It appears that two Nations, incapable of making an electric toaster, are prepared to hurl nuclear weapons at each other over one of the most desolate areas on the earth. Start this by posing the question: "What can and should the US do about it?"
DJ

It's rather difficult to say what "outsider" countries like ours should do...
The US, GB, Russia are trying to push negociations forward.
In such cases you probably should use the good old trick of "the stick and the carrot".
Of course, not too big a stick or you'll gain antagonism, and as big a carrot as possible.
It is very sad to see how these people who used to live peacefuly in the same towns are now
at each other's throat.

A hard one Cav,


It's a damn difficult region over there. It's hard to say anything that makes sence about it.

I really wouldn't know what's best, but if we started talking first we could take it from there.....

Let's hope for the best. I'd like to know what the rest of you guys think about this matter.

Too bad this seems to happen in countries where, if you go back far enough, they are basically the same people. Your average outsider probably could not tell the difference between an Indian and a Pakistani (or the ones fighting in the former Yugoslavia).

I'm in agreement that all we can do is TRY and help talk these two nations back to some common sense. BECAUSE I think that it's not going to happen. I, like the rest of you are HOPEFUL that they will refrain from the use of NUKES. I mean don't they both know that IF they uise them then they are going to loose. And what about the chance of it becoming a wider ranging conflict?? ANYWAY let hope common sense prevails and a MAJOR CATASTROPIE is avoided. Thats my 2 cents worth.

DAGGER-1 " When Science Fails, Brute Force Wins"

Well, we can not wish it away nor can we accept that they will hurl nukes at each other. The entire world will pay a steep price in such an exchange. Let's try to move this discussion to surfacing some parctical solutions. I place several questions to you: Is Al-Queda stirring trouble up in Kashmir to divert attention away from there re grouping efforts? Do you place either an international or American peacekeeping force between the two nations? How do you ask the Indians not to react when Israel and the US took decisive action in the face of terrorist attacks? Like to hear your feedback.
thanks
DJ

One thing.

I'm not even too sure that the average "Joe off the street" in either India or Pakistan really understands the potential devestation involved in a nuclear exchange.

We (in the West) have been brought up learning about the horrors of this type of warfare. Sometimes it seems that people feel life is cheap in that part of the world.

I'm certainly not trying to say they are stupid over there. Just that priorities (having enough for their families to eat, etc.) are different. Contemplating the pros and cons of types of weapons is not a high priority.

Do they hear or know that 10 - 20 million people could be killed?

Steve

they probably dont and do they even care?

I am far from a historical/regional expert on the matter, whereas most of my knowledge comes from watching the movie Gandhi (great movie btw). But it is very much a sad state of affairs. Sad that people of different religions can't seem to see each other as anything other than enemies. I wish I could say this was an isolated case too. Same old story that's been going on since recorded time I guess.

As to what the rest of the world can do? Well perhaps we can all agree on at least one fundamental point. The atomic bomb was a weapon that almost made itself obsolete shortly after it was used. That is to say that a weapon of such destructive power, one that would likely end up destroying or endangering the people who use it is not a very good weapon. Kind of like developing a weapon the can destroy the entire world. Who's going to use it? Who is going to threaten to use it? If the 21st century should stand for anything it should probably try to make weapons of mass destruction an obsolete philosophy. The creators of the a-bomb knew this when they tested the first weapon. They understood that they had tapped into a destructive force that was beyond a mere "weapon". You might as well call a F5 tornado (and that's not a plane) a weapon.

What would I do if I were in charge? Probably give both India and Pakistan a good talking too. Did they learn nothing from the cold war? Do they really think that having a nuclear deterrence is "best" for their part of the continent? Do they think countries like China would actually sit by and let them detonate a few nukes in their back yard? In the end if countries that acquire the ability to build nuclear weapons can not secure and be responsible in their stewardship of the most powerful force on earth, then that force should be taken away from them, for the good of the rest of the planet. Taken away either through economic sanctions or force. Whatever is necessary. Keep in mind I am not saying that those countries (other than India and Pakistan) that are already in the club are any different. In the end this is a club that should be shrinking, not growing. I mean come on; do we really want every country in the world to have their own arsenal of nukes???

Jim

Well....lots to cover. Steve asks if they understand that 20 million could be killed in a nuclear exchange. I'd say probably, and it doesn't matter to them. At least not to the power brokers. We're talking about countries with HUGE populations and massive population growth rates. Thinning the herd by that figure would be inconsequential to them from that standpoint. Now, the destruction involved and residual radiological hazards are another matter but my point is I don't they are too concerned about the human loss per se. Grim.

DJ started by stating, perhaps tongue in cheek, that they can't make electric toasters. Just a little reminder that in India, at least, they have been building MiG fighters for over three decades. And upgrading them as needed with advanced Western avionics. In the high tech industry I'm currently sentenced to, you can't look at a software development department phone list without seeing a large number of Indian names. They may have dirt-poor populations but they do have some very bright people and some technical prowess as well. In short, they have the means to make life for each other very nasty if they so choose.

I'll also agree that if you scratch deep enough the divisions aren't there. The overlay is religion, and extreme forms at that. We already know about radical Islam, but radical Hindu nationalism is quite possibly worse. These guys are gaining influence in India, and some of their ideological underpinnings make Nazis look like boy scouts. There are latent empire builders there. Some of you guys are probably Star Trek fans, so I'll note that a few of these fellows look a lot like the character of Khan Noonien Singh from an ideological point of view. Bad jammers.

Keeping these fine fellows talking is of course prefered, and the carrot and stick approach might be useful. But maybe not now. Personally, I am not sure that either side believes it to be in their best interest right now; both sides appear to think that another military face-off is the way to go. They are not yet exhausted by fighting, as Europe was after two world wars. It is supremely dangerous to allow them to fight it out to get this out of their systems, no question about that. But I see very little that we can do to prevent them from doing so if such is their intent. Militarily, we have little leverage with Pakistan and zero with India. Indeed, India is probably the only country in the region who has a real shot at serving the US navy a defeat if we tried to project power close inshore and they didn't like it. They possess a competent navy with small aircraft carriers and relatively modern surface craft. Their Air Force should not be underestimated. Think Falklands, and recall how perilously close the air/naval battle was for the British. Bad scene developing here, fellas...

Greg

I personally think Al-Queda is behind the terrorist attacks in India as well as Israel. They surely would benefit from clashes all around the area

So, You've poised the question; What to do?? and in the same course answered it with the idea that IF we tried to . It would be costly if not worse So then the question is HOW FAR ARE OUR LEADERS AND OTHER NATIONS LEADERS WILLING TO GO TO PREVENT THIS STAND OFF FROM SPIRALING OUT OF CONTROL. As you have clearly stated neither country seem too concerned about the loss of it's own peoples lives and property to such destructive power. And a full fledged WAR. And then too if the problem is an internal problem with Zealous elements within the two countries trying to push each to the brink of Destruction. THen we should help then to see this and to end this threat on both sides.

DAGGER-1: "When Science Fails, Brute Force Wins"

I think Jim has once again spoken words of wisdom. Don't underestimate the effect of such an event in, what Jim calls, China's backyard.

Let's stick to talking first.....I'll say it one more time, since it's the only solution with sence. Let's just hope they're willing to listen but something tells me that's gonna be a real hard nut to crack.

AMEN AGAIN AND AGAIN: PRAYERS MIGHT BE HELPFUL HERE ALSO;


DAGGER-1

First of all, I don't like when westerners think of people living in "less fortunate" countries ignorant. I believe most of the people there are well aware of the danger, but some of their politicians and media can present a war like a "proper" thing to do... You know what Hitler did to Germans, turning them into some kind of zombies (no hard feelings) just in order to expand the Reich.

BTW, somebody mentioned former Yugoslavia, too. I can comment on that cause I live in the region. I know that we are all the same for most of the Westerners. But I could tell you a totally different story. There are a lot of differences between the nations here; religious, cultural and some nations even have a different alphabet. Those differences go all the way from the Roman Empire. So, lets not generalize...
But it is not the differences that cause the war. It is the people who use that differences to ignite the nationalism and rule their own nation by the means of hate towards what is different.

Mario M.

This is a grim situation no matter how you look at it. Extreme religious fanatics are dangerous no matter who or what they are. I think the real question is; if there is a major exchange, how far reaching could it become and where would it stop?

Personally, however, I'm more worried about the future with China.

The world's third largest nuclear delivery system and going balls out on a space program.

That's going to be the real crisis of the 21st century. There's a lot of tension there and a lot of possible flash points...

Steve

Jim and Danny wonder about China's response to nukes going off in their back yard. So do I, frankly, but what can they really do? China shares no border with Pakistan. It shares a small and very mountainous border with India, a border in dispute and over which the two have fought. China generally got the worse of the matter. So, the Chinese can't project military power that would really hurt either antagonist othe than using their own nukes on the warring parties. Highly unlikely, in my view. They can certainly impose ecoonomic sanctions, but those always take time to be effective (if they do...) and would not be of immediate use in changing national behavior here. I don't see any real good options for them to influence the matter.

Captian Maki has a point about our perceptions--a lack of material wealth does not equate to a lack of intelligence, or knowledge, or motivation. And he's right about their being substantial differences among peoples in his former Yugoslavia. Now, I don't want to hijack the thread but I have to ask: Why did it all have to come apart in nasty little wars? The country under Tito seemed peaceful and progressive, and for a decade after his death seemed to be making the transition away form one-party rule. I would hate to think that it was only the force of his regime that kept it together; that the peoples of Yugoslavia saw no other commonality amongst themselves. As an outsider, an American, here is what I see: Political factions in both regions using cultural and religious differences to divide and conquer for their own ends. NONE of the world's major religions preaches intolerance for other faiths. All preach tolerance and coexistence. It is when other cultural and political differences are added to the mix and the religion is used as cover to justify people's actions that the death spiral begins. All people of faith feel strongly about it, that's why it is faith--a personal matter of great value to the individual. Naturally they feel threatened when problems are cast as a threat to that faith. The political cynics know this, and use it to motivate people to suit their own ends--not what would make for a peaceful and prosperous furure for their peoples. Just my .02...
Greg

I agree. Recent events are proof that even in the worst warn-torn countries, there are still smart highly educated people in/from those countries who can make a difference. In every sense "ignorance" is the enemy in today's world. I mentioned the movie Gandhi in my above post. And I am sure there are many westerners who think that India and Pakistan are still much like they were back then. Indeed sometimes it's easy to see the whole second/third-world as one big poor village. But that really isn't the case today as it might have been 80 years ago. That's not to say there aren't still places like that. But I challenge anyone who still has this perception to just watch one of the many International News channels on DirectTV. Another case in point for those who didn't know... the world's tallest building (since 1998) is in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Cheers,
Jim

PS:....had to edit and add: Cool....I am at 1111 posts.

I don't think ignorant is the right word but certainly less informed in a country where the press is contolled by the government (Pakistan) and where there are tremendous rates of poverty and illiteracy and where people are extreme in religious beliefs. Not that those things don't exist elsewhere, but they are taken to extremes in that part of the world.

Steve

Exactly... to quote myself from the last post:

But it is not the differences that cause the war. It is the people who use that differences to ignite the nationalism and rule their own nation by the means of hate towards what is different.

Mario M.

Maki...i wish i wasn't going on holiday tomorrow,i'd like to say more on this.I agree with you
that these aguments go back centuries,to when the Golden Horde poured out of Asia,and
laid the foundations of conflicts from your part of the world to Mogul IndiaThe answer
to the India-- Pakistani argument Has to be sorted out by themselves,and give the
Kashmiris the referendum promised fifty years ago at the time of independance.Its time
the gutless UN stood up and did what it was formed to do,and not leave it up to UK.US.
and othersto pick up the pieces.What i dont want is the conflict over there,to spill out
among their communities over here.So i suggest the UN get off their arses for once
and do something about it,the only trouble with that it is the same old countries that get stuck with the sh.....ty end of the stick.
Arhur

HERE, HERE!

A lot said already, and more to come on this toppic, I'm sure.

What do you guys (and galls ofcourse) think. Is al Quaeda involved more than meets the eye in setting up these countries against each other ?

i hope it doesnt go that far

Great feedback. I appreciate the response regarding the technical capabilities of our fellow human beings. Is that not also the true regret--potential without direction. I can also detect in your responses the dread and deep sorrow each of us feels when we contemplate the potential catastrophe. I ask you to put on your thinking caps once again. What will we do, or better yet, should we do if one of the country's involved lauches the nuke?
DJ