Should, and could India intervene in Iraq crisis?

nrupatunga

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 10, 2013
Messages
2,310
Likes
960
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

Good idea. However, do we have the resources?

If at all India would like to join, I doubt we would get any support from Arab nations, they will not tolerate Indian presence in middle east.

If it would be an UN led mission and if we get invite, perhaps then GoI will decide whether or not to participate in the operations.
@pmaitra, @SajeevJino, @Ashutosh Lokhande, @cobra commando, @nrupatunga, @Razor thoughts?
As mentioned by other posters, the west does not feel that isis has to be terminated. They still may feel that they can "use" isis for their benefit. Don't know why west is not bombing in syria against isis. Also west in a way ensuring that their ally aka kurds are not targeted by bombing only those areas where isis is in conflict with kurds. In a way pushing isis towards syria. As they want the isis to fight assad and not against their allies. Since assad was able to neutralise isis & other jihadi groupsand these jihadi groups wanted somne morale boosting victories to show for their rank, they moved towards iraq. As jihadi groups gained territory and money there, they in a way settled there in iraq. So with these bombings, isis is being pushed back to fight assad.

As far as arab states taking on isis, who?? IMO only egypt has "actual human capacity" to take on isis. Though gcc states have the latest and greatest military hardware in the region, this military hardware is mainly for show. Also isis has been created and aided by these same gcc states. Why would they take on isis? All these are just for photo-ops.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

kseeker

Retired
New Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
2,515
Likes
2,126
Destroying ISIS may take years, US officials say - The Times of India

WASHINGTON: The Obama administration is preparing to carry out a campaign against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria that may take three years to complete, requiring a sustained effort that could last until after President Obama has left office, according to senior administration officials.

The first phase, an air campaign with nearly 145 air strikes in the past month, is already underway to protect ethnic and religious minorities and American diplomatic, intelligence and military personnel, and their facilities, as well as to begin rolling back ISIS gains in northern and western Iraq.

The next phase, which would begin sometime after Iraq forms a more inclusive government, scheduled this week, is expected to involve an intensified effort to train, advise or equip the Iraqi military, Kurdish fighters and possibly members of Sunni tribes.

The final, toughest and most politically controversial phase of the operation — destroying the terrorist army in its sanctuary inside Syria — might not be completed until the next administration. Indeed, some Pentagon planners envision a military campaign lasting at least 36 months.

Obama will use a speech to the nation on Wednesday to make his case for launching a United States-led offensive against Sunni militants gaining ground in the Middle East, seeking to rally support for a broad military mission while reassuring the public that he is not plunging American forces into another Iraq war.

"What I want people to understand," Obama said in an interview with NBC's "Meet the Press" that was broadcast Sunday, "is that over the course of months, we are going to be able to not just blunt the momentum" of the militants. "We are going to systematically degrade their capabilities; we're going to shrink the territory that they control; and, ultimately, we're going to defeat them," he added.

The military campaign Obama is preparing has no obvious precedent. Unlike American counterterrorism operations in Yemen and Pakistan, it is not expected to be limited to drone strikes against militant leaders. Unlike the war in Afghanistan, it will not include the use of ground troops, which Obama has ruled out.

Unlike the Kosovo war that President Bill Clinton and NATO nations waged in 1999, it will not be compressed into an intensive 78-day tactical and strategic air campaign. And unlike during the air campaign that toppled the Libyan leader, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, in 2011, the Obama administration is no longer "leading from behind," but plans to play the central role in building a coalition to counter ISIS.

"We have the ability to destroy ISIL," Secretary of State John Kerry said last week at the NATO summit meeting in Wales, using an alternative name for the militant group. "It may take a year, it may take two years, it may take three years. But we're determined it has to happen."

Antony J Blinken, Obama's deputy national security adviser, has suggested that the United States is undertaking a prolonged mission. "It's going to take time, and it will probably go beyond even this administration to get to the point of defeat," Blinken said last week on CNN.

Kerry is scheduled to head for the Middle East soon to solidify the anti-ISIS coalition. And Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel is traveling to Ankara, Turkey, on Monday to woo another potential ally in the fight against the Sunni militant group.

Although details of how the emerging coalition would counter ISIS remain undecided, several American officials said that they believe the list of allies so far includes Jordan, offering intelligence help, and Saudi Arabia, which has influence with Sunni tribes in Iraq and Syria and which has been funding moderate Syrian rebels.

The United Arab Emirates, officials said, has also indicated a willingness to consider airstrikes in Iraq. Germany has said it would send arms to pesh merga fighters in Kurdistan. And rising concern over foreign fighters returning home from Syria and Iraq may also have spurred Australia, Britain, Denmark and France to join the alliance.

Administration officials acknowledged, however, that getting those same countries to agree to airstrikes in Syria was proving harder.

"Everybody is on board Iraq," an administration official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the policy is still being developed. "But when it comes to Syria, there's more concern" about where airstrikes could lead. The official nonetheless expressed confidence that the countries would eventually come around to taking the fight into Syria, in part, he said, because "there's really no other alternative."

The talks between Hagel and the Turkish leadership may be crucial in determining whether the United States will be able to count on Ankara on a number of fronts, including closing the Turkish border to foreign fighters who have been using Turkey as a transit point from which to go to Syria and Iraq to join militant organizations and allowing the American military to carry out operations from bases in Turkey.

But Turkish officials have been wary of attracting notice from ISIS, given that the group holds the fate of 49 kidnapped Turkish diplomats in its hands. In June, Sunni militants with ISIS stormed the Turkish Consulate in Mosul, Iraq, kidnapping the consul general and other members of his staff, and their families, including three children.

Obama's planned speech suggests he may be moving closer to a decision on many remaining questions, including whether and at what point the White House might widen the air campaign to include targets across the border in Syria, possibly to include ISIS leadership and its equipment, supply depots and command centers. The time of the speech on Wednesday has not been announced.

Senior officials have repeatedly ruled out sending ground combat troops, a vow Obama reaffirmed in his appearance on "Meet the Press."

"This is not going to be an announcement about U.S. ground troops," he said. "This is not the equivalent of the Iraq war."

But it is not clear if that declaration would preclude the eventual deployment of small numbers of American Special Operations forces or C.I.A. operatives to call in airstrikes on behalf of Kurdish fighters, Iraqi forces or Sunni tribes, a procedure that makes it much easier to distinguish between ISIS militants, civilians and counter ISIS fighters.

During the recent operation to retake the Mosul Dam, Kurdish soldiers, using a more roundabout procedure, provided the coordinates of ISIS fighters to the joint United States-Kurdish command center in Erbil, which in turn passed them to American aircraft, Masrour Barzani, the head of Kurdish intelligence, said in a recent interview.

The White House is counting on an effort by American, Iraqi and Gulf Arab officials to persuade Sunni tribesman in western Iraq, now aligned with ISIS, to break their ties after chafing under the harsh Shariah law the group has imposed.

Unless the new Iraqi government is substantially more inclusive, American encouragement and support for these groups to turn on ISIS may be far less effective than it was in 2007, when many tribes fought the forerunner of ISIS, al-Qaida in Iraq.

Some Sunni tribal leaders are still bitter at the treatment under former Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, a Shiite.

"Even if they try we will not accept it," said Sheikh Ali Hatem Suleimani, a tribal leader in Anbar who lives in Erbil. "In the past, we fought against al-Qaida and we cleaned the area of them. But the Americans gave control of Iraq to Maliki, who started to arrest, kill, and exile most of the tribal commanders who led the fight against Al Qaida."
 

Dhairya Yadav

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
481
Likes
141
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

Even if it is not overt, India could covertly take part in the operations including intelligence sharing... it would be particularly helpful when Pakistan falls to the extremists.... As far as IS is concerned, they are not going to vanish just like that because Nato drops a few bombs in Syria/Iraq border area. They are there for the long haul. When push comes to shove there, they will move to new havens including former Al Qaida strongholds... like Somalia and AfPak border. Pakistan is going to become more and more radicalised as the usual players of democracy fail and radical ISI elements tighten grip on the Deep State. Therefore, we will need to strengthen intelligence sharing with the West, howevver much the Leftists will hate it.

This threat is very real, considering the 'sympathy' that IS is generating across the world. And India's taking part in the operations or not will not have any impact on that slide. IS is far more sophisticated than Al Qaida and have the means to reach any corner of the world. Baathists have been inexorably sucked into the IS fold and they will have little sympathy for Indian concerns in future. Iran will be a far better regional ally for India.
Why do you think that Pakistan falling in hands of extremists is good for India??? :shocked: I hate Pakistan, but a stable Pak is better than a extremist Pak
 

kseeker

Retired
New Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
2,515
Likes
2,126
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

Why do you think that Pakistan falling in hands of extremists is good for India??? :shocked: I hate Pakistan, but a stable Pak is better than a extremist Pak
Stable Pakistan not in India’s interest » Indian Defence Review

Does India Want Stable Pakistan? | The Diplomat
@bennedose, @rock127, @Blackwater would be the right people here, who can shed some more light on the topic of Stable or Destabilised Bakistan :namaste:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Blackwater

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2012
Messages
21,156
Likes
12,211
Last edited by a moderator:

Dhairya Yadav

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
481
Likes
141
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

Stable Pakistan not in India's interest � Indian Defence Review

Does India Want Stable Pakistan? | The Diplomat
@bennedose, @rock127, @Blackwater would be the right people here, who can shed some more light on the topic of Stable or Destabilised Bakistan :namaste:
How about all the defence forces of Pak, their nukes, missiles , Fighters go suddenly in the hands of ISIS, AQ?
Can you imagine what kind of threat that would be to India and the world?

A weaker, badly damaged Pakistan is in India's interests. A extremist Pakistan isnt .
 
Last edited by a moderator:

cobra commando

Tharki regiment
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 3, 2009
Messages
11,115
Likes
14,530
Country flag
First let me get some of teh 'Nuclear-powered super-ACs' (with big CVBGs) , then i'll think about it. :ranger:
 

kseeker

Retired
New Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
2,515
Likes
2,126
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

A weaker, badly damaged Pakistan is in India's interests. A extremist Pakistan isnt .
What's the difference between a weaker, badly damaged Pakistan and an extremist Pakistan? :confused:

Do you mean to say, a weaker, badly damaged Pakistan is Stable Pakistan? :confused:
 

Dhairya Yadav

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
481
Likes
141
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

What's the difference between a weaker, badly damaged Pakistan and an extremist Pakistan? :confused:

Do you mean to say, a weaker, badly damaged Pakistan is Stable Pakistan? :confused:
Do you think Extremism is weak? Extremists are our enemy, but Im damn sure they arent weak.
 

kseeker

Retired
New Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
2,515
Likes
2,126
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

Do you think Extremism is weak? Extremists are our enemy, but Im damn sure they arent weak.
I didnt say extremism is weak however, I am unable to comprehend how can you classify a weaker, badly damaged Pakistan as a stable pakistan?

In fact, bakistan will become badly damaged when extremism takes over everything over there. Soon they attain that damaged state, it's better for India.

A badly damaged bakistan will disintegrate soon enough and it will engulf itself in civil war, looting what not etc... that will certainly be beneficial to India.
 

bennedose

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2013
Messages
1,365
Likes
2,169
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

How about all the defence forces of Pak, their nukes, missiles , Fighters go suddenly in the hands of ISIS, AQ?
Can you imagine what kind of threat that would be to India and the world?

A weaker, badly damaged Pakistan is in India's interests. A extremist Pakistan isnt .
There is a problem premise here - and that premise is that the Pakistani army - that has attacked India for 67 years, and supported the LeT for the Mumbai attacks, and has made overt nuclear threats against India is somehow more lovable in your eyes than ISIS.

In fact, if I was a Pakistani army strategist - what you say is exactly what i would want you to believe.

You are entitled to your view but you are wrong. If Country X makes a nuclear threat against you 5 times, why would it be worse if entity Y got nukes and threatened you? If ISIS and the Pakistani army went to war tomorrow, the Pakistani army would defeat ISIS hands down. So why is an ISIS nuclear threat to India worse than a Pakistani army nuclear threat?

i think you have lulled yourself into a fond belief that the Paki army is not much of a threat, but ISIS is. If we can face Paki army, we will kick ISIS ass to jannat and beyond.
 

Dhairya Yadav

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2012
Messages
481
Likes
141
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

I didnt say extremism is weak however, I am unable to comprehend how can you classify a weaker, badly damaged Pakistan as a stable pakistan?

In fact, bakistan will become badly damaged when extremism takes over everything over there. Soon they attain that damaged state, it's better for India.

A badly damaged bakistan will disintegrate soon enough and it will engulf itself in civil war, looting what not etc... that will certainly be beneficial to India.
By weak and damaged I meant that they should be discouraged to such a extent that they wouldnt dare look eye to eye with India.

Yes, extremism will weaken the state, but extremists with nukes is a very dangerous scenario .

And as we all are seeing right now, Shitland doesnt need extremism for civil war . Just look, its imploding right in front of our eyes! :pakistan::shoot:
 

kseeker

Retired
New Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2013
Messages
2,515
Likes
2,126
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

Yes, extremism will weaken the state, but extremists with nukes is a very dangerous scenario .
See, Nukes are not hand grenades, they are sophisticated weapons; every mohammed, abdullah and razzak (as in tom, dick and harry :D) can't control it. So let's not worry about that too much :truestory:
 

rock127

Maulana Rockullah
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2009
Messages
10,569
Likes
25,230
Country flag
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

Stable Pakistan not in India's interest � Indian Defence Review

Does India Want Stable Pakistan? | The Diplomat
@bennedose, @rock127, @Blackwater would be the right people here, who can shed some more light on the topic of Stable or Destabilised Bakistan :namaste:
If Pakistan got Stable then it would put all of its energy to Destabilize India.

It's official stands is to bleed India by 1000 cuts.

So basically there needs to be Stability in Destabilization of Pakistan since it's a Iblis aka Shaitaan.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

tramp

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2009
Messages
1,464
Likes
580
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

It's not my case that Pakistan falling into the hands of extremists is good for India. The point is Pakistan is inexorably drifting in that direction and it is bad for India. Change of govt etc there will not stop this drift. Eventually at some point India will have to make a decisive move perhaps with the help of West and even China to prevent calamitous takeover by the IS. Pakistan looks more and more ripe for an IS takeover.

Why do you think that Pakistan falling in hands of extremists is good for India??? :shocked: I hate Pakistan, but a stable Pak is better than a extremist Pak
 

Rowdy

Co ja kurwa czytam!
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2014
Messages
3,254
Likes
3,061
Re: The IS (Islamic State) aka ISIS updates

So basically there needs to be Stability in Destabilization of Pakistan since it's a Iblis aka Shaitaan.
Exactly.
Right now they are fighting over Nawaz vs Imraan and have lost some economic ground.
Let them lose more. As they are embroiled within, they will keep losing ground.
In the late 80s and early 90s , when US Aid was at all time high, they were all high and mighty. The Anti-Hindu sentiment in the West was at an all time high, and India was snake charmers and elephants so to speak.
It was then they formulated the bleed by a thousand cut strategy in hopes of closing the superior conventional strength, through attrition.
Luckily, we went through reforms and now the status differential is such that they want a compromise at least outwardly.
Now after 10 yrs of high growth due to NaMo ( I hope!) the difference will be so huge, they will give up, or atleast shut up :D.
Kinda like China vs India :frusty:
 

SajeevJino

Long walk
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
6,017
Likes
3,364
Country flag
.

Yes Subramanian Swamy Jumped in

India, US and Israel have special responsibility in dealing with ISIS problem: Subramanian Swamy

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy on
Thursday said that India, United States and Israel have special
responsibility in countering the global threat posed by the
ISIS. Commenting on the U.S.'s decision to take the offensive
against ISIS to Syria, Swamy said, "It is extremely necessary,
because, the ISIS is a threat to the world, they have declared
themselves as a caliphate, and the caliphate requires all Muslims,
in whichever country they are, to forget about their nationality and
become an international citizen of the caliphate."


"They (ISIS) are using very brutal and use primitive methods for
killing people and dishonouring women. Therefore, they are a
threat to our civilization. I think that India, the United States and
Israel have a special responsibility because of our different
strengths. India has manpower strength, the United States has
weapons strength and Israelis have intelligence strength," he
added. Swamy further said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi
should offer help to the U.S. in their effort to curtail the growing
influence of the ISIS.


"I think that when Prime Minister Narendra Modi visits the United
States, he should offer full cooperation to the United States in this
effort," he said. U.S. President Barack Obama had earlier said that
U.S. air strikes that have been targeting the jihadists in Iraq will
also be expanded to cover ISIS targets in Syria. Obama warned
that he will not hesitate to take military actions against ISIS in Iraq
or Syria because they threaten America's security. He added that
the U.S. will hunt down the terrorists wherever they are.

India, US and Israel have special responsibility in dealing with ISIS problem: Subramanian Swamy | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top