Which you do NOT get by attacking a nuclear power.
And India will know for sure that the rebels hold them how ? As for soldiers, if India invades during a civil conflict, what makes you think they’ll feel the need to wait for orders ? If the US government was killed off somehow in the Cold War and the Soviets invaded, do you really think our military wouldn’t have launched, orders or not ?
Oh, and under those circumstances, the rebels could ask for help from the soldiers who DO know how to use those weapons, and get it.
Nope. Too sane. If Stalin wasn’t that nuts, then I don’t see why the comparatively meek and mild India would.
That link is to the page on the Indian state of Jammu and Kashmir, which is already as annexed by India as you’re going to get. I suppose India might try to take Azad Kashmir. India does not control that, as evidenced by the masses of Indian and Pakistani armed forces on either side of the line of control.
Characterizing a nation as “meek” and “mild” is not a political analysis.
It is anthropomorphizing.
Nations act on their percieved intrests.
They can [ul]
[li]Use force[/li][li]Negotiate.[/li][li]Spend money.[/li][/ul]
There are no other options.
[list=A]
[li]Is Pakistan a threat to India y/n?[/li][li]Will the attack end that threat y/n?[/li][li]Are there enough resources to do it y/n?[/li][li]Do we know where the atomic weapons are y/n?[/li][li]Will it work y/n?[/li][/list]
Claiming a nation to have perceived interests is ALSO anthropomorphizing.
Really, anthropomorphizing an organization made, composed of and run by humans is perfectly reasonable, at least to a degree. For that matter, it’s quite hard to talk about such an organization without doing so.
Oh ? They can also use propaganda, or simply do nothing.
No, it will be made like this :
1 : Attacking a country that has nuclear weapons is insanity.
In other news, Bush suspects al-Qaeda may be in some respects hostile to American interests. Further study may be needed.
Meanwhile, Pakistan’s media urge calm after Chaudhry’s victory; “newspapers warned democratic forces on Saturday that destabilizing President Pervez Musharraf further could play into militant and extremist hands.” Which it could, of course, but I’m wondering how free is the Pakistani press. Does anyone know?
To answer the OP question, not at the moment. We are trying to work with Musharref as he walks a tightrope between us and islamic fundamentalists. The haven that AQ has on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border will remain as long as the United States does not cross into Pakistani territory. That status quo will remain until and unless another 9/11 scale attack happens on american soil. After that, all bets are off.
Another attack on that scale will mark a fundamental change in our society. It only took one Pearl Harbor to focus the country in 1941. These days it appears that it will take two.
:dubious: :mad: I should hope not! We have already had far, far too much of that the past six years! The kind of “fundamental change” our society needs now has nothing to do with foreign terrorism and everything to do with domestic class relations!