The Quad (US, Japan, India, Australia Security Dialogue) : Updates and Discussions
- Thread starter Ashwin
- Start date
I think I agree that these two have some paranoia of West.
Now, you are talking absolute dribble! Do you have some sources to back up your claim?
Nobody considers them as friend. It`s mutually beneficial partnership.
lol! India isn`t sandwiched between pak-russia-china. learn some geography JFC.
We can control escalation in a war with China. But a war with Pakistan can go nuclear. If we are to deal with Pak, it can only be through violence, but the Americans have more options. If the Americans decide to take out Pak, the country will collapse within a year. They can even help aggressively denuclearise Pakistan.
Basically the Americans can solve our problem overnight. But they won't do it, 'cause they wanna use Pakistan to deal with India in the long run.
It's an enemy country. How do you think an enemy country should be dealt with?
How old are you?
You mean by stopping economic aid, IMF loans, down grading thier ratings, etc??
And then let radical mullahs take over those nukes.
Other than India, It is in nobody interest to denuclearize Pakistan.
Pakistan gives China and US leverage over India.
Internally, Pakistani military knows that world will not allow a nuclear nation(with significant population of radical Islamist) to fails also nuke helps in deterrence with India.
Aid will come to Pakistan under different names,banners but it will come,no matter what.
They are already shooting themselves in their feet.
We, need to eat popcorn and watch .
Not relevant.
Thing about it, why else would they invade Afghanistan?
Aleksandr Dugin - Wikipedia
Jetray, randomradio and vstol jockey have repeatedly stated that "Russia are our friends," throughout this thread.
No, but it would have been if the USSR had succeeded in taking Afghanistan and then Pakistan. You'd have had two Communist monkeys on your back.
Because it isn't useful to revisit 75 year-old territorial changes. And sure, the ruler of Kashmir gave the territory to India formally, but he was not elected.
Explain.
Nobody listens to Alexander dugin.Thing about it, why else would they invade Afghanistan?
Aleksandr Dugin - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
If you are saying that he has influence over Russia's foreign policy,then you have provide evidence.
USSR invaded Afghanistan because ruler of Afghanistan stop listening( being puppet) of USSR.
But, as of now we don't.
I am sure we are talking about disputed land between India and china.
Why did they install him in the first place though? Afghanistan was completely unimportant in the 1970s unless they were trying to reach the Indian Ocean. Dugin has been described as Putin's brain.
Who is Aleksandr Dugin and why has he been dubbed 'Putin's brain'?
The Russian ultranationalist, suspected of being the target of Sunday's car bombing in Moscow, is said to have had a massive influence on Vladimir Putin's world view.
www.euronews.com
Imperialism.
Afghanistan was completely unimportant in the 1970s unless they were trying to reach the Indian Ocean. Dugin has been described as Putin's brain.
Who is Aleksandr Dugin and why has he been dubbed 'Putin's brain'?
The Russian ultranationalist, suspected of being the target of Sunday's car bombing in Moscow, is said to have had a massive influence on Vladimir Putin's world view.
Who is Russian ultranationalist Alexander Dugin?
Political philosopher dubbed Putin’s ‘brain’ by some observers has long called for Russia to annex Ukraine.
“He has never really held an official title within Russia … and he isn’t that in touch with the current establishment, least of all Putin,” Ramani said.
He noted Dugin had always “wanted to go much further [on foreign policy] than Putin is willing to go”.
Alexander Dugin was never Putin's brain
At 9.30pm on Saturday 20th August, Alexander Dugin’s daughter Darya was assassinated by a car bomb. Her father was likely the intended target — he should have been travelling in the car that Darya died in. No-one has claimed responsibility for the attack. Speculation on why Dugin was targeted...
unherd.com
None of that. Stop giving them forex, they will collapse and come to the negotiating table. Mullahs care only for their lives. If the army is gone, the mullahs will behave.
Pakistan is supposed to be under international economic sanctions.
Only India's enemies want a nuclear Pakistan. There are plenty who don't.
Agreed. If there's a financial collapse, I'm not complaining. But if they are saved, then we have to break them ourselves.
'Cause you are either ignorant if old or just naive if young. Worst case, both. No issues though.
You have to stop treating the US as our bum-chums. Every single person worth their salt in our strategic circles agrees that after Russia and China, it will be India's turn. It's also why we don't care about becoming allies with them and the fact is repeatedly reiterated time and again by different people in power to drive home that point very clearly.
"Only India's enemies want a nuclear Pakistan." Whoever wants Pak to hold nukes are our enemies. Neither Russia nor Israel, even Iran, want a nuclear Pakistan. So you can extrapolate from there.
Thing about it, why else would they invade Afghanistan?
Aleksandr Dugin - Wikipedia
Jetray, randomradio and vstol jockey have repeatedly stated that "Russia are our friends," throughout this thread.
No, but it would have been if the USSR had succeeded in taking Afghanistan and then Pakistan. You'd have had two Communist monkeys on your back.
Being friends and being allies are not the same. What we had was a relationship of convenience. The SU was simply happy that we weren't allies with the West.
It wasn't in India's interests for the SU to operate in the IOR either. It's just that we were not a strong enough player to influence anything back then. We didn't even 5 years ago, never mind during the Cold War.
It was a rule the Brits created, not Indians or Pakistanis. It was Britain's one last attempt to balkanise India. We didn't like this rule either, and we actually opposed it. It's why we later annexed territories either diplomatically or aggressively.
How many princely states joined India? Find the Answer at BYJU’S UPSC Preparation
How many princely states joined India? Know the answer and learn more about IAS preparation at BYJU’S.
byjus.com
Upon Independence, they were given the choice of either joining India or Pakistan or remaining independent. Through tact and diplomacy Sardar Vallabhai Patel managed to integrate many princely states within the Union of India.
Some examples of using violence.
From an Indian nawab:
Annexation of Hyderabad - Wikipedia
From the Portuguese:
Annexation of Goa - Wikipedia
We are neutral. We don't do alliances. It's not in our interest at all. There's quite literally no advantage for India to be in an alliance with literally anybody. The only two enemies we have, it was they who decided to become our enemies.
Bingo. Gain control, as per Eastern Europe pre-1991 so they could expand down to Indian Ocean and create a port there.
"Dugin’s actual influence over Russian policy has been grossly overstated,” Samuel Ramani, an associate fellow at the United Kingdom-based Royal United Services Institute for Defence and Security Studies think-tank, told Al Jazeera.Who is Russian ultranationalist Alexander Dugin?
Political philosopher dubbed Putin’s ‘brain’ by some observers has long called for Russia to annex Ukraine.www.aljazeera.com
“He has never really held an official title within Russia … and he isn’t that in touch with the current establishment, least of all Putin,” Ramani said.
He noted Dugin had always “wanted to go much further [on foreign policy] than Putin is willing to go”.
"Dugin’s influence over Kremlin thought is minimal, his influence on their current war effort is nonexistent. Is Dugin supportive of the invasion? Absolutely. But to think he is dictating it — that it is happening at his will, or inspired by his writings — is absurd. Dugin’s hold over the actual workings and policy of the Kremlin is nonexistent, and claims that he operates as a Rasputin-type figure, dictating Putin’s foreign policy, are fantasies. Most Russians will not have heard of the thinker until his daughter was killed in front of him."Alexander Dugin was never Putin's brain
At 9.30pm on Saturday 20th August, Alexander Dugin’s daughter Darya was assassinated by a car bomb. Her father was likely the intended target — he should have been travelling in the car that Darya died in. No-one has claimed responsibility for the attack. Speculation on why Dugin was targeted...
Putin's Brain
Alexander Dugin’s Eurasianist ideology has influenced a whole generation of Russian conservatives and radicals and provided the intellectual basis for invading Ukraine. The philosophy has worked to Putin's advantage so far, but whether he can control it as he has so many others is a question...
Russian nationalist thinker Dugin sees war with Ukraine
Prominent Russian ultra-nationalist philosopher Alexander Dugin tells BBC News that war between Russia and Ukraine "is inevitable".
www.bbc.com
Russian intellectual Aleksandr Dugin is also commonly known as 'Putin's brain'
NPR's Ayesha Rascoe talks with Washington Post columnist David von Drehle about the Russian intellectual known as "Putin's Brain," whose ideology has influenced the invasion of Ukraine.
www.npr.org
What we know about the father of Darya Dugina, who was killed in a suspected car bombing in Russia
The death of Darya Dugina in a suspected car bombing on Saturday has sparked a myriad of questions around her family. Her father, Alexander Dugin, is arguably one of Russia's most well-known ideologues. Here's why his influence over Vladimir Putin remains a subject of speculation.
www.abc.net.au
Nobody would have gone to the trouble of an assassination attempt otherwise.
Yeah, so it's kind of arbitrary. Basically Britain could have split it 50:50, they you would have 5% less of J&K but you would be happy, because you wouldn't feel like Pakistan took it. What the West don't recognise is the value in opening an old would.
You personally, are definitely not neutral.
They are if the friendship is real.
That was the plan. Our leaders didn't allow it to happen.
India was supposed to have a big hole in the middle.
By conspiring with Pakistan, the Nizam there screwed up, which allowed India to send its army in and take control.
I am personally more neutral than my country. On this forum, I am merely opposed to your views.
How can you so sure of that? it's delusional to believe that mullahs care about their lives or Pakistan's people lives.
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2021/09/28/the-agonizing-problem-of-pakistans-nukes/
"Ever since May 1998, when Pakistan first began testing nuclear weapons, claiming its national security demanded it, American presidents have been haunted by the fear that Pakistan’s stockpile of nukes would fall into the wrong hands. That fear now includes the possibility that jihadis in Pakistan, freshly inspired by the Taliban victory in Afghanistan, might try to seize power at home."
"Former President Barack Obama translated this challenge into carefully chosen words: “The single biggest threat to U.S. security, both short term, medium term and long term,” he asserted, “would be the possibility of a terrorist organization obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
And With worry of Nukes falling into jihadist's hand, it won't be allowed.
I was talking about big players like US, China. Russia( Don't care much) and Israel had to worry about Iranians/Hezbollah getting Nuke technology from failed Pakistani state.
Pakistani Military Reputation is all time low in Pakistan. India meddling in Pak's domestic affair will strengthen their reputation. How is that in India's Interests?
Then I guess, I am Naive Lol!
No one said US is going to be our Bum-chums.
However, I don't see US going to war with even china In order to maintain US economic might/ Diplomatic Dominance.
As, For undermining your near peer Competitor through block economy/ Sanctions/unfair Trade Deals will definitely remain in US playbook.
But War, NO.
The mullahs won't get nukes. Even if they do get nukes, they won't be able to use them 'cause only the PA HQ will have access to the codes that can trigger them. It's the same reason why Ukraine returned the nukes to Russia.
Pretty much all of them can be 'persuaded' to return these stray nukes.
Russia, UK and France don't want a nuclear Pakistan. US and China obviously want a nuclear Pak. That's their leverage over India.
If it wasn't for the existence of India, then both US and China will not want Pak to have nukes either.
I am talking about the long term. Things are in our favour today, but that may not be the case in the future.
It's difficult to say. Near-peer is the keyword. After WW2, the US used its economic heft to get its way. But they are losing that advantage. So now their only advantage is the military. If they begin losing there as well, things can get dicey for everybody. China won't be just a near-peer within the decade.
For the US, it's really important to keep the Chinese bottled at Taiwan. If Taiwan falls to China, then the US loses control over the entirety of the Western Pacific to China. The threat on Japan would expand. And things would get really bad for Korea too, where the Chinese can attempt a unification, challenging the US once again. The US won't be able to stop the unification even if they go to war. And if the US ends up withdrawing from their alliance obligations with SoKo, then that will be the end of America's global political power. 'Cause Japan will be next.
Taiwan gives the US the best possible advantage at playing defence with the least amount of escalation compared to defending SoKo or Japan. Meaning, both the US and China can go to war, but neither side will go nuclear over Taiwan. It's also the only place where the US can use its qualitative advantage spread over smaller numbers in a war that will very likely end quickly.
Going by that logic, no document signed with the Gulf countries should be honoured. Did you take your meds or what?
The logic that only a democratically elected person can sign a document goes against most documents you chaps have signed historically. Better not to go down this line of arguement.
That is your choice, but it isn't a practical one.
The UK has been democratic for a long time. It doesn't help to revisit legacy agreements but the fact is that the status quo in Kashmir is just that, it's the way things are and have been for a long time. India trying to reclaim POK would be like Pakistan trying to reclaim Bangladesh. Both countries could be seen to have historical entitlements but either would end in mass bloodshed.