Nuclear War in South Asia?

drbrumley

Well-known member
Once again, the bitter India-Pakistan dispute in Kashmir endangers the world, says Eric S. Margolis.

INDIA AND PAKISTAN RATTLE THEIR NUCLEAR SABRES

While Americans were obsessing over a third-rate actor’s fake claims of a racial assault, old foes India and Pakistan were rattling their nuclear weapons in a very dangerous crisis over Kashmir. But hardly anyone noticed that nuclear war could break out in South Asia.

India and Pakistan, both nuclear-armed, have fought four wars over divided Kashmir since 1947, the lovely mountain state of forests and lakes whose population is predominantly Muslim. India controls two thirds of Kashmir; Pakistan and China the rest. This bitter dispute, one of the world’s oldest confrontations, has defied all attempts to resolve it.

Once again, the bitter Kashmir dispute endangers the rest of the world. The great powers should be pressing both India and Pakistan to reach a compromise on this problem. But India has long opposed internationalization of the issue, saying it is a domestic Indian matter. It is difficult to imagine the current Hindu nationalist government in Delhi backing down over Kashmir. But India must be very cautious because behind Pakistan stands its ally China which shares a long, often poorly-defined border with India. Kashmir, not Korea, is the world’s most dangerous border.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
In what scenario would the US get involved?
I say we step in now and tell them if they don't resolve this peacefully, we'll divide it up for them, and establish a military presence there to enforce the peace. Preventing nuclear war is in our best interest, and is in the interest of the entire international neighborhood.

Another option would be to have them draw lots to have one of them divide up the land, and then have the other one pick which half they want. That way whoever draws the line makes it as fair as possible, so that there's no clear advantage given to either side.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
I say we step in now and tell them if they don't resolve this peacefully, we'll divide it up for them, and establish a military presence there to enforce the peace. Preventing nuclear war is in our best interest, and is in the interest of the entire international neighborhood.

Another option would be to have them draw lots to have one of them divide up the land, and then have the other one pick which half they want. That way whoever draws the line makes it as fair as possible, so that there's no clear advantage given to either side.

That's just a great way to...

make things worse.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
They did that 70 years ago, and they're still squabbling over the edges
Then let's go enforce the currently existing line. Once we build our wall here in the US, let's build another barrier there and then they don't have to squabble over it anymore.

:idunno:
 

ok doser

lifeguard at the cement pond
What do we get from Pakistan?

Terrorists


What do we get from India?

Ineffective tech support and malware



Let 'em blow each other up :wave2:
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
:blabla:

If you don't have anything to add, then you should just butt out.

It was a valid comment to your asinine post. Your "solution" would only make things worse although I don't for a second expect you to realize the why and how.

Although, by all means explain how the USA would "step in" and how things would be sorted out via such military methods and if not, why on earth they'd agree to "draw lots"?!

Do you even think some of these things through or do you just type them out on a whim?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Why do WE have to build it?
WE don't. In fact, let's have both countries build it, and if any issues arise during construction, have them draw lots to determine which side gets to build that stretch of wall, maximum one mile.
 

Arthur Brain

Well-known member
WE don't. In fact, let's have both countries build it, and if any issues arise during construction, have them draw lots to determine which side gets to build that stretch of wall, maximum one mile.

Yay, just that simple! They'll be amenable to that and then all conflict, tension will just magically disappear!

:dunce:
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
It was a valid comment to your asinine post.

No, it was your opinion on my solution.

I know you think highly of yourself, Arty, but your opinions aren't valid just because you voice them.

Your "solution" would only make things worse

And you have yet so even attempt to show how.

although I don't for a second expect you to realize the why and how.

:blabla:

Although, by all means explain how the USA would "step in" and how things would be sorted out via such military methods and if not, why on earth they'd agree to "draw lots"?!

Do you even think some of these things through or do you just type them out on a whim?

:blabla:

Poor Artie, he thinks he's so smart, but he really just can't comprehend how a neighborhood of nations should interact.
 
Top