Lahore which was repaid by Kargil, there has been a pattern to such peace initiatives launched by India followed by a terror attack. It's almost as inevitable as night following day.
To quote S.S.Menon again, a couple of decades ago there used to be a peace constituency in India rooting for peace between the two people's come what may . A small constituency with a voice inversely proportional to its height and punching much above its weight mainly comprising of MSM English language journalists but not exclusively so. Today while that constituency exists, it's lost its credibility. The same is true for the aman ka tamasha lobby.
There are many who see IK not only as a front for the PA & it's minions but as its proxy. Someone who wants peace just coz Pakistan is in an economic mess. The moment they start to recover, they'd be back to business in Kashmir & elsewhere.So, why should we oblige you?
I don't share that view. Pakistan or at least the then west Pakistan was doing much better economically as compared to India, yet we saw the 1965 conflict initiated and prosecuted by the PA. Pakistan, whether strong or weak has been anything but inconsistent in the way it's viewed India and in it's behaviour towards India.
If it comes to the point of armed terrorists with "no supervision " & potentially armed with NWP, it ceases to be India's problem exclusively and automatically becomes a world problem. As it is the question of snakes being raised in ones backyard only biting those it was raised to act against has been proved false. That was always going to happen as any student of history will tell you. It's the TTP now. What's to prevent the JeM or LeT not going rogue some years down the line? The question being even if you were to come to terms with India & Afghanistan what will you do with this ever growing lot of illiterate , radicalised youth with little or no chance of being absorbed into the economy in a productive manner.
I guess we'd just have to steel ourselves just as Israel has done in the West Bank. Build perimeters, constantly monitor them, be vigilant, use state of the art technologies and if in spite of all this we face casualties ( which is inevitable) unleash hell on the attackers and their constituency.
While I agree with your assessment, I believe the thinking in the establishment and among vast sections of our society is, we can't come to terms with you. It's going to be a long haul and a battle of attrition which will get increasingly vicious as time goes by. Our primary intention would be to grow the economy. That would then have to be balanced against our national security needs. The previous regime emphasized the former. The present one is doing both. Or at least attempting to.
But you can be sure of one thing, if more Pulwamas are going to be a staple feature, you're going to see a return to the post Lal Masjid scenario too. Only this time, with all your neighbors as antagonists, the world opinion led by the US being staunchly against you and the internal cleavages in your nation being more pronounced. Add to that a floundering economy. See if the choice is between inciting and prolonging a civil war within Pakistan to seeing a wholesale export of these elements in the neighborhood, I don't need to tell you what the choice of your neighbors is going to be.
Broadly, yes. The planning of a reprisal was always with the Corps Commander in picture and Command in loop. With the 'Surgical Strike' a test case of political ownership of strikes was made which served two purposes:
1. Aimed at dealing with the increased awareness of Indian public which is now more aware, thanks to media.
2. Called out Pakistan's chant of 'nuclear weapons' and attempted to create, for the first time, escalation below the nuclear threshold in a demonstrative and not theoretical manner. Further, it showed that India would be willing to wage a conventional campaign if need be, even if Pakistan held out a nuclear threat.
While we look at this, what the IAF strikes in PoJ&K (notice how no one has spoken of the Damage in Chakothi and Muzzafarabd till date) and in Pakistan itself has demonstrated is the willingness to strike at targets into Pakistan. This is a very important message as this checkmated any attempts of Pakistan to brush off strike in PoJ&K under the pure context of 'Kashmir issue' thereby pushing forward it's narrative of making it of Kashmir.
At the same time, Pakistan declared that any Air Strike within Pakistan would be an act of aggression and would be responded to. Yet they have inadvertently, struck into what they call Indian Occupied Kashmir and not what they call Indian Territory.
This bit is very significant. Was it a lapse on their part? Or was it an attempt to create an option wherein, retaliatory strikes by India would have been called aggression by India exclusively over a 'disputed territory'. Or was it an attempt by Pakistan to not force India's hands by hitting any target not located within Kashmir valley including no targeting in Jammu by PAF.
One needs to ponder over these points.
Counter, by not closing it's airspace, what has India achieved, in your opinion, with a PAF retaliation?
- Status
