[/SUP]I did not read this as a threat - rather as an expression of India’s capability. There is a difference. Chidambaram brushed aside this thought. So your point is?
Re: India rejects trilateral security pact with Australia, US..
Oh bhai, why are you wasting time… You can provide all the sources in the world he is still going to deny, Living in full denial is the hall mark of Indians. Save the bandwidth please…
Re: India rejects trilateral security pact with Australia, US..
obviously you have not read anything wrote. CM invented his own battle, imagined his own challenge and posed a question to me based on that imagination. Hence I have referred him to read read up on Don Quixote. If you think I should still take up that meaningless and irrelevant challenge, first explain to me why, then we’ll see
Re: India rejects trilateral security pact with Australia, US..
Nothing was answered in 22. If you recall when there were rumors that Israel may potentially attack Iran, what did Iran do? It took it as a threat. When the enemy nation states they have intentions to carry out such attacks or have the ability to do so and will do so if needed that is a direct threat.
Regardless how you wish to spin it even the Indian media considered it a threat of incursion.
Re: India rejects trilateral security pact with Australia, US..
^ I agree that it was a semi-threat - that India is capable of it per the military leader. however, Chidambaran dismissed the idea. Does that make any difference to you?
Bottom line for me is, as a person living abroad, it is more imprtant for me to choose my words carefully and not inflame the situation in that region. So I prefer to see glass as half full. To me, a life lost is a life lost, whether it is east of the border or the west.