Indian defence minister joins Pakistan pre-emptive strike chorus

prontospyder

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
6,262
0
0
Originally posted by: yowolabi
Originally posted by: prontospyder
India bitter that the US has just toppled their ally's regime?

In what way are India and Iraq (Hussein) allied?

Link

On the one hand, New Delhi has good relations with Baghdad. Traditionally, it has been one of the biggest buyers of Iraqi oil.

Iraq is one of the few countries of the world to support India's stand on Kashmir.

They had a big dilemma when the war started - whether to support it or not.
 

yowolabi

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2001
4,183
2
81
Thanks prontospyder.

I don't think that Iraq was a particularly strong ally. They can get oil from other places, it' not like Iraq was giving it to them free. Also, Iraq's support for them in the Kashmir affair couldn't do much for them.

It seems to me that it's all about their long standing feud with Pakistan and the only thing Iraq has to do with it is that they would like to use it to gain support for their cause.
 

SuperTool

Lifer
Jan 25, 2000
14,000
2
0
Fernandes said he endorsed Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha's recent comments that India had "a much better case to go for pre-emptive action against Pakistan than the United States has in Iraq."
Why does India have a Mexican for a defense minister?
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
Originally posted by: jahawkin
What a great precident the US has set for the world. Thanks GWB!!

Right. This is obviously Bush's fault because as we all know these two countries have never been to war with one another or haven't been fighting over Kashmir for decades. They were obviously just waiting for some excuse.



rolleye.gif
rolleye.gif
one for you and Moonbeam.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Bush is an idoit for billing this war as an pre-emptive strike. We would have been completely justified for labeling this as a continuation of the previous war. That should have been our story, and we should have stuck to it. Just another example of how Bush has handled this situation as poorly as possible.
 

phillyTIM

Golden Member
Jan 12, 2001
1,942
10
81
Is anyone really suprised about this?

It's all downhill from here, and the Bush regime initiated it.

God help us.
 

Marshallj

Platinum Member
Mar 26, 2003
2,326
0
0
Do you guys really think the US's actions against Iraq will dictate the actions taken by two other countries (who were not even involved in this war)?

India and Pakistan have been at odds for quite come time, and both countries tested nukes several years ago in an act of saber-rattling. They have their own problems, which are not in any way related to the USA.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,409
6,080
126
Jeepers, Dave, there are those in the US who, according to the doctrine for a new American century who have been hankering after a war in Iraq and they got it under the preemptive banner. It's doesn't really matter what hostilities are tha animate people, what counts is when they are set in motion. If India nukes Pakistan under the 'wise justification' of preemptive war, should not those who promulgated and first applied it share in the blame? The whole theory is psychopathology. Sorry! Damn, if I had my way you wouldn't even get a chance to respond. :D
 

chiwawa626

Lifer
Aug 15, 2000
12,013
0
0
Originally posted by: prontospyder
Originally posted by: yowolabi
Originally posted by: prontospyder
India bitter that the US has just toppled their ally's regime?

In what way are India and Iraq (Hussein) allied?

Link

On the one hand, New Delhi has good relations with Baghdad. Traditionally, it has been one of the biggest buyers of Iraqi oil.

Iraq is one of the few countries of the world to support India's stand on Kashmir.

They had a big dilemma when the war started - whether to support it or not.


And that makes them allies? A lot of countries buy oil from iraq. As for the stand on Kashmir there are very few countries who share a stand with either of the sides, that really has no effect its not like they were sending any sort of support. With your logic half the world could be iraqi allies.
 

UltraQuiet

Banned
Sep 22, 2001
5,755
0
0
according to the doctrine for a new American century who have been hankering after a war in Iraq
There was no 'hankering' after a war in Iraq. The possibility simply wasn't precluded.

should not those who promulgated and first applied it share in the blame?
We are hardly the promulgators amd certainly not the first to apply it. I would prefer not to be compared to those who have preceded us, however.

Sorry! Damn, if I had my way you wouldn't even get a chance to respond
Yes, I'm sure that would be your preference. :beer:
 

OFFascist

Senior member
Jun 10, 2002
985
0
0
Meh I dont really care if India nukes Pakistan or vice-versa, just as long as none of our people get killed who are working in the boarder area of Afghanistan/Pakistan. If they do kill our people I say we launch a token nuke at India.

Better they get this out of thier system now while they have shorter range and less powerful weapons.

Then after this the world can be reminded of how dangerous nuclear weapons are, and then the major nuclear armed nations can form an oligarchy to prevent any other nations from becoming nuclear capable, by any means necessary.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,409
6,080
126
I think, Dave, that India is referring to our preemptive strategy as enviably imitable, no?,
 

LocutusX

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
3,061
0
0
They won't attack. India's army/air-force is in decrepit state, the planes are falling apart, once every 2 weeks a MiG "falls" from the sky due to equipment malfunction etc. And yet they say they plan on sending some astronauts to space in a few years.

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Fernandes said he endorsed Foreign Minister Yashwant Sinha's recent comments that India had "a much better case to go for pre-emptive action against Pakistan than the United States has in Iraq."
Why does India have a Mexican for a defense minister?

Parts of India/Sri-Lanka were once colonized by the Portugese. After they left, their legacy remained in the form of a mixed portugese-indian populace in those regions many of whom converted to Catholicism and took on portugese last names i.e. Fernandes, DeSilva etc.
It's much more prevalent in Sri Lanka where something like 20% of the population have surnames of either "Fernandes" or "DeSilva".

 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
If any of the Bush-haters here had even the slightest clue about geopolitics, you would know that Fernandes is an extremely anti-Pakistan hawk and has basically been saying the same thing since he took office. This isn't a radical change for India by any stretch of the imagination.

Further, he's entirely right. India has a strong case for attacking Pakistan since they harbor and support terrorists on their soil who launch attacks against Indian targets in Kashmir and Punjab, not to mention the attack in New Dehli awhile ago. I personally think that the U.S. should have a stronger relationship with India, especially as a counter to China.
 

MaxDSP

Lifer
May 15, 2001
10,056
0
71
Originally posted by: OFFascist
Meh I dont really care if India nukes Pakistan or vice-versa, just as long as none of our people get killed who are working in the boarder area of Afghanistan/Pakistan. If they do kill our people I say we launch a token nuke at India.

Better they get this out of thier system now while they have shorter range and less powerful weapons.

Then after this the world can be reminded of how dangerous nuclear weapons are, and then the major nuclear armed nations can form an oligarchy to prevent any other nations from becoming nuclear capable, by any means necessary.

Right, cause if India and pakistan throw nukes at each other, the rest of the world's just gonna sit by, watch, and cheer their side.
rolleye.gif