Outraged that India would try to defend itself against Mumbai jihadists and those who sent them, Pakistan moves troops to Indian border

Projection and belligerence from the practiced practitioners of the double game. “Pakistan troops move to Indian borders,” by Sajjad Malik for the Daily Times, December 26:

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan troops were deployed on Thursday to protect vital points along the Line of Control in Kashmir and the international border with India, defence sources told Daily Times. Reports in Indian media said Pakistan moved its 10th Brigade to Lahore and ordered the 3rd Armoured Brigade to march towards Jhelum, following a heavy concentration of Indian troops on the borders. Pakistan’s 10th and 11th divisions have been put on high alert, Indian media said, and troops had been stationed in Rajouri and Poonch sectors of Kashmir. Sources in the Defence Department declined to give details of any fresh movement but did not deny reports that Pakistan was moving certain brigades towards Lahore. Indian TV channels also reported that Pakistan Air Force continued its state of high alert and started aerial surveillance of the Chashma power plant and other sensitive sites on Thursday amid fears of a “˜surgical strike” by India.

FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    Screw Pakistan those scum bags move troops to defend Pakistani borders but the idiots cannot even kill one Islamic terrorist in the NWF. All the billions of dollars of aid to fight terrorist camps obviously has been used to fund these camps and now has enough money to move troops to protect its border.

    It is a farce and the sad part is Indian leaders are to blame because of their lack of being honest to the threat. Indian voters should vote them out and make them accountable to what happened in Mumbai.

  2. says

    Well, our monetary and military support of Pakistan seems to have some effect. Not an effect we’d desire – not by a long shot, but at least we can claim to “make a difference”.

    However, sometimes it might be better not even to try :(

  3. says

    Indian leaders are to blame because of their lack of being honest to the threat.

    True. At the last major attack in Mumbai (the train bombings) I immediately thought “Casus Belli” (’cause for war’), in that Pakistan obviously had not done enough to stop the terrorists, and India would be justified in taking military action into Pakistan to destroy the terrorists’ facilities.

    No such thing happened, not even a threat of doing so. A credible treat could have forced the Pakistani government to do something about it and prevent further terrorist plots from hatching.

    I believe the US government then – as now – urged India to exercise ‘restraint’, as if holding Pakistan accountable was not justified. In this way, we abetted the Indian government in not facing the threat in an honest fashion.

    We held the government of Afghanistan accountable for bin Laden and his activities there. Why can’t we – or India – do the same towards Pakistan?

  4. says

    Henrik,

    I could not agree with you more. It is now really up to ordinary people to hold those people who they voted in to be responsible. Anytime we have a Islamic terrorist causing carnage and mayhem the accountability directly has to go to those who we have elected as our representatives.

    We know what and how Mohammedans operate, there is no question about that, all that remains is what are the mass of ordinary people of democracies going to do. They have the power to vote their leaders out of office, they have the power to hold protests and hold leaders accountable to their ineptitude and nonchalant attitude towards Islam.

    India and Pakistan war would be costly for India but it is already paying a price for being restraint. Maybe it should take retaliatory strike to send a message. I do not like wars but sometimes that is the way to send a message and settle a dispute once and for all. Lets face it we have probably exhausted all diplomatic avenues and given enormous amounts of aid to Pakistan to no avail, if all else fails, one option remains that is military action. This may be the best option, if not the only option left.

  5. says

    For Pakistan’s elite, jihad is valid against India and Afghanistan but invalid in Pakistan. Pakistani (which is more like Punjabistani) military thought they will control Afghanistan once again after US leaves like it did in 1989. They never did a so called ‘Musharraf U-turn’ but continued to hunt with the hound and run with the hare. Pakistani military’s idealogy has always been a caliphate with Pakistan as a center. It is Machiavellian in nature when it deals with the US and openly talks about jihad when it deals with India. But by 2005, the Mehsud clan, led by Baitullah Mehsud, of Waziristan started consolidating hold in NFWP. He eventually declared jihad on Pakistan. It scared the Pakistani establishment. Musharraf had to then send army to confront him and BLA rebel groups and he showed to the Western media that he is serious about fighting terrorism. Pakistan always considered Hekmatyar and Mullah Omar as its assets and provided them full support to attack the Mehsuds and US military. But it appears that US may have figured the Machiavellian game out. They started the drone policy and their drones have assasinated Hekmatyar and Mullah Omar’s men and so far appear to be letting the Mehsuds consolidate power. That leaves the Pakistani military to confront Mehsud’s tehreek-e-taliban that has turned against them and the Pakistani elites are really scared now. After all, the Indians play by the rules mostly but Jihadis are ruthless. Pakistan is becoming a Machiavellian puzzle where nothing is what it seems. Since jihad is a legitimate concept in Afghanistan and India for them, the Pakistani military seems to be headed for a confrontation with both India and US. LeT is not a non-state actor but controlled by ISI and ISI is firmly in control of the military. With the US, they play a Machiavellian game and even send their masked men to burn supply lines to show its importance in NATO’s logistic planning. Unfortunately, Peshawar is about to fall to the fighters that have declared jihad against Pakistan. That may force the world to recognize Pakhtunistan as an independent state. Pakistan’s ideology is forcing it down a path that is not good for them.

  6. says

    We held the government of Afghanistan accountable for bin Laden and his activities there. Why can’t we – or India – do the same towards Pakistan?

    Posted by: Henrik

    One problem with Pakistan that no one faced in dealing with Afghanistan: nuclear weapons.

    It’s not clear from this story, but one report said that Pakistan was deploying troops away from the Afghan border. Very convenient.

  7. says

    One problem with Pakistan that no one faced in dealing with Afghanistan: nuclear weapons.

    Posted by: PMK

    I would not be surprised if these will be used. It will be sad with the devastation unleashed but knowing, who and when, they will be used is a matter of time.

  8. says

    I think this proves without a doubt that the Pakistani government was certainly involved with Mumbai. It is not cooperating with India properly on this and further goes to show that relations between the two are at breaking point.
    This may be the kick off to WW3 as the West would come to the aid of India if attacked and of course the Muslim/Communist countries would come to Pakistan’s.

    This will be interesting for sure as violence between India and Pakistan would mean violence on the streets of the UK with Muslims. That’s for sure.

  9. says

    PMK

    Considering nukes is a problem for India, but not the US. Pakistan doesn’t have anything that comes close to hitting US cities – in fact, they can’t even strike at US troops in Iraq. And there is no reason for US to factor in Paki responses to India should an US attack on Paki territory happen.

    I don’t expect, and nor should, the US fight India’s war for India. But given that Pakistan has been using these events as a pretext for withdrawing troops from Waziristan to the Indian border, the US would be well justified in escalating the attacks it’s been making in the area against Jihadi elements, and take out any Paki troops that attempts to hinder its operations. No need to try not to undermine the Zardari government – they were after all, democratically elected, remember?

    A few weeks of good carpet bombing by the US of those areas in Western Pakistan, and they can then pick their jihad.

  10. says

    I can’t imagine there will be anything less than a war within the next few days between India and Pakistan. Pakies have been looking for an excuse for a while to fight India for all kinds of reasons. The only real short lived peace between India and Pakistan ever existed was a couple of years after India kicked ass in Bengladesh war. Pakies are on role again with surpluss Military HW; God knows how many sleeper cells in Mombay/New-Delhi/Kalokotta/ etc currently exist?

    Interestingly, the sign of a war footing is probably a wake-up call to the sleeper cells all over India.

  11. says

    MusHuntCowboy,

    Interestingly, the sign of a war footing is probably a wake-up call to the sleeper cells all over India.

    It think it’s yet another wake up call to the West. If the sleeper cells wake up all over India, should that not make us all realise that we too have the same situation in the West? I don’t know how many Muslims there are in the West, as after going to Daniel Pipes I am still unsure, but safe to say, like here in the UK, you also have enough to cause serious trouble in the USA.

    The World should be watching India and Pakistan Aggression.

  12. says

    “HW; God knows how many sleeper cells in Mombay/New-Delhi/Kalokotta/ etc currently exist? ”

    None. The New York Times said the Muslims in India are fiercely patriotic. There’s nothing to worry about.

  13. says

    “Outraged that India would try to defend itself against Mumbai jihadists and those who sent them, Pakistan moves troops to Indian border”

    Becauce India, much like Israel, should not be allowed to defend itself, I guess.

  14. says

    Hypothesis: Pakistan. Timeline: Week before 9/11/2001, the head of Pakistan’s ISI came to the US and met with US leaders to try to get sanctions lifted. That failed. He gave the go-ahead for 9/11 to al Qaeda in the DC area.

    Then he met with US intensively following few days. US agreed to life sanctions and pay money to Pakistan. He then gave the signal to the anthrax team to mail the anthrax on 9/18. Reason? 9/11 was to turn on US concern for al Qaeda and that they needed Pakistan’s help to get to Afghanistan.

    Once they got the money they sent out anthrax made from spores from a US lab (obtained by bribes or foreign scientists in them) to turn US attention to domestic terrorism. Once they got the money they wanted to turn attention away from Pakistan. It basically worked.

    Before 9/11, there was talk the US might lift sanctions on India but not Pakistan. Pakistan already considered the sanctions unjust. The head of ISI was a fundamentalist and unjust in that context means its not just ok to kill but whatever it takes is required to do to remove the unjust situation.

    http://www.iht.com/articles/2001/09/07/edmansoor_ed3_.php


    Pakistan:Leaving U.S. Sanctions in Place Would Be Grave
    By Mansoor Ijaz, R. James Woolsey and James A. Abrahamson
    Published: FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2001

    NEW YORK: The Bush administration is preparing to lift punitive sanctions imposed on India for its nuclear program. But clearing this hurdle to bolster political, economic and military ties with India while maintaining even sterner sanctions on Pakistan would be seen throughout the Middle East as discrimination of the first order. Islamabad would be pushed in dangerous directions, particularly toward increased reliance on its nuclear and missile programs.

    Further crippling a weak Pakistan, perhaps to the point of state failure, would invite its myriad problems to spill over into other countries. Islamic militancy, arms and drug trafficking and religiously motivated sectarian violence could have devastating consequences for India’s economic prospects and cause trouble in important Islamic oil-producing countries. Risks to U.S. forces and interests in the Middle East would be a virtual certainty.

    Also

    http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P1-27095601.html

    Search Pakistan “sanctions lifted” 2001, and other similar searches. Toss in nuclear, IMF, etc. Pakistan’s central banker on 9/11 later wrote a book and said Pakistan was unable to continue w/o lifting sanctions. That meant Pakistan would have to give up its nuclear program but India wouldn’t. That would be “unjust”.

    http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=911_project

    has info on Pakistan and 9/11. Can look up meetings ISI and US after 9/11 before 9/18. Also has an anthrax timeline.

    http://www.historycommons.org/project.jsp?project=2001anthraxattacks

    By Sep 23 2001 Sanctions lifted in the news.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1558860.stm

    Pakistan knew that before 9/18/01. There were also anthrax incidents in Pakistan in 2001 after 9/11. Pakistan ISI was capable of getting anthrax from a US source and then producing it. Only Pakistan and the others involved in 9/11 could plan it all out in advance and be ready to mail on 9/18 from NJ and from Florida the fake letters to same people, e.g. NBC.

    Only Pakistan had a motive to divert attention from 9/11 on 9/18 because then they had the money and sanctions lifted deal. Means, motive, opportunity, timing. It all fits Pakistan.

    Pakistan also has the MO before 9/11 and up to now. In 1999, Musharraf invaded Kargil and said Pakistani troops were terrorists. India won and wanted to return the bodies of Pakistan soldiers, but Pakistan still said they were terrorists and wouldn’t take the bodies of their own soldiers.

    More on Anthrax attacks at

    http://anthraxvaccine.blogspot.com/

  15. says

    “Considering nukes is a problem for India, but not the US.” — Infidel Pride

    I wish. One of the last Chinese above-ground nuclear tests, at LopNor back in the ’60s, dropped significant amounts of radioactive iodine on North America about a week later.

    RSI

  16. says

    Who says we would support India in a attack?

    Just heard today we still consider, and we still call Pakistan a partner in the war on terror.We give them planes, armor, money, and support.

    Pakistan has nukes, but is not as advanced in them, or the delivery systems as India.

    If pakistan demands help and protection from The U.S., what will we do? To say we would rush to India’s side in this may be a mistake.

  17. says

    Infidel Pride,

    The US cannot ignore Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, even from across the ocean. That the US cannot be hit directly doesn’t mean we won’t be adversely affected. They can hit our allies. They can hit our soldiers in Afghanistan. They can hit India. They can disrupt world commerce. Imagine Bangalore being hit.
    Most of the world would probably survive a Pakistani detonation but none of us would emerge unscathed.
    Radiation from a Russian nuclear reactor made its way to western Europe, and that was an accidental detonation that Russia sought to contain. A deliberate detonation, even if it’s just a few weapons, could cause great harm to the environment, which we will not be able to protect ourselves from. I don’t know how strong Pakistani nuclear weapons are but I have to assume they are far stronger than what was detonated at Hiroshima and the danger they pose should not be discounted.

  18. says

    Infidel Pride,

    Addendum: thanks for pointing out that Pakistan is moving troops from Waziristan. I thought I had read that somewhere else but couldn’t remember where.

  19. says

    PMK, I believe the Pakistani nukes are roughly the same size as the Hiroshima bomb, some 15 kilotons. This is the clame of the Wisconsin Project, too, going up to 35 kilotons.

    I’ve studied the effects of the Hiroshima bomb in some detail. 15 kilotons is indeed something to worry about.

    It would be interesting if India was to precisely indicate what problems (i.e. terrorist bases and training camps) they’re looking for in India. They could rightly demand the Pakistani government to take them out, and make it clear that if Pakistan does so, they would have no reason to take military action.

  20. says

    Looks like a war is coming and it appears that it is Pakistan that is planning to attack India! Its good that Pakistani army is vacating the western border. Pakhtuns and Bolochis will occupy Peshawar and Quetta and declare independence. The biggest myth is that US drones and Pakistani army are both fighting terrorists in NFWP. US drones are killing the taliban that Pakistan is promoting in order to occupy Afghanistan. This leaves the taliban that are hostile to Pakistan to control the area.

    Most likely Indian SU-30 should prevail over advanced F-16s supplied by the US to Pakistan.

  21. says

    PMK wrote:
    “The US cannot ignore Pakistan’s nuclear weapons, even from across the ocean. That the US cannot be hit directly doesn’t mean we won’t be adversely affected. They can hit our allies. They can hit our soldiers in Afghanistan. They can hit India. They can disrupt world commerce. Imagine Bangalore being hit.”

    Well, Bangalore can likewise be hit by the next Mumbai-style terrorist attack. And the same goes for the rest of the civilized world. So doing nothing means getting hit anyway.

  22. says

    Back during the last Indo-Pakistani nuclear face-off, then Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld flew between the New Delhi and Islamabad, and managed to get the two belligerents to calm down. Reportedly, he showed the two sides an U.S. Air Force study that predicted the results of a nuclear war on the subcontinent to include fifty million dead, a near-century of reconstruction, and a global economic depression.

    Rumsfeld never received much credit for this action, but he probably saved more lives than anyone in history save Lister, Koch, and Pasteur. At least for the present.

    Years later both sides have added to their arsenals. Pakistan reportedly has broken ground on facilities to triple their nuclear weapons production. The pressure to mount a first strike by either side will only grow. Throw Islamic terrorism into the mix and the status quo will become intolerable.

  23. says

    It won’t be long now, this festering stinkhole called Pakistan has gone rabid and India won’t let this go unanswered. The entire region is at a tipping point and whether Pakistan or Iran is the trip wire will not matter. All that matters is that the detritus be swept away so that Pakistan and Iran can begin to populate with something that can develop social skills. Currently there mentality is not much improved over the ebola virus.

  24. says

    India should revise its first-strike policy with regards to terroristan. If India nukes terroristan it would be a good thing for the world and not just for India. The US and other western allies should help India in denuclearising Pakistan with immediate effect. It will only be a matter of time now before paki nukes start falling into the hands of criminals and idiots like baitullah mehsud, dawood ibrahim and so on. The US has got to be more pro-active and stop funding the pakis as if those guys were actually sincere. This whole F-16’s for paki support on terror is nothing but blackmail. destory pakistan and its people. They are the root cause of terrorism. pakistan needs to be finished off. since pakis just love to live in islamic countries we should pack them in boats and ship them to saudi arabia/indonesia or some other hell-hole.

  25. says

    India should revise its first-strike policy with regards to terroristan. If India nukes terroristan it would be a good thing for the world and not just for India. The US and other western allies should help India in denuclearising Pakistan with immediate effect. It will only be a matter of time now before paki nukes start falling into the hands of criminals and idiots like baitullah mehsud, dawood ibrahim and so on. The US has got to be more pro-active and stop funding the pakis as if those guys were actually sincere. This whole F-16’s for paki support on terror is nothing but blackmail. destory pakistan and its people. They are the root cause of terrorism. pakistan needs to be finished off. since pakis just love to live in islamic countries we should pack them in boats and ship them to saudi arabia/indonesia or some other hell-hole.