Survival of the Fittest

For anyone looling to understand how india came to be occupied by waves after waves of invaders, the answers are right here.

America does not have to come to conquer Pakistan. It already has. Who do u think controls your bases ? Who controls your Army ? How many ships does one need to close all Pakistani Ports ?

The destiny of Pakistan was more or less determined at its birth. Pakistanis talk about its strategic importance geographically. Well Pakistan never took advantage of Geographic situation. As a matter of fact it squandered the opportunity. On your East you have India with whom you have had a running conflict for more than 50 years without one iota of benefit for Pakistan. In the West you have Afghanistan and even the most friendly Pashtuns consider half or your country (west of Indus) as their own. As a matter of fact Afghanistan`s writ is obeyed more in NWFP and Balauchistan then Pakistan`s. Shia Iran your other western neighbor has no love for you. Guess they do not like there shia brothers being labeled as Kaffirs and murdered. So what does Pakistan have. Nuisanse and Buffer value for the region.

Pakistan should realise what it is. It is like a prostitute. It has to bare itself when US gives it a few dollars. It has to have dance when the Saudis give it a few Dinars.

Real strength in this day and age comes from a strong Economy. For strong Economy the nations needs a good Education System. And Education mean enquiry and exposure to current and new ideas. If your head is buried in sand or worse still in sand jokey`s ass, all you are going to end up with is a stinky head.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Urstruly bhai. Ba`d az salam...
I understand that this article is war planning for a worst-case scenario and i agree with most of it with that in mind. however, wouldn`t it be better --and more of a credible treat against US interests--which as we all know are equal to Zionist interests--be for pakistani to develop the capability to take out...ISRAEL instead of India if our survival as a nation is threatened? Will the Zionist hawks in the US state dept then think of taking us out if they knew that the cost would be no more israel?

The Israelis are very clever and they have a plan called Nuclear Suicide whereby if they ever feel that the existence of their state is threatened they will nuke and take out as many of the surrounding arab/muslim nations as possible. they have abt 400 nukes so thats a lot of muslim ciies turned to rubble. THAT is why at present no muslim country attacks israel. if pakistan can therefore ensure--by as you say builiding up its nukes and missile delivery systems--so that if we are going to go israel too is going to go--that will be our biggest card in the pack and ensure we do not become the next iraq.

North Korea`s leader said something v clever the other day--the war on iraq has taught us that the only way to protect yourself from usa aggression is to have nuclear weapons and the ability to deliver.

since we can`t hit the usa with our nukes at present we can hit the country they hold dearer than all else--as sharon said last year `we jrws control america` --i.e. israel.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Layman # 9 :

You have raised some very important issues. I will try to answer them one by one.

Your first issue is that ``US doesn`t have to impose a war because there are other methods to achieve its objectives``.

Yes there are arguments for and against this assertion, which are regularly discussed in media around the globe. Personally, I do not think that Pak Army will ever bow down to a level as low as nuclear disarmament. So far they have played their cards sensibly. But keep in mind that ``an attack on Pakistan`` is not a figment of my imagination; instead US media, its politicians, its government officials, its think tanks and ordinary people put forth this scenario on almost daily basis. Even President Musharaf in a public rally has openly admitted that he thinks that Paksitan might be next. And as I elaborated before, the strategic planning is done with keeping the worst case scenario in mind; and it is done prior to when something happens. In my opinion a credible Pakistani deterrent is necessary for the security and prosperity of whole region.


Your second issue is that US can achieve its goals of nuclear disarmament through economic noose tightening.

I have discussed this briefly in the article. It will not work this time because of two reasons:

1. It did not work in the past 3 ½ years, between 9/11 and our nuclear tests. And it will not work again because the econo-politics along with geopolitics of the world has changed 180 degrees after US aggression on Iraq, as I discussed in the article.

2. The economic noose tightening will create extreme internal turmoil, which may cause a change of leadership. In that case the nuclear assets might get compromised; and that fails the purpose of tightening of noose in the first place. And now when Pak Army has gone as far as almost turning against its own people to fulfill American demands, I don’t think it is left with a wide playing field.

Your third issue is regarding Policing Pakistan

As I wrote in my article, the post war policing of Pakistan is an inviolable objective. It is absolutely necessary to make sure that the objective (disarmament) for which war was imposed in the first place, has been achieved. And in addition there is no chance of re-arming for an extended period of time. Your contention that Pak Army will surrender and disarm is baseless, because you are sifting this scenario through the prism of Iraqi debacle. Paksitan is no Iraq, politically, socially, and militarily. On the other hand I think a strong polarization will occur with in the army if the question of disarmament is ever raised. And that again may cause a compromise of nuclear assets.

ferozk:

my friend first a digression…you are driven, focused and precise in your interacts…(take this in the light of our long running arguments re: your articles…the duracell-effect;))

now your post # 21:

Europe wants to replace the Soviet Union in the geo-political power equations and the United States is against this idea, but no one is seriously seeking a collapse of the post-second world geo-political order, as you had suggested and hence, the system is in a period of transition and not in a state of decline or has been revoked in its intent.

---this does not address the inherent adversarial role of bipolarity governing relations between nations following the demise of the League (of Nations)…and (admittedly) while this itself was a ‘transition’…failure of a new game plan and role-playing amidst nations post 89-91 has not helped matters either…

…perhaps you can articulate this new relationship in a post?… between the US and unified Europe...with the rest of the world voting with euros or dollar…along the desperately needed eco-reform as articulated by sohail(SR).…a friendly but fierce and competitive world wide competition between euro and dollar for domination…with an emphasis on ideology-less eco-fights…will look for your reply along scores of knee-jerk responses that portions of this article will certainly generate...

urstruly:

…your canvas is wide but choice of colours and brush strokes do not entirely succeed in conveying the big picture well to the viewer…cannot say with certainty whether it is deliberate or by default…

rgds.

t

Urstruly:

Chill out bro. Going by America`s track record since 9/11, the next victim will be a defenseless dictatorship that either harbors terrorists who target Israel or USA only. As long as Pakistan prevents terrorist attacks against US and Israel from its soil, Pakistan will remain a strategic ally and pal of Uncle Sam.

And if things do come to a standoff, India will dare not cross the line of control. The flying time for a nuclear warhead perched atop a Ghauri or Shaheen missile is just 5-10 minutes from Lahore to any part of India. A few people believe that threat of nuclear retaliation will dissuade Pakistan from using its nukes. Hahahaha.. No country builds nukes just for the heck of it. Ancient wisdom tells us:

``Jo Mukka Larraayi ke baad yaad aye, ussay apnay hi munh par maar lena chaahiye``

(A boxer who forgets to use his best punch during the bout, should punch himself in the face).

You get the drift.. If it comes to war, Pakistan will use its nukes without any fear of consequences. If we perish, we shall take 1 billions Indians with us. This puts the heat on India for preventing full-scale war. But ostensibly the Americans are not threatened by this posture. So it is also necessary to raise the cost of war for them as well. A couple of ICBMs parked in Islamabad (as well as New Delhi) will do the trick.

Urstruly: Stop taking threats seriously. Awaken to the new world... a world in which nuclear deterrence ensures relative peace.

Well a very good article where the Statagies has been discussed. I hope if some
of the following stategies are missing in American War Plans they might just picked
some tips from your article. Pakistani Desk working in Pentagon would be contacting
you soon mate!.
You have discussed the schemes of American case wise where your Case-1
Calculated Elimination of Top Leadership-- is not a bad idea but Mushraff now
Bushraff is American Front Man which ofcourse is in the `Supreme National
Intrest of Islamic Republic` so I fail to understand why Americans would like to
get rid of Pres.Mushraff whos not only the President but an army Chief well not
in the immediate future.Well it might be helpful for BB and Nawaz Sharif if any
accidents occur with due respect to Zardari.CASE-II and III:India attacks Pakistan -
Anglo-American Coalition provides support : that makes sense US if they want to
attack Pakistan would for sure use India but I don`t agree that US Marines would
take part in it.Indian Army to my best of knowledge wants to attack Azad Kashmir
as soon as possible but ther Establishment is double-minded about it ; they think
Pakistan would use its Nukes . If US ask India for an offensive Indians would
need a gurantee that Pakistan wont be using her nukes! and for that Indians would
ask US to target Pakistani Nuclear Installations in Chasma and Khushab (www.fas.com).
And ofocurse the secondry target would be : Air Force Installations in Sargoda.
CASE-IV: Limited War and Embargos : well thats what Pakistanis have been expecting
for years to be honest an attack on Azad Kashmir followed by sanctions but if I could
remember correctly our Military Officals have already made it clear that `there won`t
be any limited conflicts`.
Now to your Doctrine Sir!So, in order to defend Pakistan, it must achieve two objectives:
1. India must buy the idea that the aggression on Pakistan, by anyone, will have
formidable and dire consequences for India. I think thats is understood by Indians too
and they know what will be the impact if in-case India helps or be a partner to anyone.
2. Make it impossible to police Pakistan in a post-war scenario. (My friend the country
is not Policed Pre-War it can`t be Policed ever).First Line of Defense – Politics & Debate:
Gosh! you sounds like Nasir ullah Saab except he can`t read or write. Well yes we need
reforms and thats what Mushraff did ! We need political stability for about 10-15 years
in this country and then we could soften the amendments I think! Pakistan Army is
never been prepared to really defend `our country` we have been trained to attack. Remember
1965? who really attacked India? 71 yeah its our own fault! Bangolis hated us coz` we didn`t
had local support. Pakistan I agree need to be Economically and Politically strong and for
that we do need `Nukes` but whats more imporant is to keep a common Pakistani `happy` and
for that we have to `look at the ditribution of finances to our provinces` and by spending
more on heath care then anythin else coz` it has been proved that for a country to `really reduce
povert` one has to need to spend more on `health care facilities`. Some times I think we
need a Dictator but at times I am ashamed to look at our Gentleman Officers attitude!
especially when theres an Army Dictator. We need to work a lot the bigger threat to us
is not India or United States but our `Justice System` and the `feudrals,officers (with wifes),
and ofcourse selfish people` bottomline is our biggest enemy is : OUR OWN SYSTEM WHICH
IS BASED ON HYPOCRICY. I wonder how many people comes up with a Docterine to
get rid of this menace! or do we really need Mao or Atatruks?
As far as US is concerned they wont be attacking Pakistan coz` first they need to
take care of Oil Rich Countries secondly, we have nukes ( remember the N.Korea`s Policy
of Pre Emption) we could always take some notes from them after all we are partners! thirdly,
US need Dollars to finance wars :Pakistan is a poor country (maybe this is why they didn`t attack us).

Urstruly: You ignored my question. Let me (patiently) repeat it:

So the world order collapsed, did it (per your opening line). The world order where a dictator can come to power by force, and proceed to build luxurious palaces for himself, steal billions of dollars, torture and kill anyone who questions this theft? And Mr. Mohammed bemoans this.

(If you are unable to provide a rational answer, I will be glad to provide you one. If rationality is what you are interested in, i.e.).

nasah # 13


I did not quite understand your cryptic post - probably you were in a Kamala state of mind when you wrote it. Judging by your previous post I think you are the greatest proponent of Korean nuclear deterrent to save it from US agression. If you are willing to extend this to Paksitan as well, then we are in agreement.

tahmad 32

I stopped reading this article after the first sentence.

Well shouldn`t you? Keep in mind, and remember that you and your ilk is descendent of those, who used to supply horses, liquor, and their women to British Tommys as they invaded Hindustan, so we expect nothing less from you too.

Liberal democracy, economically sound, fiscally viable and paying off the debt is the order for defending Pakistan against possible foreign invasions and internal hopelessness. The contribution from Pakistanis is to ascertain the dominance of ethics over morals. Freedom of beliefs, rituals and propagating morals profusely brings nothing to the table in international matters; liberal democracy does.

Firstly, let me give credit to the author for a fairly detailed and comprehensive analysis of security situation in Pakistan. The author has written this article with a set of implicit assumptions in mind and given those assumptions, his inferences are not far from the likely scenarios. USA will never attack Pakistan in all likelihood, but then the author, I believe, wants to discuss the contingency plan if it did. From a purely strategic point of view, this article provides a window into the mind of some Pakistani military strategists who run the country. The only point IMO, is the validity of the basic premise or the underlying assumptions which seems dubious to me. For instance, author implicitly assumes that there is no way out but to pursue a path of indefinite existential military confrontation with India. The author also fails to consider the possible Indian countermoves to his proposed plans. The biggest factor that the author discounts is the relative economic and military asymmetry that exists between the two countries which gives India a natural advanage in any of the above scenarios. It would be nice to see an article of similar type from Indian perspective of what all things it can do if Pakistani strategists do indeed go along with a similar plan. I will post a little game-theory based analysis of my own somewhat later on this board.

#41 by HisExcellency on April 24, 2003 11:34am PT
And if things do come to a standoff, India will dare not cross the line of control. The flying time for a nuclear warhead perched atop a Ghauri or Shaheen missile is just 5-10 minutes from Lahore to any part of India. A few people believe that threat of nuclear retaliation will dissuade Pakistan from using its nukes. Hahahaha.. No country builds nukes just for the heck of it. Ancient wisdom tells us:

I agreee we will kill all Hndus but all they will accomplish is maybe 10% of muslims in the world. Islam will survive and thrive while it will be a doomsday for Hindus.

#39 by dost-mittar on April 24, 2003 11:33am PT
hrrehman:
``I am so sick and tired of listening to your PM always saying that his patience is running thin``
.....so are most Indians.

So why don`t you guys do something about it instead of always saying
``AB KI MAAR KE DEAKH`` u weak hindu cowards.