[flagged]
India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
431–440 of 714 posts
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Putin had already attacked multiple countries before. Georgia, Chechnya As always, westerners leave in an information bubble. Chechnya was always a part of Russia. It was a civil war. Ukraine was always a part of Russia until 1991, btw, there was never a separate country called "Ukraine" before 1991 - you can easily find that even in Western history books, although I'm sure they'll be rewritten in some way soon, if…
> there was never a separate country called "Ukraine" before 1991 By your standards there was no separate country called Russia between 1918 and 1991. So how is this different? Also absurd argument. There was no country called Belgium until the 1830s. So what? > So this distortion of reality works the other way round So your justification for distorting reality is that other people are allegedly doing that so it’s fi…
> there was never a separate country called "Ukraine" before 1991
Btw that is simply not true. There has been independent Ukraine few years by the end of WWI. Unfortunately, eventually they lost the war to the red army and been occupied by Moscow .
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's as many theories about why Putin and Kremlin did what they did as there are war analyst books on it. Some of them are more right than others, but at the end of the day, if I'm honest, I'm as confused as I was in 2014. Which is a problem not only for my curiosity: if Western policymakers are as confused as me, it's difficult to craft a good policy: we're effectively playing half-court tennis (to quote Sarah C.…
> it's difficult to craft a good policy This is a choice though. The decisions aren’t as hard as leaders are making them. Pulling support or giving support would end the war. Neither has actually occurred and support has been drip fed, bleeding both countries.
> The decisions aren’t as hard as leaders are making them.
Is there a statement that is more "armchair-policy-maker"?
In all seriousness, I have a similar sentiment about support for Ukraine, but I'm saying that it's difficult to have a robust policy (especially when it involves so many parties) when you struggle to understand the opponent's perspective.
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They were unable to locate the terrorists even after two or three weeks and needed a distraction. This does not make sense. When France attacked Daesh in 2015 after the terrorist attacks in Paris or when the US attacked Afghanistan after 9/11, the objective wasn't to target the exact people who carried out the attacks, but the organization behind the attacks. People can always be found as long as the organization r…
1) Pakistan is a lot less stable right now than 2019 (as is the world). 2) The putative organization is in Pakistan, and likely supported by the military. The biggest threat India is doing (IMO) is threatening the water supply. That is getting everyone in Pakistan’s attention. These strikes are more about managing the local political situation in India, which requires some degree of obvious violent retribution.
The incentives of the Pakistani generals to permit organizations like LeT to commit further terrorist attacks is a different domain from whatever the local political situation is like in India. There has been a past regime where Pakistani generals were able to train and send militants regularly to conduct terror attacks in India. Without an effective response from India putting pressure on these generals, that can easily become the new normal again.
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's because we'd seen "Russian invasion imminent" every year since the annexation of Crimea. It got to be very boy who cried wolf.
A lot of people have learned exactly the wrong lessons from the Boy Who Cried Wolf. Making people complacent with repeated false alarms is more likely the intended outcome than a failure. When I was in school, one of the history teachers spent a lot of time describing how the Yom Kippur War started. I guess he thought it told something important about how things work in the real world. The lead up to the Russian inva…
> A lot of people have learned exactly the wrong lessons from the Boy Who Cried Wolf
Never tell the same lie twice?
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ukraine was not and still is not economically strong enough for war. It just suffered an unprovoked invasion by its neighbor and had no option but to either capitulate or fight. I hope I am not biased but it really does not seem comparable to the border situation in Kashmir where both sides are showing aggression towards each other and weighing the costs of going to an all out war.
> It just suffered an unprovoked invasion It was such a great coincidence they had a huge army trained and armed by the west at the same time.
I don't think there were western armaments in Ukraine even though Russia invaded Ukraine over ten years ago and they have been fighting ever since.
In the second phase of the invasion both sides still used old Soviet equipment until West finally decided that sanctions are not enough to stop Putin
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#437The bad news: there is some real potential for escalation due to the suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/indias-water... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indus_Waters_Treaty Wasn't there something in the intro of "Mad Max fury road" about water wars?
This is probably the only real dangerous point at the moment.
Neither side gains to win much from a conflict, but should India really tamper with the water supply I hope they consult their economists first. Otherwise Pakistan has little choice but instantly commit to a full war.
The reason:
A significant amount of the food produced in Pakistan directly depends on the water from the river Indus. Even a moderate water supply reduction would lead to a loss of around 10% of the harvest.
That does not sound like much, BUT economically food is a commodity with low 'elasticity', meaning demand does not really go down with reduced supply. The result would therefore be a doubling of food prices.
In a country where people have little dispensable income, that means wide spread famine.
By all measures India is the more powerful state, but as Ukraine demonstrates: Desperation can make up for a lot of disadvantage.
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
> They should have coordinated with Pakistan to run the strikes. I think the past 30 years have demonstrated enough that Pakistan is only paying lip service when they denounce attacks like this At best they don't care, and at worst they sponsor the terrorists directly, but they definitely are not trying to help anyone stop attacks like this or root out their extremists
You may not be aware of this, but terrorists inside Pakistan kill Pakistani military servicemen on a weekly basis. India's attack on Pakistan are counterproductive. It will fuel the fire and the crazies will kill more Indians and Pakistanis as a result.
LeT is a state sponsored terrorist organization. It was founded by General Zia as he proudly declaimed that he would "Bleed India with a Thousand Cuts". I suggest reading the books written by Pak Generals to know that they fully believe in investing in militant/terror organizations - it is a firm and unalienable part of their military culture. Such a culture was actually encouraged by the US initially before the 9/11 blow-back.
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#439Earlier quoted context omitted.
"I understand your skepticism, but realistically, I don't see the case. Pakistan is in a very bad situation. The U.S. has cut off a lot of funding over the past decate. They were on the verge of bankruptcy a couple of years ago, and China bailed them out.
New proxy war between US-aligned India and China-supported Pakistan? My understanding is that China and India don't tend to get along politically.
Not convinced India is particularly US aligned, and while Pakistan is relations have deteriorated in the past, the us has backed Pakistan more than India.
Maybe this time the us would back India as part of a proxy war.
Re: India launches attack on 9 sites in Pakistan and Pakistani Jammu and Kashmir
#440Hoping for a quick resolution and diplomatic victory for all people there. I’m scared of the geopolitical effects. On a side note.. Can we get the Peace and Prosperity update next, ASAP? Let’s bring out the aliens issue and work on interstellar travel and galactic survival instead of terrestrial disputes. I just want to live in a chill world. And for me that’s science and tech tree maxed out.
In what world "tech" has brought peace? So far it brought of stuff like dependency to petrol and now rare minerals, climate change, and water rarerification - which are I think most of the reasons why wars are/have been/will be happening?
Europe is much more peaceful that it was. Not sure if you can blame tech.