India Coffee House Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : India Coffee House

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: ChinuSFO who wrote (12205)	6/8/2002 12:24:04 AM
From: Nandu	Read Replies (2) of 12475

JPR, it would be suicidal for the US and the British troops to be stationed on the LoC. And here is why. These troops, if they are stationed on the Afghan/Pakistan border would not be that vulnerable to attacks from the Osamas and Talibanis since they have air cover and surveillance from US base in Kandahar. Instead, if they move to the LoC, then they have nowhere to go if there is a military confrontation between them and terrorists who have infiltrated and infested the Pakistani side of the LoC. Well, the patrol might be the proverbial head of the camel. Fact is, for the war on terror to continue, troops are this border. Al Qaeda is now happily settled in Pakistan and with coalition troops turning up the heat on the Afghan border, they will move to PoK and the J&K. US wouldn't want to make the same mistake they made in Afghanistan, viz. attacking the terrorists without first cutting off their escape (or relying on Pak troops to cut off the escape). This time US wants to be sure they are confined to Pakistan where they can be destroyed. Hence the need for troops on the LoC.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next