| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Pakistan describes India "a fit case" for pre-emptive strike |
| 2003-04-07 |
| Pakistan Monday characterized India as a fit case for a pre-emptive strike as "India possesses weapons of mass destruction and has also kept chemical and biological weapons with neighboring countries." "And it's just chock full of Hindoos!" "India is a fit case for a pre-emptive strike," Pakistan Information Minister Sheikh Rashid Ahmed told reporters in Islamabad. "India is taking unjustified advantage of our sincerity," Rashid said while responding to remarks by Indian Minister for External Affairs Yashwant Sinha, who described Pakistan as a "fit case" for an Iraqi style military action by the US because it has weapons of mass destruction, shelters terrorists and lacks democracy. Not to mention being chock full of Islamist nutbags... "If India thinks, and could do so, then we also have the right to go for a pre-emptive strike," the Pakistani Information Minister insisted. "We have evidence and arguments which make our case stronger," he said, claiming that India has committed massacres in Ahmed Abad town of Gujarat much like Serbia. Rashid said India possesses weapons of mass destruction and has also kept weapons of mass destruction, chemical and biological weapons with its neighbors. He did not name the neighbors. He warned that if India took any action against Pakistan "it would be eliminated from the globe." I think this might have originally been drafted in Korean. As an afterthought, I wonder if, given the performance of the Iraqi "information minister," all the "information ministers" in the world shouldn't give serious thought to changing their titles. |
| Posted by:Fred Pruitt |
| #9 we also have the right to go for a pre-emptive strike What's stopping you, fool? RW Perhaps the knowledge that India's army is nearly six times the size of Pakistan's, that India can produce 80% of its own warmaking materials, compared to Pakistan's 35%, the fact that India has more transport aircraft than Pakistan has in its entire air force, the fact that India has a fairly respectable deep-water navy, including an aging but still usable aircraft carrier, the fact that India can produce all the food, oil, equipment, supplies, and material it needs for a long-term war, while Pakistan would have to import (at high prices, with little to pay for it with) more than 2/3 of what it would need, the fact that India has about six times the number of nuclear weapons as Pakistan, while India is about three times the size of Pakistan (more damage both from primary blasts and secondary radiation in Pakistan than India), and a few dozen other factors. Pakistan will rattle the sabers, but won't actually start a war they know they can't win. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2003-04-07 20:55:29 |
| #8 we also have the right to go for a pre-emptive strike What's stopping you, fool? |
| Posted by: RW 2003-04-07 19:46:36 |
| #7 Atomic Conspiracy I think India's stance on Iraq can be explained by the following article. Its quite long but its gives quite a bit of insight. The writer Used to work in RAW, India's intelligence agency so he knows what he's talking about. [Some info Bush could use] .... In the early nineties, India decided to seek the co-operation of the intelligence agencies of the Islamic world in dealing with pan-Islamic jihadi terrorism originating from Pakistan. Only the intelligence agencies of the Najibullah government in Afghanistan, Algeria and Iraq came forward to help us. After the Mumbai blasts of March 1993, during which terrorists orchestrated by Pakistan’s ISI killed nearly 300 innocents, New Delhi desperately sought the help of the international community in smoking out the perpetrators of these blasts who had taken shelter in Pakistan. It received a lot of sympathy but very little concrete assistance. Only two intelligence agencies unreservedly co-operated. One of them was Iraq. India, therefore, has strong reasons to be grateful to the Iraqi government, although India has had — from time to time — concerns over some aspects of Iraqi policies. India has believed since the eighties, when it became the worst victim of Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, that terrorism is an absolute evil, all the more so if it is state-sponsored. After 9/11, the rest of the world has come to share this view. But such perceptions continue to be influenced by narrow political considerations. A more glaring example of this cannot be found than in the US reluctance to act against Pakistan-sponsored terrorism, is in sharp contrast to its over-anxiety to act against Iraqi-sponsored terrorism. ... |
| Posted by: rg117 2003-04-07 19:12:29 |
| #6 The problem in Pakistan is that Islamofascist movements - such as Jamaat-i-Islami - are allowed the freedom to promote genocide. The leader of Pakistan's fourth largest political party - the MQM - has called for the banning of the JI. These jihad pigs exist only because the White House is buying State Department snakeoil about the alleged propriety of respecting exercise of freedom-of-religion by these murderers. Americans will pay for this perverse indulgence of the most dangerous enemy of America in its history. The JI's headquarters in Lahore needs to be reduced to rubble. Their leaders - Qazi and Khurshid Ahmad - need to leave the land of the living. And their American puppet groups - ICNA, IANA, ISNA, MSA - need to be liquidated, and their members deported, or better: shot on sight. |
| Posted by: Anonon 2003-04-07 15:37:02 |
| #5 The sad and scary facts are that Indian troops have been used in brutal and repressive ways in the disputed Kasmir..(can't spell it, drat) region while Pakistan has supported and funded terrorist/guerilla forces there. I lean toward India since it is a democracy yet it still has a lot of corruption, bureaucratic and military, to flush out of its system. A big problem/threat is the rise of fanatic Hinduism which played out in the train attack and following riots roughly a year ago. Those involved "ordinary" people doing things like pouring gasoline on kids of the "wrong" faith and burning them alive, as well as the "usual" murder and rape. That part of the world is more dangerous than the Israeli-Pales. struggle. |
| Posted by: Rifle308 2003-04-07 15:28:11 |
| #4 Nothing like a hot bowl of soup! Now with extra gamma rays. It's mutalicious. The Islamist Pakis are getting nervous. First the dread Afghani fighters, then the home territory of Saddam the Brutal in THREE WEEKS! Full attention on Pakistan is not something healthy for Fundis and other slimey things. |
| Posted by: Craig 2003-04-07 15:18:36 |
| #3 Alaska Paul, Soup! MMMMMMmmmmmmm GOOD! |
| Posted by: Craig 2003-04-07 15:12:10 |
| #2 The Paks better slow down the mouth and look at their pile of chips. If they mess with India, they WILL become a Roentgen Soupbowl. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2003-04-07 14:12:17 |
| #1 More Pak-islamo fantasy. I'm still miffed with the Indian government's stance on the war in Iraq, but only a deluded crank on the same level as the Iraqi minister of disinformation could claim that India is comparable to Iraq. Ahmed's remarks that India "shelters terrorists and lacks democracy" are far more reasonably applicable to Pakistan itself rather than to India. |
| Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy 2003-04-07 12:09:47 |