You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
India-Pakistan
India to answer Mumbai attacks with talk not troops
2008-12-04
India will not respond to attacks in Mumbai by sending troops to the border with Pakistan, but will instead mobilise global pressure for its neighbour to act decisively against Islamist militants, analysts say.
They blinked ...
The military strategy was tried in 2001 and 2002 after an attack on India's parliament, but achieved little.

The crucial difference this time is that India is dealing with a civilian, democratically elected government in Islamabad -- a reasonably friendly government which does not have full control over a much more hostile, hawkish military establishment.
They aren't really civilian since they do whatever Kigali tells them to do, they certainly aren't democratic, and and they absolutely aren't friendly.
Military confrontation, however tempting as Indian elections loom ever closer, would only empower the hawks across the border. "It is simply not on the table," Siddharth Varadarajan, strategic affairs editor of the Hindu newspaper said. "If India were to take any of the military measures some armchair analysts want, that would almost certainly play into the hands of the military establishment in Pakistan."

It would also have played into the hands of the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, by forcing Pakistan to withdraw troops from its tribal areas and western border. It has even been suggested this was one possible motive behind the attacks. If so, that is not a trap India will fall into, analysts say.
Posted by:john frum

#11  Indian politicians of the Congress sort have been sucking up to the Gandhian overhyped ideals like it was infallible, that peaceful resistance is a one-size fits all solution. (Not forgetting, among other idiotic things that Gandhi actually did, he was slso a holocaust denier). Too much verbose nonsense(verbal diarrhoea) from the local leftist press there too. He was a flawed iconic figure but taken mostly to be infallible.
Posted by: Duh!   2008-12-04 23:08  

#10  So, that's the reason Pakistan keeps taunting India.
Posted by: Rednek Jim   2008-12-04 19:38  

#9  If they are not going to fight openly... at least they should let out "contracts" on the top 25 and place some bounties.

Posted by: 3dc   2008-12-04 15:07  

#8  The least India can do is give all its law enforcement personnel enough practice time on the rifle range. It will come in handy later.

Why? do they really need to practice dropping their weapons and surrendering? seems like that has already been done for them.
Posted by: USN, Ret.   2008-12-04 14:09  

#7  The least India can do is give all its law enforcement personnel enough practice time on the rifle range. It will come in handy later.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2008-12-04 13:38  

#6  sludge i play civilization 4 all the time and you are right their other leaders do the same thing and always can be wiped out pretty early in the game
Posted by: rabid whitetail   2008-12-04 10:46  

#5  Ever play Civilization (computer game)? You can always attack India and Gandhi (who leads your Indian opponent) almost always lets it pass. It's the same thing all over again!
Posted by: sludge   2008-12-04 10:13  

#4  An alternative view would be that this declaration is simply magician's patter to misdirect the audience while they acquire needed intelligence and prepare a plan of attack.
Posted by: SteveS   2008-12-04 09:27  

#3  "Aha! Abdul, a sign of weakness(tm)! We must attack on all fronts!"
Posted by: Anonymoose   2008-12-04 09:14  

#2  It is always easier to absorb the hit and do nothing. And absorb the next hit, and the next...
Posted by: Cynicism Inc   2008-12-04 08:27  

#1  Where did I hear this before?
Posted by: g(r)omgoru   2008-12-04 05:56  

00:00