All US Citizens: Get out of India.

Klaus Probst

The temptation to use nukes is inversely proportional to how well you are doing in the conventional mode of a war. Since Pakistan would never win a conventional war against India, it follows that they would be the first to use them. India would then retaliate in kind, of course. Personally, I think they should get on with it and blow themselves to bits. India and Pakistan having nuclear weapons is a bit like giving guns to retarded children. None of them have the infrastructure or command/control know-how to effectively maintain them as a deterrent (as the US/NATO and the Soviet Bloc did during the cold war). Of course I wouldn't want to be Indian or Pakistani if that happens, but hey. They felt good about having their dangerous toys, they're fighting over a worthless piece of land and they feel they can play in the big leagues. I think they'll find out it takes more than just big armies and big guns to be truly big countries. ___________ Klaus [www.vbbox.com]

Martin Marvinski

David Stone wrote: Gotta airlift Nish, Ravi, and all the other CPians who reside in India then. I don't think we have any people in Pakistan Ravi lives in Massachusetts, USA. Nish lives in Trivadarum which is probably not a significant target. After a poor performance in London in 1899, Steinitz went insane and died a year later on August 12, 1900 at Wards Island, N.Y.

David Stone

Gotta airlift Nish, Ravi, and all the other CPians who reside in India then. I don't think we have any people in Pakistan...but I could be wrong. David Stone dstone@newcenturytitle.com
MEEKNESS, n. Uncommon patience in planning a revenge that is worth while. The Devil's Dictionary, Ambrose Bierce

Brit

Are you residents of India doing anything to protect yourselves like building bomb shelters? I am so glad the US is building Missle defence. Yeah. Bomb shelters. That'll help. Actually, bomb shelters would help if you are on the outskirts of a bombed city. Particularly because Pakistani and Indian nuclear weapons are not terribly powerful (read: they have a low explosive yield - in contrast to Russian and US nuclear weapons which can be far more powerful). In one of India's recent tests, they detonated a 43-kiloton nuclear device. In contrast, Russia detonated a 58 megaton device in 1961. Of course, with the proximity of the two countries, you won't be able to get to your bomb shelter unless you are already at home. It only takes five minutes for a missle to reach an Indian/Pakistani city. If you're not already at home, you'll never get there because the steets will immediately be filled with people.

Stephen Kellett

Hmmm, First the Buddhist statues in Afghanistan, if Pakistan drops a nuke on India, I wonder how many more Buddhist monuments will get hit? I was listening to a travller on the radio this evening, who had camped nearby the monuments in Afghanistan, and said how peaceful that part of the world was, and he couldn't beleive that some had blown those enormous statues up, for a misinterpretation of a 1400 year old script, and of course the statues predate the script in the first place. Disclaimer: Yes I'm concerned about people dying, etc. No one ever talks about the historical monuments that are here today, Taliban'd tomorrow. Oh well. Sigh, was wonderful walking around the green fens this evening. Its a depressing thought that more people may be going to war. Stephen Kellett -- Memory Validator. Faster Leak Detection, Better Analysis. http://www.softwareverify.com http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk

Stephen Kellett

Klaus Probst wrote: None of them have the infrastructure or command/control know-how to effectively maintain them as a deterrent (as the US/NATO and the Soviet Bloc did during the cold war). ...they're fighting over a worthless piece of land and they feel they can play in the big leagues. I think they'll find out it takes more than just big armies and big guns to be truly big countries. Thats quite an interesting take on the situation, shame the media don't report like that. Why is Kashmir worthless? Does it have no strategic value, no mineral deposits, or religious significance, or something else? Is it really a straight land grab battle? I'd always assumed there must be something more to it than that. Most people need a reason to fight and die, just saying 'this is ours', usually is not enough (which is why Britain, France, Russia, and others lost in Afghanistan). Cheers Stephen Kellett -- Memory Validator. Faster Leak Detection, Better Analysis. http://www.softwareverify.com http://www.objmedia.demon.co.uk

Christian Skovdal Andersen

Martin Marvinski wrote: Are you residents of India doing anything to protect yourselves like building bomb shelters? I am so glad the US is building Missle defence. Why? If somebody wants to detonate a nuke somewhere in USA, they will propably just send it by mail. USA's new enemies does not bother with hightech stuff anyway. Last time they used simple hoppy-knifes - remember? Christian Skovdal Andersen Don't mention the war...

Klaus Probst

Stephen Kellett wrote: Thats quite an interesting take on the situation, shame the media don't report like that. Why is Kashmir worthless? Does it have no strategic value, no mineral deposits, or religious significance, or something else? Is it really a straight land grab battle? I suppose it has a certain amount of strategic value. I doubt that one could think its worth was more or less based on any religious considerations though. I'm not sure about minerals or natural wealth, but I doubt it since it is in an area which doesn't have much to begin with. I do know it's (or used to be) very beautiful. I think the legend of Shangri-La was based on a place in Kashmir. Stephen Kellett wrote: I'd always assumed there must be something more to it than that. Most people need a reason to fight and die, just saying 'this is ours', usually is not enough (which is why Britain, France, Russia, and others lost in Afghanistan). Oh, but they don't. That's the problem ;) At this point I think they've forgotten about why they started fighting over it and the shole situation is just about stupid nationalistic pride, as most of these things are. FWIW, I think Pakistan has a more legitimate claim over Kashmir given that the entire population is Muslim. But then again, maybe the Kashmiris (sp?) themselves hold no love for either of them and just want to be independent. Whatever it happens to be, I kinda think it's stupid to consider that anything is worth 17-24 million human lives. ___________ Klaus [www.vbbox.com]

David Cunningham

David Stone wrote: Ravi, and all the other CPians who reside in India then I'm pretty sure Ravi lives in Boston :) David http://www.dundas.com

Chris Maunder

Meaning we should still try and airlift him to safety anyway? ;) cheers, Chris Maunder

Rama Krishna Vavilala

Anders Molin wrote: They are also the first country to pull out it's people. Kiwis were the first

Rama Krishna Vavilala

I talked to my friends and parents and people are extremely relaxed in India. They are so used to these wars of words between India and Pakistan so they don't think there would be a war in the first place. If there is a war they don't expect anyone to use nukes. But who knows what will happen. My personal opinion there is going to be a war may be a small scale after Rumsfield leaves.

Nish Nishant

Ravi Bhavnani wrote: we're not a bunch of countries but a single planet. :rose::rose::rose: That's the best thing I've seen in a long time Ravi! Nish :rose: