|
Posted on 08/01/2007 10:32:19 PM PDT by nwctwx
|
Phone sales trigger suspicions, again (WI)
http://www.thenorthwestern.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070806/OSH/308060048/1987
Thank you for the ping.
>>Particular threats against India may be an attempt to promote an India - Pakistan conflict - a conflict that would allow AQ to solidify its base of operations in that country (as long as the conflict doesn’t go nuclear).<<
” . . .Pakistan is a very large country. Its population is more than 150 million, or six times that of Iraq. Its land area is roughly twice that of Iraq; its perimeter is about 50 percent longer in total. Stabilizing a country of this size could easily require several times as many troops as the Iraq mission—a figure of up to one million is easy to imagine. . . “
http://www3.brookings.edu/views/articles/ohanlon/2007april_kagan.pdf
Preventing Nuclear Catastrophe in South Asia
(excerpted)
. . . Of all the military scenarios that would undoubtedly involve the vital interests of the United States, short of a direct threat to its territory, a collapsed Pakistan ranks very high on the list. The combination of Islamic extremists and nuclear weapons in that country is extremely worrisome. Were parts of Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal ever to fall into the wrong hands, Al Qaeda could conceivably gain access to a nuclear device with terrifying possible results. Another quite worrisome South Asia scenario could involve another Indo-Pakistani crisis leading to war between the two nuclear armed states over Kashmir.
The Pakistani collapse scenario appears unlikely, given that country’s relatively pro-Western and secular officer corps. But the intelligence services—which created the Taliban and also have condoned, if not abetted, Islamic extremists in Kashmir—are more of a wild card. In addition, the country as a whole is sufficiently infiltrated by fundamentalist groups—as the attempted assassinations against President Mubarak make clear—that this terrifying scenario of civil chaos must be taken seriously.2
Were this to occur, it is unclear what the United States and like-minded countries would or should do. It is very unlikely that “surgical strikes” could be conducted to destroy the nuclear weapons before extremists could make a grab at them. It is doubtful that the United States would know their location and at least as doubtful that any Pakistani government would countenance such a move, even under duress. If a surgical strike, a series of surgical strikes, or commando-style raids were not possible, the only option might be to try to restore order before the weapons could be taken by extremists and transferred to terrorists. The United States and other outside powers might, for example, come to the aid of the Pakistani government, at its request, to help restore order.
Alternatively, they might try to help protect Pakistan’s borders (a nearly impossible task), making it hard to sneak nuclear weapons out of the country, while providing only technical support to the Pakistani armed forces as they tried to put down the insurrection. One thing is certain: given the enormous stakes, the United States would have to do anything it could to prevent nuclear weapons from getting into the wrong hands.
Should stabilization efforts be required, the scale of the undertaking could be breathtaking.
Pakistan is a very large country. Its population is more than 150 million, or six times that of Iraq. Its land area is roughly twice that of Iraq; its perimeter is about 50 percent longer in total. Stabilizing a country of this size could easily require several times as many troops as the Iraq mission—a figure of up to one million is easy to imagine.
Of course, any international force would have local help. Presumably some fraction of Pakistan’s security forces would remain intact, able, and willing to help defend the country. Pakistan’s military numbers 550,000 Army troops; 70,000 uniformed personnel in the Air Force and Navy; another 510,000 reservists; and almost 300,000 gendarmes and Interior Ministry troops. But if some substantial fraction of the military broke off from the main body, say a quarter to a third, and was assisted by extremist militias, the international community might need to deploy 100,000 to 200,000 troops to ensure a quick restoration of order. Given the need for rapid response, the United States’ share of this total would probably be over half—or as many as 50,000 to 100,000 ground forces—although this is almost the best of all the worst-case scenarios.
Since no US government could simply decide to restrict its exposure in Pakistan if the international community proved unwilling or unable to provide numerous forces, or if the Pakistani collapse were deeper than outlined here, the United States might be compelled to produce significantly more forces to fend off the prospect of a nuclear Al Qaeda.
What about the scenario of war pitting Pakistan against India over Kashmir?
It is highly doubtful that the United States would by choice take sides in such a conflict, actively allying with one country to defeat the other. US interests in the matter of who controls Kashmir are not sufficient to justify such intervention; no formal alliance commitments oblige the United States to step in. Moreover, the military difficulty of the operation would be extreme, in light of the huge armed forces arrayed on the subcontinent, coupled with the inland location and complex topography of Kashmir.
There are other ways in which foreign forces might become involved, however. If India and Pakistan went up to the verge of nuclear weapons use, or perhaps even crossed it, they might consider what was previously unthinkable to New Delhi in particular—pleading to the international community for help. For example, they might agree to accept international administration of Kashmir for a period of years. After local government was built up, and security services reformed, elections might then be held to determine the region’s future political affiliation, leading to an eventual end of the trusteeship.
While this scenario is admittedly a highly demanding one—and also unlikely in light of India’s adamant objections to international involvement in the Kashmir issue—it is hard to dismiss such an approach out of hand if it seemed the only alternative to nuclear war on the subcontinent.
Not only could such a war have horrendous human consequences, killing many tens of millions, and shattering the taboo on the use of nuclear weapons that is so essential to global stability today, it could also lead to the collapse of Pakistan—thus raising the same types of concerns about that country’s nuclear weapons falling into the wrong hands that are discussed above.
What might a stabilization mission in Kashmir entail? The region is about twice the size of Bosnia in population, half the size of Iraq in population and land area. That suggests initial stabilization forces in the general range of 100,000, with the US contribution being perhaps 30,000 to 50,000. The mission would only make sense if India and Pakistan truly welcomed it, so there would be little point in deploying a force large enough to hold its own against resistance by one of those countries. But robust monitoring of border regions, as well as capable counterinsurgent/counterterrorist strike forces, would be core to any such mission. . .
THANK YOU.
PING to Oorang’s post regarding Oil Tanker.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1875105/posts?page=499#499
Thank you.
USSTRATCOM is going bananas too....lots of traffic
Thank you Velveeta.
I added it to the cell phone thread.
(http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1682087/posts )
Thank you callmejoe.
Interesting.
Well, this is good news.
#
UPDATE:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1877432/posts
“Spammer gets 30 years in the slammer”
Channel Register ^ | 8/2/07 | Austin Modine
Posted on 08/06/2007 10:15:18 PM PDT by LibWhacker
You don’t sound like a nut. You sound like a prepper. Nothing wrong with that, imho.
You’re welcome.
What does that mean, Karl?
Excellent, thanks.
Bombs in Bedford (NH)
BEDFORD – Police found three homemade bombs in several driveways in a residential neighborhood yesterday morning.
“Someone could have been killed,” Bedford detective Matt Fleming said.
Most of Regency Drive was locked down yesterday morning after police, who responded to a 9 a.m. call about a theft, were told there was a suspicious looking object in a driveway. Bedford officials quickly called in the State Police Bomb Squad and agents from the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
Police spent the next three hours examining the bombs, talking to witnesses and gathering evidence. No one was injured. By early afternoon, the bombs had been defused.[snip]
Thanks for the heads up.
It looks to me like the intel chatter is heavy enough in volume that even the media is picking it up.
There’s been peaks in the chatter and no attacks before, and foiled attacks before, but have to agree the threat level is up right now.
Who knows, maybe this time they’ll screw up and give me a chance to step on some terrorist heads?
Thanks for the ping Ian. Hope all is going well with TM.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=russia
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=georgia
#
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1877441/posts
“Georgia says it was bombed by Russian jets”
Reuters ^ | Tue Aug 7, 2007 | Margarita Antidze
Posted on 08/06/2007 11:36:04 PM PDT by Blackyce
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6933034.stm
Last Updated: Monday, 6 August 2007, 11:37 GMT 12:37 UK
“Surge in police anti-terror stops”
ARTICLE SNIPPET: “Anti-terror stop and searches in London have risen five-fold since the alleged attempted car bomb attacks in June.
Metropolitan Police chiefs said officers were making more use of special powers to “deter, disrupt and prevent terrorist activity”.
Provisional figures reveal there were almost 11,000 stops in July - five times more than the monthly average.
Under the controversial law, officers can stop and search people without needing to suspect them of a crime.”
ARTICLE SNIPPET: “”Terrorists live, work and blend in to our communities. They need information; accommodation; transport; communications; material; and storage.
“Terrorists can come from any background and live anywhere. They are as likely to be seen in quiet suburban roads as they are in inner-city areas.”
There have been a large number of coded messages being sent out since Sunday morning from US STRATCOM, which is the old Strategic Air Command. Some say there is a huge exercise going on....but it has gone from 1 or 2 a night to 10 an hour.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
