on why we shouldn't expect uncle sam and the cavalry to rescue us. self-help should be the mantra.
in fact, nobody including the US will do squat if pak or china drop a nuclear bomb on mumbai tomorrow. they'll wring their hands theatrically and advice india to go for further talks, that's about it.
of course, if the nuke were dropped on delhi, they would be a little more perturbed, because they have their 'assets' there, including the famous 'mole', as well as military-industrial-media complex inserts from the atlanticist and the nytimes and the wsj.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Rajiv Malhotra
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Subject: An American with military-security background on why India should not count on US military support
To:
From: Rajiv Malhotra
Date: Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:06 PM
Subject: An American with military-security background on why India should not count on US military support
To:
An American friend (left anonymous here) with prior relations with US security agencies sent me the following message as to why India should NOT depend on US military support in an attack by China:
"As a historical fact the United States has never defeated an Asian Army in the field. The Japanese surrendered unconditionally because of the atomic bomb, with 14 Army Divisions on the mainland. In Korea, at best it was a draw, and would not have come to an end without Indian Military negotiations. And Vietnam was a loss. Dessert Storm was a set-up, which I will not elaborate upon here. Iraq is a declared victory in the face of defeat, and I surmise the Taliban, with its historical associations with Pakistan and ISI, forwarded by our CIA and NSA in training the Mujahideen, could very well lead to disastrous results with an American withdrawal. I do not see how anybody could reasonably expect the US Military to intercede. India needs to become the foremost military power in Asia. All the members of my family having been members of the military in Asian conflicts, form wave commanders on Iwo Jima and Okinanwa, to a Marine Corps Officer during the Viet Nam conflict, to my son who just completed 5 year of active duty in Special Operation dealing first hand with the Taliban. We know the military and something about the M6, CIA, NSA, KGB. Nobody should be naive or dependent on the United States in these matters."
I
3 comments:
Rajeev,
Wars are won by putting boots on ground, where men meets men in battlefield amidst the chaos and din in between the spurts of blood flowing onto the ground. They can not be won by throwing million dollars missiles on some tents and cave.
Americans along with the Europeans have a strange problem of counting body bags. They military is afraid of dead bodies. Russians are far braver than these louts. I guess they wont be having enough fighting men in their ranks on 10 years time.
Eyeraq, I agree was a set up as the nation was rendered cripple by years of sanctions and connivance of Arabs.
Indian army would be adifferent ball game for them, so would be the Chinese. They also don't care baout dead bodies. (Every year there re almost 13 million bachelors that become 21 and have no women for them. War will remain the only solution for them to be used as cannon fodder
It's mainly due to the fact that there are no real extra-territorialist lobbies in the US, except of the European/Atlanticist variety, with a slight exception being the Israel lobby (however, even they're on shaky ground these days - just ask Lieberman)
There are no Asia-leaning lobbies in the US of any significant influence. Therefore, the inevitable result is that the US can only go to war for European interests. Fine, they did manage to go to war against Iraq twice, for Israeli interests, but as we can see, the brief era of Israeli influence is waning.
As for Asia, they've always been out of the loop in US foreign policymaking, and the results can be seen for themselves. To Americans, Europe is the 'old country' - the motherland, but Asia is just some place where there are economic interests.
I guess Asia is what one of the Englishman described, "The peasant class" and the sole aim as rightly pointed out is to serve the economic interests of the Atlanticists.
The Population of Asia if does not become powerful enough will go through severe droughts and Famines to keep them under check beyond a certain number so as not to threaten the interests os the Western powers.
Post a Comment