The Constipated Faujiz tahmedji,
A humble observation. No offence meant.
You seem to have different standards for debating and logical coherency for yourselves and for others.
For something you say, you state some facts, and then arrive at conclusions without following a clear logical trajectory from those facts.

Indian scientists felt the need to test their weapons.

I am afraid this is not plausible for the following reasons: (a) There does not seem any scientific reason to test 5 weapons, when one weapon at a time would make seem more sensible AND consistent with ``industry`` practice in terms of tests by other nations (b) Why threaten Pakistan -rather than reassure it of the intent - if the purpose was to test the weapons and not to show off some nuclear muscle to Pakistan?


I am not aware of your background, but are you a nuclear scientist? On what grounds do you decide on the ``scientific reasons``. All 5 devices tested were of different kilotons, one of them being a thermonuclear device.

Nowhere else in the media have I ever heard ANYONE raise this point.....that why did India test 5 devices and not one. If you could provide such a link or reference, I would take your aspersions on the scientific reason as valid.

Please note that USA has conducted more than a 1000 tests. Russia is not far behind. This shows that you need multiple tests. India rushed them all into 3 days because of an impending CTBT and to avoid frequent uproar.

The basic point being that it removed any doubts the Indian government may have had concerning Pakistan`s nuclear ability. On that fateful day, as you put it, Pakistan achieved military parity with India. Thanks to your brilliant strategists in delhi! Ha! Ha!

Okay, please re-read what you have written. Even if we assume for the sake of argument that the sole purpose of the tests was to flex muscles at Pakistan, then the fact that Pakistan actually had nuclear weapons makes the decision a good one, right? It removed all doubts from the mind of the Indian government and made it 100% sure of the nuclear capability of Pakistan. You talk as if, by conducting tests in Pokhran, some nukes magically materialised in Chagtai. Pakistan had achieved military parity years back, when it obtained nukes.

Imagine this scenario, okay. Pokhran and Chagtai tests never happened. Mush then planned Kargil, India repealed the attack and started thinking of expanding the fighting along the international border as well. You think at this point of time, the incumbents in pakistan would have remained tightlipped about the bomb? Wouldn`t they have threatened India anyway?

As Peter Sellers, playing Dr. Strangelove, in the movie by the same name says - ``The whole point of the doomsday machine is lost...if you keep
it a secret! Why didn`t you tell the world, eh?!``

In conclusion, let me restate my position. India did not conduct the test to provoke Pakistan. The tests were in the offing for over a decade, long before the BJP came to power. The specific timing, if anything, was driven by domestic compulsions. However yes, Advani`s comments were made with the intention of provoking Pakistan.

Did India gain too much by making Pakistan test? Not significantly. But a Pakistan that conducted tests was marginally more desirable than a Pakistan that did not conduct test, given the fact that everyone knew that you people had nukes anyway. India got a companion to bear the brunt of the world`s displeasure. But I don`t think of these achievements as being too important.

Did Pakistan lose too much by conducting the tests? I think not.(here is where i disagree with other Indian posters and agree with hossp). Pakistan was in deep shit anyway. they werent getting any peanuts from the west. The current ``debriefing`` activities would have taken place even if Pakistan hadn`t conducted the tests.

You seem to be saying that Pakistan actually gained something from the tests. And here is where I disagree. What you see as gains, I see as something Pakistan already had
- Military parity. In strictes military terms, if India attacked and Pakistan wanted to respond with a nuke, they could have done that regardless of the tests.
- Talking point. So Mush threatens us with first strike. So what? Pakistan has refused a ``no first strike`` deal from much before 1998. This ``no first strike`` thing didn`t materialise magically after Pokhran. BB and NS in the past have repeatedly rubbished such a pact. In fact, I remember, when I was in high school, in 1995, I took part in an interschool debate about Nuclear Weapons. At that point, me and my teammates had drawn parallels between Pakistan`s refusal to state a ``no first strike`` intent with that of America during the Cold War.

The Constipated Faujiz tahmed32 and hossp

just a couple of points

a) The Brownback I act merely gave the President the authority to waive the Pressler Amendment. It was not exercised and the act finally lapsed. Then came the Brownback II, and again the authority was not exercised. Sanctions under the Pressler Amendment on Pakistan remained in place until September 22, 2001. And I may be reading too much into things, but I believe this little thing called September 11 had a lot to do with that.

b) I don`t think the Indian tests were designing to bring Pakistan out of the nuclear closet. Neither were they a response to Ghauri. They were tests that previous Indian governments had been trying to conduct, but had been foiled by the CIA snoops. With CTBT looming large, it was necessary to get all the data in. India HAD TO conduct the nuclear tests, pakistan or no Pakistan.
Now, once India decided to conduct the tests and went ahead with them (independent of any plans for Pakistan), they would have wanted Pakistan to respond as well. I am an Indian who lives in India and I am telling you that people on the streets were positive that Pakistan had N-bombs. Newspapers regularly printed estimates about Pakistan`s stockpile previous to May `98. The newspapers had already created that awareness.
So Advani`s antics (NOT THE TESTS) were directed at making Pakistan test. More than any sanctions, I think it was the desire not to be the ``only bad guy`` in the neighbourhood.

c) Vajpayee made the peace moves in 1999 because at that time Kashmir was peaceful. terrorism had almost died down, and stats from any sources show `98 and `99 as being the most peaceful years in the valley since 1989. The anti-Pakistan feeling in India, which is associated only with Kashmir, was low. Cricket was being played regularly on neutral as well as each other`s venues. The anti-Pakistan feeling was so low that in Chennai, the Pakistani team got a standing ovation. Gujral had already met Sharif in New York once and set the ball rolling. Vajpayee`s peace moves followed all these signs. If anything, they got a bit postponed by the nuclear tests.
In 1999 the plane got hijacked, and with the release of Omar Saeed, Mushtaq `latram` Zargar and Masood Azhar, terrorism got a new lease of life. Never seen before ``fidayeen`` attacks started shortly afterwards. Then came Kargil. And the anti-Pakistan feeling was back and strong. Cricket stopped, did it not?

If you want to track the Indo-Pak relationship, you should look at the Cricket Index.

Valentine’s Day This was such a cool article. Happy Valentine Day. I spent mine 1200 km away from my sweetheart :(....the mobile phone bill will be a bomb this month, but it`ll be worth it :).

Saudi Arabia, the nerve center of the Islamic world was the one place every Muslim bowed down to five times a day. The Saudis were combating Valentine’s Day by raiding flower shops, gift stores and retail outlets and confiscating everything that resembled a red heart.

But even the Saudis were losing the battle against Valentine’s Day.

You could replace ``Saudis`` with ``Shivsena`` and yet the sentence would ring just as true. Notice how fundos across all religions share a similar thought process?

Maybe romair should start a shivsena fan club too, to go with his mullah fan club. ;)

The Constipated Faujiz Ahmadzai,

I agree with what you write about Mush. People of Pakistan seem to either eulogise him or denigrate him, nothing in between. When he captured power in 1999 and kept talking of ``accountability``, no one asked him why this coup, if it was motivated by a desire to bring accountability in Pakistan, was happened AFTER Nawaz fired Musharraf from the Army Chief`s job. Mush was not even in the country. This means that Mush wasn`t the one who ``masterminded`` the coup. He was worrying about whether his plane could land.

Mush in 1999 was just a front for the top brass of the army.

Mush even now is no different. No one could have done anything different than what he is doing after 9/11. Maybe a civilian government would have taken the chance at Agra to patch up things with India. But then, that civilian govt would have been overthrown by the military anyway, to the chorus of ``Sellout, sellout!!``

But otherwise, from an Indian viewpoint, there is no difference between the leadership of BB, NS and PM.

The Constipated Faujiz Layman

Very true. Too much gloating will end this boom just as it is starting.

However, every indicator is showing a positive improvement. A book has come out recently which makes a detailed study and says that the commonly held belief that ``GDP is growing but employment is falling`` is false. Employment too has grown, and in every sector and strata. If it has reduced, it is from unproductive sector, and will, in the long run, be absorbed elsewhere.

For example, many central and state governments are selling off or closing down lossy PSUs. They were providing employment, but at what cost? The fiscal deficit was growing because of this.

I agree that we have a long way to go. The 8% growth is mainly because last year was a drought year. But do note that even in a drought year India grew at almost 5%. For a country with 60% of its workforce in agriculture that is mainly dependent on monsoons, this is no mean feat. The journey has started. Why feel upset if people are praising the country?

Why dont they write about the thousands of students who have engineering and MBA degrees from second rung colleges and are without a job? Not to mention the armies of BCom, BSc graduates without a job?

Okay, about this issue. I frankly feel that half the engineers/MBAs in this country are not worth the cost of the paper their degrees are printed on. They got into a private engg or MBA college, and crammed or copied their way. Many of them have insufficient knowledge. And they seem to think, just like most indians that a degree is all that is needed for a job, no knowledge.

Let me tell you about these jobless engineers. A friend of mine who works in a software company told me this incident. The company was recruiting engineers for very simple type of coding. They had a requirement for 50 people. They decided to conduct a selection process through referrals, i e they told their employees to recommend names. 150 such names were selected and invited for the test. 1600 turned up, from far off cities!!! The company didn`t mind. The more people, better the competition, they thought.

It was a simple aptitude test with some basic questions about C programming thrown in. I saw the test myself. Very simple for anyone who has passed engineering, or even learnt C. The company kept the test cutoff as low as 50% marks, because the jobs they were hiring for were not very complicated.

You know how many people cleared the test? 31!! 31 engineers out of 1600!!! Now should they be hired just to make our employment scene look good?

They would be well advised to work in call centres instead. Even the BSc;s and BCom`s you mention, are getting jobs in BPO now, by the lakhs.

There is a large number of people holding impressive sounding degrees like ``engineer`` and ``MBA``. India has 800 MBA colleges. You really think that this economy, or any economy for that matter, can give good jobs to the huge number that passes out from these 800 b-schools?

Hopefully there will be a shakeout in the future, similar to the dotcom bust, where only the fittest engg and bschools will survive. Then we wont have a computer engineer, who doesnt know syntax of C, but wants to be paid 15,000 rupees a month.

layman, welcome to capitalism.

History, Culture and the Mullahs Respected Saint Romair

Just some friendly advice. Get a map. Got it? Good! Nowlook slightly to the left of Pakistan, just a bit...yes...there it is Afghanistan!! Now go back in time. Say, to 1996. Read some news reports about what used to happen there until 2001. Okay? Now go back to your interact #39 which might well be named ``Poor Innocent Little Mullahs`` and read it again.

#27 taqat-e-parvaaz

I would like some knowledgeble Pakistanis or North Indians to shed some light on this festival Basant. It is happily called a ``Hindu`` festival, but I never recall having celebrated it. I have lived in maharashtra, MP, the South and a little bit in eastern UP, but I dont recall any holiday for Basant, or anyone even wishing each other for Basant.

When, according to the Hindu calendar, is this festival celebrated? Is it the same as Basant-Panchami, which i recall as just being some minor note on the calendar?

Or is it big, mainly in states bordering Pakistan, like Punjab and J&K?

All I can gather is Basant is the festival where people fly kites. And I know the word Basant means spring. Other than that I have very little idea of this ``Hindu`` festival. Initially I used to think it was Holi, but reports of Basant celebrations in pakistani papers come much before Holi.

Please enlighten me!

The Nuclear Noose Around Pakistan’s Neck tahmed32 #291

Response to your point a)
- Okay, I am not yet sure about your views on China`s desire to build/buy aircraft carriers. Even now, you are insisting that China is being ``realistic`` and hence ``focussing`` on a coastal navy. Aleph and I have said time and again that China has been trying to build a blue water navy, but has been thwarted by American pressure. And these are not just guesses as you doubted in one post. Please read my #221 where i have given links from the Global Security site that talks about the PLA`s efforts to get a carrier. Alephnull...or someone else, has also posted another link later on. If despite this, you stick to your opinion, that China`s choice of sticking to coastal navy is not a Hobson`s choice, I can`t really say much more. Maybe you doubt the veracity of the links.

Taiwan is the main reason America is not letting anyone sell China a carrier. Russia is selling it to India, but not China, because America says so. This is not USSR, tahmedjee, this is Russia, which follows American diktats. America does not mind India having a carrier because it sees India as a friendly state, even a potential ally in the Indian Ocean, and if need be, in the Pacific rim. America has blocked Russia`s sale of the cryogenic engine to India in the past too, remember?

China has not ruled out force as a way of annexing Taiwan. Read this report -

Communist China`s Taiwan Invasion Threat

The first line itself says - On January 30 1996, Communist China`s Premier Li Peng emphasized that in trying to absorb Taiwan as ``a region of China...in the final analysis, we cannot promise to give up the use of force.``

The whole report will tell you many facts that will clear up the misconceptions you have about China. And you will appreciate why, even while working to resolve all issues with China, India has to at least make an effort to keep up with it militarily, for the sake of deterrence.

About Vikrant, glad you mentioned the Seventh fleet. Sending the Ghazi was the right move in my opinion. The Vikrant was sure to be used in the attack on EP through the sea-route. Had the Ghazi been successful in sinking Vikrant, it would have made a big difference.

Response to your point 2)
- I guess our views on militarisation are quite different. let us just agree to disagree on this point. However, regarding Japan and Germany opposing militarisation after WW2, again, it was a Hobson`s choice.....where Hobson = USA.

Responding to point 3)
Pakistan needs to keep its guard up. It needs to possess all weapons necessary for defence as well as counter attack(missiles), even if tomorrow the country is ruled by a perfectly democratic government. i am not opposed to there being a strong military in pakistan. It is a country of 15 crore people, it should have a strong military. I am just opposed to the military ruling the country and being in control of the policy-making. Let Pakistan build n-bombs, missiles, everything. You never know what might happen tomorrow. India may have a jingoistic leader who decides to attack POK. USA might just decide to ``liberate`` Pakistan. So I agree Sir, in fact I heartily support your view that pakistan should keep its guard up. I just don`t understand your classification of Pakistan and China`s militarisation as necessary, defensive , realistic, etc and that of India`s as jingoistic, aggressive unnecessary, wasteful and paranoid.

About Advani`s comments after the 1998 Pokhran blasts. well, though this has been stated by other posters before, I shall paraphrase. Pakistan`s nuclear weapons did not become a ``deterrent`` on 29th May. Pakistan nuclear weapons became a deterrent the day that Pakistan acquired/built them. In the minds of the Indian government, the nuclear-deadlock has existed since the 80s. All that Pokhran-Chagtai did was give Pakistan the ability to rattle the nuclear sabre in public. While from the viewpoint of a pacifist, I can understand why you thought Advani`s comments were dumb, from a strategic as well as tactical point of view, they were brilliant. As someone said before, the intent was to drag Pakistan, kicking and screaming, out of the nuclear closet. And he succeeded. Sanctions were imposed on pakistan as well, whom they hurt much much much more than us.

And tahmed, dont forget that Pakistan in 1998(or even now) was not this benign country going about life peacefully. It has been waging proxy war against india for 2 decades, created the Taliban so that it could ``outsource`` the proxy war to Afghanistan....or to use jargon, for ``strategic depth``. Think of things in the right perspective and you see why the nuclear tests were a brillaint move.

The Nuclear Noose Around Pakistan’s Neck gujjubania

Everything is fair if done keeping the country`s interest in mind . In my very humble way , I have tried to do that.

Even if one puts down your ``humble`` use of vulgarity to your overenthusiastic patriotism, your repeated insistence in quoting Purchasing Power Parity figures and extrapolating the Q3-FY04 8.4% growth shows your limited knowledge of macroeconomics. And your arrogant persistence shows your unwillingness to learn the right thing.

I hope you get into an IIT, so that you go through the Eco course in first year, where they use a Samuelson textbook.

Maybe you will learn that a GDP of $500 billion growing at 6.5-7% is quite impressive as well. And you shouldn`t quote the 3-trillion-ppp figure especially while referring to defence purchases.