Trump may ask India to send troops to Afghanistan

[spikey360]

But we can deploy our SF soldiers in afghanistan *covertly*.

===============================================

That will create the ground.

And 5 years is good enough time to change the policy.

Right, fully agreed. In the garb of "trainers", SF are already there.
The only thing lacking now is a big strike. Something on the scale of PNS Mehran. India should strike Paki assets in Afghanistan and reduce them to ashes. They want 1000 cuts, I say let us give them ten thousand cuts.

 

[Vijyes]

@spikey360

I can try but the gray matter in your skull is yet to be fully developed.

Now I understand where the "India is a supapowa" memes are coming from. This alone proves that you are an imbecile, far removed from the ground realities and will continue to remain so, regardless of anything I say or do.

Where are the goddamn logistics you superpower of a moron?

Iran,chabahar port.

===========================================

Our priorities must be to check pakis and the dog eaters.

We must send a message,we wont stop now.

You have set a a steam rolling juggernaut on helm.

Oh come on. Try me. Give us your pearls of wisdom. Give a glimpse of your plan.
Surely you are no coward. Give us your oh-so potent, practical plan in which India trumps Pakistan, China and all other enemies by not firing a single shot, but simply throwing more money towards the problem.
Don't answer a question with a question. I challenge you to post something which resembles a strategy on how India can become a greater power than today by not firing a single shot/not doing anything tangible security-wise for Afghanistan. I challenge you, moron.

Never trust a muslim. Iran or anyone else. Never spill Hindu blood for muslim. Afghanistan is not friendly. The government is a puppet. If free and fair elections without terms and conditions are allowed, Taliban may win.

India doesn't have logistics as military planes will not be allowed to fly over Pakistan or Iran. Iran doesn't hate Sunni. Iran has been supporting Palestine and Kashmir for sometime now, both of which are sunni.

India is a superpower because of its massive population and decent level of technology. The population of India can make anyone cower. It is that Hindus are hopelessly cowardly that India is in this shape. If Hindus become radical, which is possible now, India will be a superpower. But, as I said, our oil dependency on middle east jihadis is keeping us in a fix. Eventually, we will have to replace it by coal liquefaction but it is inconvenient right now. So, until oil can be replaced by coal liquefaction, India has to keep its heads straight.

 

[Vijyes]

Why r u searching for your father in online forum

Muhammad Selvam, we are tired of your rants. Keep quiet.

Who says right now,like today.

Lets create the ground,convince allies and go in full guns blazing.

Give me a cost benefit analysis, @aditya10r before you speak anything more. Tell me what is your objective, how many years do you want, how are you going to achieve it. If you can answer these questions coherently, then we can proceed on arguing about the feasibility.

guys if you ask me we are working more closely with Russians and Iranians opposite to popular perception that we are working closely with USA
i think China Russia alliance on Afghanistan is temporary adjustment.
i would like point out Russia would not want Afghnistan to become another north korea with china as its closest ally and so does Iran if that happens both of them would not gain anything because instead of US hegemony they will witness Chinese hegemony which will become more difficult to get rid of because China has trump card called Pakistan and geographically nearer to Afghanistan so the main objective will be not to allow Afghanistan become satellite state of either US or China and so does we it would be better and i think we are quietly working with Iran and Russia and indirectly with Taliban (directly with some factions) via Russia and Iran to prevent Afghanistan to fall into lap of China or USA

Please give me evidence other than the media hype. Also, please tell me the proper motives of Russia, USA, China with fundamental arguments. Speaking old wives tales makes no sense. Lets get down to business

 

[Johny_Baba]

Muhammad Selvam, we are tired of your rants. Keep quiet.



Give me a cost benefit analysis, @aditya10r before you speak anything more. Tell me what is your objective, how many years do you want, how are you going to achieve it. If you can answer these questions coherently, then we can proceed on arguing about the feasibility.



Please give me evidence other than the media hype. Also, please tell me the proper motives of Russia, USA, China with fundamental arguments. Speaking old wives tales makes no sense. Lets get down to business

+1 for you-know-what. .

 

[aditya10r]

Give me a cost benefit analysis, @aditya10r before you speak anything more. Tell me what is your objective, how many years do you want, how are you going to achieve it. If you can answer these questions coherently, then we can proceed on arguing about the feasibility.

Any military objective has never reaped any money(except colonial wars).

Our objective should be very clear-Dealing with talibunnies and other pakistan supported militias,support the afghan government,containing taliban.

And most importantly-stopping afghanistan from falling into chinese side.

And eventually bringing afghanistan into india sphere of influence.

Start off with sending soldiers and officers covertly,create the ground,try to get iran on our side-offer them gold/usd in exchange of their gold-or if possible buy a few oil fields.

Initially we should start with working along with RSAF-NATO,then slowly steadily we should work on increasing our footprint.

Even 3000 soldiers are good enough to start with.

It costed USofA-60 billion usd anually to maintain 100k+ soldiers in afghanistan.

We are not gonna station 100k soldiers,we just want some 5000-10000,plus we wont be having shit load of military equipments like amreekis in the region.

 

[Vijyes]

Any military objective has never reaped any money(except colonial wars).

Our objective should be very clear-Dealing with talibunnies and other pakistan supported militias,support the afghan government,containing taliban.

And most importantly-stopping afghanistan from falling into chinese side.

And eventually bringing afghanistan into india sphere of influence.

Start off with sending soldiers and officers covertly,create the ground,try to get iran on our side-offer them gold/usd in exchange of their gold-or if possible buy a few oil fields.

Initially we should start with working along with RSAF-NATO,then slowly steadily we should work on increasing our footprint.

Even 3000 soldiers are good enough to start with.

It costed USofA-60 billion usd anually to maintain 100k+ soldiers in afghanistan.

We are not gonna station 100k soldiers,we just want some 5000-10000,plus we wont be having shit load of military equipments like amreekis in the region.

Give me a proper plan. What is the point of deploying troops? How do you know Iran will side against Pakistan? Do you have any serious evidence to claim that?

Cost benefit analysis is not about money always. It could be any cost or benefit.

By stationing troops, what is the final objective over long run to be achieved? Stopping Taliban by sending troops is meaningless. Just because there is troop deployment doesn't mean Taliban will vanish. It is not that Indian soldiers have divya jnana and can find Taliban fighters hiding everywhere

 

[mayfair]

We have a strong troop deployment in J&K and it hasn't stopped Napakis from sending in infiltrators, even if it's a trickle. To think that a couple of thousand troops will stop the Taliban from sneaking into Afghanistan is a folly.

If we ramp up the troop numbers, we have to be concerned about supplies and logistics, none of which can be maintained by air. Ground access via Pakistan is out of question. Other routes are equally unsuitable for sustained deployment. None of these countries will allow us to transport lethal weapons through their territory.

Afghanistan must and can only be secured by Afghans themselves.

 

[Mangal]

We have a strong troop deployment in J&K and it hasn't stopped Napakis from sending in infiltrators, even if it's a trickle. To think that a couple of thousand troops will stop the Taliban from sneaking into Afghanistan is a folly.

If we ramp up the troop numbers, we have to be concerned about supplies and logistics, none of which can be maintained by air. Ground access via Pakistan is out of question. Other routes are equally unsuitable for sustained deployment. None of these countries will allow us to transport lethal weapons through their territory.

Afghanistan must and can only be secured by Afghans themselves.

It's not about number of troops it about the quality. The indian contingent of troops though miniscule in number can guide ANA and other rag tag militia to stage attacks on paki and Chinese infrastructure. Similar to what ISI and Paki SSG did to Soviets during Afghan war. We cant risk ignoring Afghanistan. It's already a battle ground. The need of hour is to have "some sort". of military presence. We don't need lakhs of troops. But saying that we don't need them at all is millitary short sightedness.

 

[mayfair]

US/NATO have been trying to do what you describe for years and have failed. Why?

It's a folly comparing the Soviet experience to ours. The terrorists were able to successfully attacks Soviet infra not just because of Napaki guidance (it was actually Amreeki-Napaki co-guidance), but also because of Amreeki weapons, especially stingers. Moreover, unlike today, they were never in control of large swathes of Afghan territory- Najeebullah had a competent and battle hardened army that kept the Taliban-precursors at bay till 1992. Soviet economy was what made them withdraw. If they were as rich as Amreekis now, they could have well stayed put.

ANA is nothing like that- they have little will to fight the Taliban and NATO/US have been unable to whip them into some sort of shape. They have proven themselves less than capable of fighting off Taliban.

In CI ops, the main and the most useful strategy is to hold the ground and deny the tangos any safe areas to regroup and consolidate. This is what we have done in J&K and in NE and in Naxal areas and previously in Punjab. Then you need enough boots on the ground to stop the tangos from infiltrating from across the borders. Despite considerable troops on the frontier, we do not have ZERO infiltration.

Afghan border is equally if not more porous and treacherous. We cannot afford to put in our troops to cover ever inch of the border, nor can we find enough Afghans to do so. The logistics will be a humongous problem. They will need feeding, accommodation, weapons and ammo. How will we ship all of it?

Plus, our soldiers fight in J&K and elsewhere because it is OUR land and they wish to defend it. Afghanistan is most certainly NOT, at least not in the present form.

Putting our troops in number beyond what we already have there is a recipe for disaster. It will dwarf what happened to the IPKF, when we faced a similar set of challenges.

 

[indus]

Why u r obsessed with super power word. India will never be super power. If we uplift the millions of poor people from the poverty, thats more than enough.

Years of Congi regime have made many Indians into belieiving such defeatist attitude. Yes India is not a superpower today and will take decades to bring out millions out of poverty. But as a nation why we should not have such a vision and work towards it. Even if we do not become like US, Europeans, we may attain a standing of our own. India already is becoming a regional power. We are assertive in our neighbourhood and influencing decisions in our backyard like Nepal, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Bhutan etc. Surg strikes in PoK & Myanmar, Doklam, Rohingya issue are a proof of an assertive foreign policy. We are part of mtcr and working to join nsg and other tech denial regimes. India is a growing economic power and a quite strong millitary power as well. Its time to realise our strengths and forget that nehruvian defeatist mindset.

 

[Vijyes]

It's not about number of troops it about the quality. The indian contingent of troops though miniscule in number can guide ANA and other rag tag militia to stage attacks on paki and Chinese infrastructure. Similar to what ISI and Paki SSG did to Soviets during Afghan war. We cant risk ignoring Afghanistan. It's already a battle ground. The need of hour is to have "some sort". of military presence. We don't need lakhs of troops. But saying that we don't need them at all is millitary short sightedness.

First tell me what exactly is the problem and why? Lets ask the basic question and get answers before discussing high level stuff. So, first let us know the root level problem, the circumstances surrounding it and the final solution. Then we can draw a roadmap on how to fit in things together

 

[Mangal]

US/NATO have been trying to do what you describe for years and have failed. Why?

It's a folly comparing the Soviet experience to ours. The terrorists were able to successfully attacks Soviet infra not just because of Napaki guidance (it was actually Amreeki-Napaki co-guidance), but also because of Amreeki weapons, especially stingers. Moreover, unlike today, they were never in control of large swathes of Afghan territory- Najeebullah had a competent and battle hardened army that kept the Taliban-precursors at bay till 1992. Soviet economy was what made them withdraw. If they were as rich as Amreekis now, they could have well stayed put.

ANA is nothing like that- they have little will to fight the Taliban and NATO/US have been unable to whip them into some sort of shape. They have proven themselves less than capable of fighting off Taliban.

In CI ops, the main and the most useful strategy is to hold the ground and deny the tangos any safe areas to regroup and consolidate. This is what we have done in J&K and in NE and in Naxal areas and previously in Punjab. Then you need enough boots on the ground to stop the tangos from infiltrating from across the borders. Despite considerable troops on the frontier, we do not have ZERO infiltration.

Afghan border is equally if not more porous and treacherous. We cannot afford to put in our troops to cover ever inch of the border, nor can we find enough Afghans to do so. The logistics will be a humongous problem. They will need feeding, accommodation, weapons and ammo. How will we ship all of it?

Plus, our soldiers fight in J&K and elsewhere because it is OUR land and they wish to defend it. Afghanistan is most certainly NOT, at least not in the present form.

Putting our troops in number beyond what we already have there is a recipe for disaster. It will dwarf what happened to the IPKF, when we faced a similar set of challenges.

You right to an extent. We don't need troops to man Afghan border posts. But we sure need few troops in clandestine way to stage attacks and do whatever Black ops that needs to be done. Besides in case Pak or china violate Afghan border we need our army in advisory role and provide technical and technological assistance. So we surely need boots on ground to some extent. But we surely don't need to go as far as sending contingent of the size of IPKF.
One more thing, Soviets were economically week so are the pakis right now. It would be better to compare pakis with soviets and not USA.

 

[Vijyes]

You right to an extent. We don't need troops to man Afghan border posts. But we sure need few troops in clandestine way to stage attacks and do whatever Black ops that needs to be done. Besides in case Pak or china violate Afghan border we need our army in advisory role and provide technical and technological assistance. So we surely need boots on ground to some extent. But we surely don't need to go as far as sending contingent of the size of IPKF.
One more thing, Soviets were economically week so are the pakis right now. It would be better to compare pakis with soviets and not USA.

We already have military advisors in Afghanistan. Pakistan has no economic power. But, we are speaking of Arab oil. Don't be arrogant and keep insisting on Pakistan being the key. Islamic world itself is the key. Arab oil is the reason behind all these nasty business being tolerated.

So, next time, speak of Arab money routed via ISI-Pakistan and not simply insist on ISI-Pakistan doing everything just like that

 

[Mangal]

We already have military advisors in Afghanistan. Pakistan has no economic power. But, we are speaking of Arab oil. Don't be arrogant and keep insisting on Pakistan being the key. Islamic world itself is the key. Arab oil is the reason behind all these nasty business being tolerated.

So, next time, speak of Arab money routed via ISI-Pakistan and not simply insist on ISI-Pakistan doing everything just like that

Watch your tone buddy. No need to tell what should one do next time. BTW.. Can you elaborate what purpose Arab are routing their money via Pakistan. As far as I know it's limited. China is a bigger player in Pakistan.

 

[Vijyes]

Watch your tone buddy. No need to tell what should one do next time. BTW.. Can you elaborate what purpose Arab are routing their money via Pakistan. As far as I know it's limited. China is a bigger player in Pakistan.

China is loaning pakistan goods and constructing buildings like dams, roads etc. But that is a loan and not fund. How will Pakistan pay back? Pakistan will not pay back but will ask Saudi to help. Saudi has already agreed to be investor in CPEC. It means Saudis will repay the loan.

Saudis are the ones who fund ISIS, ISI, Al-Qaeda, Taliban, PLO etc.

 

[pruthvi24]

Muhammad Selvam, we are tired of your rants. Keep quiet.



Give me a cost benefit analysis, @aditya10r before you speak anything more. Tell me what is your objective, how many years do you want, how are you going to achieve it. If you can answer these questions coherently, then we can proceed on arguing about the feasibility.



Please give me evidence other than the media hype. Also, please tell me the proper motives of Russia, USA, China with fundamental arguments. Speaking old wives tales makes no sense. Lets get down to business

1)For your info Russia has already sent or is about to send it's afghan envoy to India
2)right now Afghanistan is a turf war USA by staying there can keep an eye on cpec and Pakistan and China and can even harass Russia via central Asia states & mineral resources
2)Russia wants USA out of here but doesn't want afghanistan to be under Chinese influence it wants Russia wants afg under control to control central Asian states & mineral resources
3)China wants USA out of afg but want to control afg via Pakistan and secure it's ambitious cpec mineral resources
4)India wants afg under its influence 2 reasons
1)access to central Asia
2) sabotage cpec
3) surrounding Pakistan and teach a lesson keep them busy in western side spread the Pak army entire Pakistan make war with India unaffordable even if India attacks Pak on backdrop of tereorist attacks and friendly afg govt and some Taliban factions
4)mineral resources
Iran 1)wants a friendly afghan govt which is not under saudi or Pak influence
2)doesn't want afghanistan under us or Chinese influence it may affect Iran
These are some points that are really I can think off I'm not strategist buddy so I may be completely wrong

 

[spikey360]

By stationing troops, what is the final objective over long run to be achieved? Stopping Taliban by sending troops is meaningless. Just because there is troop deployment doesn't mean Taliban will vanish. It is not that Indian soldiers have divya jnana and can find Taliban fighters hiding everywhere

Now you are asking the correct questions.
Objectives as @pruthvi24 already pointed out
1. Surround Pakistan with Indian personnel and hardware from both fronts
2. Establish our first offshore milbase. Expand our footprint in our immediate neighbourhood. The Chinese have already established something in far off Africa.
3. Fill the vacuum of power/deterrence which will be created when USA leaves Af. In any case, short of vacuum being filled by Russia, it is always a lose-lose scenario for us if either Talibun(nies!), or Pakistan or China or Iran control Kabul. Russia is not in such a powerful condition that it will support both Syria and also Afghanistan. There is plenty of opportunity for us to cease the moment.
4. Start covert operations into Pakistan aiding the Shia militia and Balochis from the western front of Pakistan.
5. Destabilise the CPEC.
6. Build some more schools and dams in Af, but this time with Indian companies, Indian materials and Indian labour.

 

[spikey360]

China is loaning pakistan goods and constructing buildings like dams, roads etc. But that is a loan and not fund. How will Pakistan pay back? Pakistan will not pay back but will ask Saudi to help. Saudi has already agreed to be investor in CPEC. It means Saudis will repay the loan.

Saudis are the ones who fund ISIS, ISI, Al-Qaeda, Taliban, PLO etc.

I say, simply nuke each inch of CPEC. But that's just me.

 

[Vijyes]

Now you are asking the correct questions.
Objectives as @pruthvi24 already pointed out
1. Surround Pakistan with Indian personnel and hardware from both fronts
2. Establish our first offshore milbase. Expand our footprint in our immediate neighbourhood. The Chinese have already established something in far off Africa.
3. Fill the vacuum of power/deterrence which will be created when USA leaves Af. In any case, short of vacuum being filled by Russia, it is always a lose-lose scenario for us if either Talibun(nies!), or Pakistan or China or Iran control Kabul. Russia is not in such a powerful condition that it will support both Syria and also Afghanistan. There is plenty of opportunity for us to cease the moment.
4. Start covert operations into Pakistan aiding the Shia militia and Balochis from the western front of Pakistan.
5. Destabilise the CPEC.
6. Build some more schools and dams in Af, but this time with Indian companies, Indian materials and Indian labour.

Iran is not at all friendly. Forget about Shia help. Iran, in fact tried to destroy Salma Dam built by India and had trued to stop it several times as it reduces water into iran.

Pakistan is not afraid of Indian hardware in Afghanistan. India doesn't have logistics and are a sitting duck. Bases are useful as long as it can be well supplied and defended. Just setting up a base in the middle of hostile territory is asking for trouble. India can't do a sweep of Afghanistan as that will raise hostilities between India and Afghanis. It will only cause massive casualties to Indians as Pakistan will be easily able to supply Taliban while India will have no supplies.

Your covert operation strategy is meaningless as nothing big can be done to arabs as that will cut oil supply to the world. The jihadis are funded by arabs and no matter what, unless the supply of arms and funds from Arabs end or a genocide is done, the problem of jihad can't ever end. Neither of this is possible now. So, please don't be unnecessarily hawkish

 

[Mangal]

China is loaning pakistan goods and constructing buildings like dams, roads etc. But that is a loan and not fund. How will Pakistan pay back? Pakistan will not pay back but will ask Saudi to help. Saudi has already agreed to be investor in CPEC. It means Saudis will repay the loan.

Saudis are the ones who fund ISIS, ISI, Al-Qaeda, Taliban, PLO etc.

The politics of middle East and Arab states is way more complicated than that. Saudis can't afford to irk the Americans. The Americans on the other hand don't poke their nose in Saudis spreading wahabi Islam. It's like you scratch my back and I yours. But Afghanistan is a different ball game altogether. I don't think Americans will give Saudis a free run here. If that was the case they would have asked Saudis to send troops and not India.As far as Saudis aiding Pakistan and bailing them out. Well they are part of Islamic Ummah. So what do you suggest? We should just sit back? Let them run over Afghanistan? We have friends too. Iran and Saudis don't see eye to eye. Afghans themselves hate Pakistan. It's that time in history where India has small window of opportunity to destabilize and destroy Pakistan. We need to grab it. We can't do that by sitting and asking someone like USA to do that for us. We need to behave like a regional power and stand up for ourselves. So yes we need to increase troops presence and set up our infrastructure for RAW and Army so that Afghanistan remains under Indian influence and do whatever necessary to have a divided Pakistan.