India US Relations

Covfefe

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2021
Messages
3,978
Likes
26,996
Country flag
Lol, this thread is just going in circles.
> US is a jerk
>India ain't doing s*it
> US is a jerk

Get out of it, people. Let's try and focus on today with some hard realities.
India- has its geographical, economic and historical realities

US- it's ideological, cultural and economic realities

It'll be better to put things in perspective from a more current and futuristic standpoint. It's sad that we even have Indian Americans participating here and we're mostly discussing the bad past and current shortcomings.
 

srevster

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
2,777
Likes
5,288
Country flag
And we only become first without pissing off everyone by being multi aligned. Not by being in any camp.
Nope, that’s the fallacy. Everyone steps on you because we have superficial relationships with everyone.

a proper foreign policy will have a clear mandate, a vision and countries that support that vision. They are either in your camp or against you.
 

Chimaji Appa

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
243
Likes
634
Yea no nuclear carrier was sent into Indian ocean in 71, and absolutely no Pakistan Govt. was armed to fight India. Also no moral support to our ever so friendly neighbour to develop nukes, right?

Dont make up facts out of thin air, America has been threatening and subverting Indian society for decades. Only recently have they switched sides because we started having everything that they wanted.

Money. And lots of it.
100+ American Patton tanks absolutely routed by Indians in Assal Uttar in the 1965 pak war.
 

srevster

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
2,777
Likes
5,288
Country flag
100+ American Patton tanks absolutely routed by Indians in Assal Uttar in the 1965 pak war.
Exactly, lol. There are no alliances that are permanent. It’s about incentives and alignment. India should increase alignment with the players that accelerate growth and not hang onto a colonial past.

INA also aligned with Hitler and Japan. No American is complaining about that. The bottom line is that the past is the past and the future is the future. America and Japan fought each other, but learned to coexist. Similarly India can put its past behind it and focus on the future.
 

Varoon2

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
1,190
Likes
4,242
Country flag
It does help to focus on the present, and not be too obsessed and resentful of the past. But it is certainly justified to observe that on specific major issues affecting India's unity and sovereignty, the 'liberal' western media- the same media that is now so critical of India under Modi and the BJP- were unsympathetic to India. On the liberation of Goa, there was more criticism than praise or even neutrality. India was the pluralistic democracy and the anti-colonial liberator. Portugal was the long time( grossly) colonial occupier, and that too under a dictatorship of Salazar. Guess who this media sided with? Hint-not India. For the princely state of Hyderabad, India was liberating, integrating and democratising a state that had been shamelessly supporting the British empire with huge amounts of cash. When there was commentary on this matter, it was more critical of India's actions than of the British policy of using Hyderabad, or of the Hyderabad ruler himself. In 1971, India was helping to liberate a huge population from a militarist and Islamist regime and tyranny, the Nixon Kissinger duo sent the seventh fleet to help those militarists and Islamists!

In none of these instances was India under a so called 'right wing, Hindu nationalist majoritarian BJP government that is departing from India's commendable and time honoured ideology of democracy, secularism and pluralism' yada yada. It was under a government that was presumptively under those very guiding principles!
 

srevster

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
2,777
Likes
5,288
Country flag
It does help to focus on the present, and not be too obsessed and resentful of the past. But it is certainly justified to observe that on specific major issues affecting India's unity and sovereignty, the 'liberal' western media- the same media that is now so critical of India under Modi and the BJP- were unsympathetic to India. On the liberation of Goa, there was more criticism than praise or even neutrality. India was the pluralistic democracy and the anti-colonial liberator. Portugal was the long time( grossly) colonial occupier, and that too under a dictatorship of Salazar. Guess who this media sided with? Hint-not India. For the princely state of Hyderabad, India was liberating, integrating and democratising a state that had been shamelessly supporting the British empire with huge amounts of cash. When there was commentary on this matter, it was more critical of India's actions than of the British policy of using Hyderabad, or of the Hyderabad ruler himself. In 1971, India was helping to liberate a huge population from a militarist and Islamist regime and tyranny, the Nixon Kissinger duo sent the seventh fleet to help those militarists and Islamists!

In none of these instances was India under a so called 'right wing, Hindu nationalist majoritarian BJP government that is departing from India's commendable and time honoured ideology of democracy, secularism and pluralism' yada yada. It was under a government that was presumptively under those very guiding principles!
Semantics, when push comes to shove India ditches no invasion doctrine and pursues its interests. The more power you accumulate, the more other countries look the other way. This is called strategic maneuvering space. India by doing NAM has an artificially slow growth period and a small strategic maneuvering space since other countries can easily predict how we will respond
 

Chimaji Appa

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
243
Likes
634
Exactly, lol. There are no alliances that are permanent. It’s about incentives and alignment. India should increase alignment with the players that accelerate growth and not hang onto a colonial past.

INA also aligned with Hitler and Japan. No American is complaining about that. The bottom line is that the past is the past and the future is the future. America and Japan fought each other, but learned to coexist. Similarly India can put its past behind it and focus on the future.
By this warped logic, we would need to hold grudges against Britian, as it was them who colonized us, not America. Every single member here is sayinf that India should be weary of the past with America, because it is a fact America only supports those who bow down to them. Members here, including myself, have posted verbal abuses from President Nixon (a supposedly pro Indian Republican), on our PM and people. If Pak didn’t have Patton Armour in 1965, they wouldn’t have ben dreamed of an invasion in 1965.

The INA comparison is very laughable. The INA were in no way, shape, and form a representative of the modern day Indian republic. They also had posed absolutely 0 threat to America. America, OTOH, made Pakistan capable of threatening India by providing them with such well protected armor. Japan, again another example of why America respects those who now to them, nothing else.
 

Varoon2

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
1,190
Likes
4,242
Country flag
The INA comparison is very laughable. The INA were in no way, shape, and form a representative of the modern day Indian republic. They also had posed absolutely 0 threat to America. America, OTOH, made Pakistan capable of threatening India by providing them with such well protected armor. Japan, again another example of why America respects those who now to them, nothing else.
Right, just like bringing up Hyderabad, Goa, Sikkim or even the Bangladesh war, is a false equivalence. India was not threatening the US, even indirectly with any of these actions. Nor was India replacing a progressive, democratic regime, with a regressive dictatorship. Quite the opposite! Unless, one takes the position that by liberating and/or integrating these states, India was 'threatening' the US, by preventing the US from coming in itself to exploit the land, resources and labour of those places. That would be warped, to say the least.
 

srevster

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
2,777
Likes
5,288
Country flag
Right, just like bringing up Hyderabad, Goa, Sikkim or even the Bangladesh war, is a false equivalence. India was not threatening the US, even indirectly with any of these actions. Nor was India replacing a progressive, democratic regime, with a regressive dictatorship. Quite the opposite! Unless, one takes the position that by liberating and/or integrating these states, India was 'threatening' the US, by preventing the US from coming in itself to exploit the land, resources and labour of those places. That would be warped, to say the least.
Okay, then why does India care about Tibet and Taiwan? India interference in China affairs. why does India care about Ukraine or Palestine?
as per your logic, India should keep its nose out of all of these affairs since they don’t affect you directly. Don’t use whataboutery as an excuse for incompetence in foreign policy.

india is just as inconsistent as America. America just has more dollars and weight to throw around so you feel a bigger impact.

don’t use whataboutery, and instead use introspection to analyze why previous policy has failed to improve on what you do in the future.

none of the other countries like the patronizing comments from India either, especially when it doesn’t have the national power to back it up. In my opinion. india should grow powerful by partnership and then throw its weight around. Talk less, do more and show leadership through actions and not speeches.
 

Varoon2

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2021
Messages
1,190
Likes
4,242
Country flag
I was referring to something a little more specific, though certainly related to the topic. It's the tendency of the US' and other Western governments and media to criticise and denounce India, even when India was in the right! Goa, Hyderabad, Bangladesh- the media and governments in the West did not take India's side, rather supported the entity that was against democracy, secularism and pluralism. With Bangladesh, the leaders of the US even threatened India physically. It is positively worth noting in these times, because India under the BJP is being attacked for supposedly being against secularism and pluralism, if not democracy( which is utterly false) itself. The very same things the US et al and their respective media, did NOT support when it came to a conflict involving India. Sikkim was a bit controversial, but no one doubts that the integration was peaceful and quite popular, and that democracy was the end result.
 

Chimaji Appa

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
243
Likes
634
Okay, then why does India care about Tibet and Taiwan? India interference in China affairs. why does India care about Ukraine or Palestine?
as per your logic, India should keep its nose out of all of these affairs since they don’t affect you directly. Don’t use whataboutery as an excuse for incompetence in foreign policy.

india is just as inconsistent as America. America just has more dollars and weight to throw around so you feel a bigger impact.

don’t use whataboutery, and instead use introspection to analyze why previous policy has failed to improve on what you do in the future.

none of the other countries like the patronizing comments from India either, especially when it doesn’t have the national power to back it up. In my opinion. india should grow powerful by partnership and then throw its weight around. Talk less, do more and show leadership through actions and not speeches.
India hasn’t militarily intervened in any of these issues, they have only verbally expressed them. US can say all it wants to about India and Afghanistan and Iraq, but they shouldn’t be militarily intervening. The only military intervention I would probably support from the US was career war, but they messed that up too by poking China.
 

srevster

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
2,777
Likes
5,288
Country flag
India hasn’t militarily intervened in any of these issues, they have only verbally expressed them. US can say all it wants to about India and Afghanistan and Iraq, but they shouldn’t be militarily intervening. The only military intervention I would probably support from the US was career war, but they messed that up too by poking China.
Lol naivety. Superpowers secure their interest via military intervention. India should do the same instead of complaining to UN about z Pakistan and Kashmir
 

Chimaji Appa

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
243
Likes
634
Lol naivety. Superpowers secure their interest via military intervention. India should do the same instead of complaining to UN about z Pakistan and Kashmir
Except your American Homies will threaten intervention. India’s biggest issue was the ideas you express in this thread only: to make some alliance with America at any costs, even though there is no evidence their view on Indian people has changed.

Plus, Kashmir is India’s issue. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya were never America’s problems.
 

srevster

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
2,777
Likes
5,288
Country flag
Except your American Homies will threaten intervention. India’s biggest issue was the ideas you express in this thread only: to make some alliance with America at any costs, even though there is no evidence their view on Indian people has changed.

Plus, Kashmir is India’s issue. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya were never America’s problems.
Exactly, do you see any internal territory disputes in the US? What’s mine is mine. What’s yours is up for negotiation. After 9/11, were there any more attacks? Compare that to India’s defensive strategy where we have seasonal attacks every year. It’s been 70 years and still no solution in sight.

if something belongs to you, you take it. You don’t ask permission

Indian policy is to shit on countries taking care of their agenda like Israel and US, instead of focusing on building domestic capabilities to solve these issues. No one likes a naysayer who sits on the fence. Better policy is to just not preach to begin with if the decision is inaction. Sit tight and assess is Indian policy with endless chai biscuit sessions.
 
Last edited:

Indrajit

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
4,029
Likes
15,303
Country flag
. Members here, including myself, have posted verbal abuses from President Nixon (a supposedly pro Indian Republican), on our PM and people.
To be fair, I'm not sure anyone ever thought Nixon was pro Indian or indeed that Republicans were pro Indian at that time. Republicans being preferable is a very recent phenomenon and pretty much starts with George W.Bush.

Nixon's visceral dislike of Indians and especially Indira Gandhi was unusual and largely a one off, based purely on personal dislike. Most American establishments have been far more nuanced.

While criticism of US is warranted many times we should also remember their help when we needed it. From one of my earlier posts:

Whatever else may have gone strategically amiss, can’t be dissing that free wheat we received as aid. Kept substantial population from starving. We owe Dr. Norman Borlaug plenty. Not for nothing was he awarded the Padma Vibhushan and a statue of him put up at the national agricultural science complex. India also owes a little known figure, Lester Brown who foresaw a possible famine with a severe shortfall of grain in 1965 ( at an age of 31, possibly risking his career if he got it wrong) and got Lyndon Johnson to ship huge volumes of wheat (Johnson ordered that India’s food problem be treated as if the US were at war, doing whatever needed to be done). Johnson also helped India move away from price caps to a price floor(now the MSP) and it would change India forever. All this in the middle of the Vietnam quagmire.

While we have plenty to criticise Americans for on foreign policy, we would be severely amiss if we didn’t acknowledge their help in this matter.
 

Chimaji Appa

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
243
Likes
634
Exactly, do you see any internal territory disputes in the US? What’s mine is mine. What’s yours is up for negotiation. After 9/11, were there any more attacks? Compare that to India’s defensive strategy where we have seasonal attacks every year. It’s been 70 years and still no solution in sight.

if something belongs to you, you take it. You don’t ask permission

Indian policy is to shit on countries taking care of their agenda like Israel and US, instead of focusing on building domestic capabilities to solve these issues. No one likes a naysayer who sits on the fence. Better policy is to just not preach to begin with if the decision is inaction. Sit tight and assess is Indian policy with endless chai biscuit sessions.
Ah yes. US invaded Iraq in 1991 and 2003 for 9/11 right? US lies on the border of highly insurgent states right. As if the US isn’t facing their own domestic terrorists committing horrific school shootings nearly every year. US didn’t invade Afghanistan for 9/11 either, as it was only in 04 when Osama admitted to 9/11. They invaded to get their nose in others politics again.

If you want India to launch an all out operation, than be prepared for severe US backlash. After all, they didn’t like us building nukes or advancing our military. It basically refutes what you have been saying in this thread.

Also, Kashmir issue will be solved becuase Pak will keep funding and sponsoring militant groups. The only way Pak will ever stop is if they ever given such a crushing defeat in a war that completely cripples their economy, and America nor the rest of the world wants such a conflict.
 

Chimaji Appa

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 10, 2020
Messages
243
Likes
634
To be fair, I'm not sure anyone ever thought Nixon was pro Indian or indeed that Republicans were pro Indian at that time. Republicans being preferable is a very recent phenomenon and pretty much starts with George W.Bush.

Nixon's visceral dislike of Indians and especially Indira Gandhi was unusual and largely a one off, based purely on personal dislike. Most American establishments have been far more nuanced.

While criticism of US is warranted many times we should also remember their help when we needed it. From one of my earlier posts:
What exactly was stopping them from globally rebuking Pakistan for their antics in 1965?
 

Indrajit

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
4,029
Likes
15,303
Country flag
What exactly was stopping them from globally rebuking Pakistan for their antics in 1965?
Pakistan was a member of SEATO & CENTO, India, for all the aid it was receiving wasn't pro US and the US saw the non aligned movement that India championed as an pro Soviet bloc. Inspite of that, the US maintained a balance in its reaction to the 1965 war, something that the Pakistanis have always held a grudge against. The US voted for a UN resolution stopping military supplies to both sides but considering that they were only giving to Pakistan, it amounted to sanctioning them. At the height of the cold war, it was more than what was expected.
 

srevster

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2020
Messages
2,777
Likes
5,288
Country flag
Ah yes. US invaded Iraq in 1991 and 2003 for 9/11 right? US lies on the border of highly insurgent states right. As if the US isn’t facing their own domestic terrorists committing horrific school shootings nearly every year. US didn’t invade Afghanistan for 9/11 either, as it was only in 04 when Osama admitted to 9/11. They invaded to get their nose in others politics again.

If you want India to launch an all out operation, than be prepared for severe US backlash. After all, they didn’t like us building nukes or advancing our military. It basically refutes what you have been saying in this thread.

Also, Kashmir issue will be solved becuase Pak will keep funding and sponsoring militant groups. The only way Pak will ever stop is if they ever given such a crushing defeat in a war that completely cripples their economy, and America nor the rest of the world wants such a conflict.
In simpler words, Keep the fight abroad and keep your domestic stuff stable. India can learn a lesson from this.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top