Cicero

Ya think? More likely, Bush will simply get Perle to throw one of his fits and declare that India is "no longer an ally of the USA".

They'll be in good company, at least, along with Germany, Canada, Belgium, France, and pretty much the rest of the civilized world.

phaedrus

Normally i wouldnt comment, but here goes....if that was the case, US would have been able to get the whole word to sing to its tunes before the war on Iraq started and everyone would have joined the so-called "allied forces" (spain, australia......give me a break)

If all the frikking governments in the world have now voted in UN supporting the post-war efforts in Iraq, it is simply because they want a piece of the action ....read OIL and RECONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS. Simple and basic needs..........

hinduwoman

Actually India has gotten contracts worth $3000000. USA is hinting there will be more to follow if troops go in.

Sorry but US is pressurising India, because who are the cronies to cater to its demands?
Australia, UK, Etc are all white and Christians --- a hated tribe in Iraq today. That is why they need an Asian country particularly if the troops have muslim soldiers as well. Also India and Iraq have traditionally enjoyed friendly relations; lots of Indians in Iraq.

They also need soldiers with exprience of terrorism. Israel is out for obvious reasons. That only leaves India with sufficient resources and experience.

hinduwoman

So far India is sticking to its stand that we will go in only as UN troops not as allies of the coaliation.

Yes, USA can bring great deal of pressure to bear but India can withstand it. Besides today the economy is so tangled up with each other's that injuring India severely would lead to harming US economy as well.

Dr Rick

My comments were tongue-in-cheek for the most part; but there's still an element of truth to them, imo. Third-world countries may possibly be more vulnerable to the subtle influences of hyperpower diplomacy than Spain and Australia, and the degrees of persuasion used by the Empire may vary depending upon the target, as well

The US views the third world differently than other countries; for instance, I don't know of an example where the US assassinated a leader or supported a coup in any European country with which it wasn't formally at war.

If India can stay out of it, good for India, but the Empire may have its ways to make that not so easy. Before he was executed, Bhutto wrote that Kissinger had threatened to make an example of him for not acquiesing to US demands on his nuclear policy, and died believing that the US was behind the coup that ultimately brought both his government and his life to an end. Indira Ghandi was assasinated by her own bodyguards around the time she was presumably contemplating a strike against Pakistan that would have disrupted US plans in Afghanistan (the US was already fighting a proxy war there with the Soviets) and just about the time Sheik Mujibur, the popular leader of Bangladesh who was not so friendly to US interests, was murdered.

Recently, we now have General Musharraf, whose coup against Sharif was not so well received initially by the Empire, but has recently earned accolades from it after making his deference to the "War on Terrorism" against the will of his people well known.

To be leader on the Asian sub-continent that does not follow the will and dictates of the Empire is not predictive of long life and prosperity.

phaedrus

Dont think the iraqis will give a rat's ass about - what colour the peace keeping forces sport. If the law/order situation doesnt improve and common citizens continue to suffer they will keep ambushing the forces.

And India has experience - in what sense? What US soldiers are facing in Iraq is not terrorism...they are facing disgruntled citizens and pockets of saddam loyalists. Going by your logic, Pakistan makes perfect sense for this force

phaedrus

Rick

Third-world countries may possibly be more vulnerable to the subtle influences of hyperpower diplomacy than Spain and Australia, and the degrees of persuasion used by the Empire may vary depending upon the target, as well

You will have to substantiate that ......as i said earlier.....if that was the case, US would have been able to convince the whole bloody world about the war on Iraq and it hasnt been able to. That is a fact. I dont see how it is different now. Countries like spain, australia and italy which supported the war on Iraq, did so because their leaders chose to go against popular opinion in their respective countries to cater to US demands (and probably get something back in kind)

If India can stay out of it, good for India, but the Empire may have its ways to make that not so easy.

Read above, the so-called empire cant make any nation/government do something it doesnt want to do. They will do it for their own reasons

Before he was executed, Bhutto wrote that Kissinger had threatened to make an example of him for not acquiesing to US demands on his nuclear policy, and died believing that the US was behind the coup that ultimately brought both his government and his life to an end. Indira Ghandi was assasinated by her own bodyguards around the time she was presumably contemplating a strike against Pakistan that would have disrupted US plans in Afghanistan (the US was already fighting a proxy war there with the Soviets) and just about the time Sheik Mujibur, the popular leader of Bangladesh who was not so friendly to US interests, was murdered.

WOW, so many conspiracy theories...i am sure you have certain references that will substantiate these?

Of the above mentioned incidents, as far my memory goes, the Indian assassination was done by body guards alright, but they happen to belong to a Sikh community which was outraged at Indira Gandhi's decision to send in troops into their holy temple which was considered sacrilege and that triggered the assassination.

Recently, we now have General Musharraf, whose coup against Sharif was not so well received initially by the Empire, but has recently earned accolades from it after making his deference to the "War on Terrorism" against the will of his people well known.

Coup was overlooked by US and so was the fact that it was Pakistan which was supportingand sustaining the taliban in Afghanistan. Yes, there was opposition to Musharraf's quick turnaround in Pakistan, but there was also a resignation about that decision among the people, since the alternative would have been to get bombed along with Afghanistan. If US had so much say on Pakistan it would stopped the country from going nuclear right? You seem to be overestimating the empires' power of persuasion.

To be leader on the Asian sub-continent that does not follow the will and dictates of the Empire is not predictive of long life and prosperity.

US has been in existence for say what couple of hundreds of years or more? Quite a few countries in Asia have been existence for thousands of years and am sure they will continue to live happily ever after. You seem to take a rather narrow approach here...granted US is currently the sole super power.....but i take your generalizations to be true....then countries like China and India shouldnt have existed, as they never are seen as towing the US line on MANY things. The latter has warmed to US only in the last 10 years or so......and China also concurs...only because it makes ECONOMIC sense. For US, it might need India to sort of neutralise China's growing presence. It is all kind of you-scratch-me-scratch which is called diplomacy and not the Empire kind of thing you are trying to potray.

Anyhows as i said the bottomline is the empire can do shit about countries/governments that dont tow its line....case in point consider the situation prior to start of the war on Iraq....how many countries were on the US side or bought into its illogical justification for the war?

jp

Darwin26

Granted the Iraq debacle is a nauseating embarrassment...for the last 10 years to me and it gets more sickening each day.

I wouldn't wish this dreadful mess on anyone or any country. But if India can go in and bring some sanity and solutions to the starving unstable masses ...what has She to loose?

i do believe the USA has and leverage to get what they want from any nation... See the Poles in action we gave them 6+billion dollars to buy american fighter jets just a few months back ... The current jingoist regime has no shame (to match the lies and innuendos they have perpetrated).

But, lets say for the sake of argument Hinduwoman, that India can relieve this inhuman disaster...should they not do what they can to illeviate the mess? Granted loss of life is inevitable should they take this mission. Just as France has gone into the Congo to help stabilize etc.
I feel it could have a number of possitive effects for India...not to mention the O word ...

I do agree that the USA is constantly manipulating the heads of foreign states to capitulate to our whims... clandestinly or ballatently... If only someone would stop us... The sale of arms and landmines to 3rd world countries is horrifying...just so we can get their cooperation and attention.

And since we have only been around for a couple hundred years our ignorance is compounded by our hegemonist Ego and Power hungry "wealth".

echidna

Darwin26, did you get your name from an Australian weather forecast ?

Darwin26

NOPE

...as a pet name for atheists ... i knew i could not, would not be the only one who wanted the handel ....so i just tacked on a number Vuallla !

Hows the weather, down under?

PS: my brother (and family) live in Melborne and i use to work for Gosford Quarries!