Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): June 30, 2011

Rana · Post by **Rana** » 12 Jul 2011 19:23

Pakistan hesitates to eradicate U.S.-mapped militant camps

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... -militant/

Drudge Report linking is making this page very active. Read the comments.

Mort Walker · Post by **Mort Walker** » 12 Jul 2011 19:47

^^^One of the comments were:

Hard to understand Pakistan's logic in protecting these groups when they are killing people inside the country that protects them. Its like feeding a pet alligator your children in the hope it won't eat you.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 12 Jul 2011 20:22

SSridhar wrote:
rajanb wrote:a)The ISI could push AAZ across the border into the hands of the AQ located in Afghanistan.
Or
b) The flied lice could help slip AAZ overland (theirs) and into hiding elsewhere?
In spite of the fact that 120 Special Ops trainers were expelled from Pakistan after Abbottabad, I am somehow convinced that TSP is still swarming with enough CIA men to monitor such double-cross. Just two weeks back, the US accused Pakistan of leaking info about IED-making factories to the terrorists allowing them to escape. The PA/ISI must therefore be unsure about making any move wrt AAZ, not sure if they will be caught once again. This will be far more serious than anything before. The credibility of TSP is so low today (never been high though) that even if AAZ escapes on his own without PA/ISI's help, the world will believe the US if it says it has proof that the PA helped him escape. Such is the nutcracker.

SS, Agreed that the US has them against the ropes. But the Pakis are past masters of the duck and weave.

In exchange for the flied lice getting AAZ away, the flied lice could strike a bargain with AAZ to halt any problems with the AQ's assets on their territory? And it would be a coup de grace for the flied lice. Shafting Unkil and protecting their deeper than the deep fliend.

A couple of years, after 9/11, I read a report in the public domain, that India had shared intel with the US, about a convoy travelling close to Aksai Chin, with OBL on board. The, then US administration, did not take cognisance of our Intel. When OBL met his end in Abbotabad, our reaction was "We told you so".

The flied lice have a lot to gain out of this stand-off between the US and the Pakis. And so far the speed with which they have stepped up, has been true to their public utterances of support for the Pakis.

Pakis giving up AAZ is a remotest possibility. Shoving him into the Afghan AQ is a mid way solution. The yanks have a major headache on their hands.

The American populace and media is beginning to get restive and is now echoing what the US forces always claimed in private. That, whom the Pakis capture, come back again to fight. Obama and the democrats have an election to fight. The Republicans breathing down their neck.

The next four weeks, with the various visits to S. Asia, may give us a clue.

38 killed in a drone strike in 24 hours is another hardening of the US position.

Toss the dice and see how it rolls!

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 12 Jul 2011 20:24

^^^
However, the best comment and responses are:

Two words... Cruise Missiles. Break out the big boom sticks if they fail to act. For every tomahawk we have to launch that is $1 million less they get in "aid"

and

Two more words... B2 bombers

and

AC-130

and

Agreed. Make it so that they lie awake at night sweating profusely at the thought of glimpsing the outline of a Spectre crossing the moon above them

and

Brilliant idea. I don't think they should get any aid. But, if they are getting any aid, your idea is an excellent condition to that aid. $1 million less for every tomahawk fired. I love it

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 12 Jul 2011 20:29

^^^flied ice??

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 12 Jul 2011 20:29

the imperial power is preparing a show em who's boss massacre of the natives...

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Jul 2011 20:31

abhishek_sharma wrote:Pakistan's demographic dilemma

Perhaps someone can explain how urbanization is taking place without industrialization. Without an income how do you eat and where do you live in a city?

Pakistan is experiencing rapid urbanization; while a third of the country's people have long been rurally based, at least 50 percent of the population is expected to live in cities by the 2020s....

...Additionally, if Pakistanis are to be gainfully employed, the economy must be large enough to absorb them, no simple feat in a labor economy that at present creates only a million new jobs a year...

Rahul Shukla · Post by **Rahul Shukla** » 12 Jul 2011 20:31

Droneacharya stimulates economy-e-jannat by providing eternal employment to 3,240 houries [U.S. drone strikes kill 45 suspected militants in Pakistan (Reuters)]

At least 45 suspected militants were killed by missiles launched by U.S. drone aircraft in Pakistan's northwest, local intelligence officials said on Tuesday, one of the largest death tolls to date in the controversial air bombing campaign.

Coming a day after Washington announced an $800 million delay in military assistance amid worsening U.S.-Pakistan ties... piloted drones fired nine missiles into a militant compound and at a vehicle in North Waziristan, killing 25 suspected insurgents, local intelligence officials said. Another strike hours later in South Waziristan killed five suspected militants. Then on Tuesday morning, a drone fired two missiles at another compound in North Waziristan.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Jul 2011 20:34

Code: Select all

Pakistan
Population (thousands)
All Variants
1950-2100

Year   Medium      High          Low           Constant fertility
1950 	 37,542 	 37,542 	 37,542 	 37,542
1955 	 41,109 	 41 109 	 41 109 	 41 109
1960 	 45,920 	 45 920 	 45 920 	 45 920
1965 	 51,993 	 51 993 	 51 993 	 51 993
1970 	 59,383 	 59 383 	 59 383 	 59 383
1975 	 68,483 	 68 483 	 68 483 	 68 483
1980 	 80,493 	 80 493 	 80 493 	 80 493
1985 	 95,470 	 95 470 	 95 470 	 95 470
1990 	111 845 	111 845 	111 845 	111 845
1995 	127 347 	127 347 	127 347 	127 347
2000 	144 522 	144 522 	144 522 	144 522
2005 	158 645 	158 645 	158 645 	158 645
2010 	173 593 	173 593 	173 593 	173 593
2015 	189 648 	191 378 	187 919 	192 422
2020 	205 364 	210 189 	200 540 	213 758
2025 	220 609 	229 589 	211 629 	237 213
2030 	234 432 	247 779 	221 103 	261 599
2035 	246 789 	264 967 	228 766 	287 169
2040 	257 778 	281 781 	234 396 	314 904
2045 	267 240 	298 374 	237 695 	345 569
2050 	274 875 	314 272 	238 538 	379 242
2055 	280 486 	328 856 	237 045 	415 670
2060 	283 959 	341 769 	233 311 	454 747
2065 	285 455 	353 298 	227 493 	496 968
2070 	285 191 	363 895 	219 755 	543 245
2075 	283 420 	373 869 	210 376 	594 497
2080 	280 415 	383 325 	199 757 	651 358
2085 	276 466 	392 285 	188 372 	714 296
2090 	271 822 	400 837 	176 629 	783 759
2095 	266 703 	409 175 	164 873 	860 368
2100 	261 271 	417 464 	153 363 	944 843

http://esa.un.org/unpd/wpp/unpp/p2k0data.asp

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Jul 2011 20:47

IMO, if the urbanization figures for Pakistan are correct, then it is only apparently in dire financial straits, the underlying economy must be healthy.

http://www.riazhaq.com/2009/09/urbaniza ... st-in.html

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Jul 2011 20:54

Hmm, urbanization without economic growth is possible - African nations are the main examples, we are told. Is Pakistan a mini-Africa, economically speaking?
http://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/2412.html

To find out why African countries'experience with urbanization and sustained growth appeared to differ from that of other countries, the authors investigated the determinants of urbanization across countries over 40 years. Rather than studying individuals'decisions to migrate, they relied on macroeconomic data and cross-country comparisons. A central hypothesis of their study: that individuals move (with varying degrees of ease) in response to economic incentives and opportunities. If location incentives are distorted, so is growth.

The authors find that urbanization levels are closely correlated with levels of income. But urbanization continues even during periods of negative growth, carried by its own momentum, largely a function of the level of urbanization. From that viewpoint, Africa's urbanization without growth is not a puzzle.

Factors other than income that help predict differences in levels of urbanization across countries include: a) income structure; b) education; c) rural-urban wage differentials; d) ethnic tensions; and e) civil disturbances. In addition, the relationship between economic incentives and urbanization is weaker in countries with fewer civil or political liberties.

Factors other than initial urbanization level that help explain the speed of urbanization include: 1) The sector from which income growth is derived; 2) ethnic tensions; 3) civil disturbances and democracy (these two slow the pace of urbanization if all else is constant); 4) rural-urban wage differentials, whether they represent an urban bias or simply lower productivity in agriculture relative to other sectors.

The weak relationship that this study shows between urbanization and traditionally accepted migration factors suggests that in Africa economists are overlooking part of the urbanization story. The fact that the informal sector appears to provide a significant source of income for urban migrants, coupled with the overlap between rural and urban activities, may shed light on the nature of urbanization in Africa.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 12 Jul 2011 20:58

Perhaps someone can explain how urbanization is taking place without industrialization. Without an income how do you eat and where do you live in a city?

villages are bleak - landlords and their private armies, jihad factories, pressure on land holdings due to fragmentation - on top of that lack of water and money to buy fertilizer and seed.

urban areas offer the chance to do trades, daily wage, part time maid, construction kind of work atleast.

lets not forget Karachi is one of largest cities in world by population and it will grow bigger...

think somalia with 1000x population and 1000x the number of armed brigands and warlords...thats the future of pakistan + a pathan caliphate in the mountains + drug lords/secular mafia running their own parallel economy.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Jul 2011 21:09

A_Gupta wrote:
abhishek_sharma wrote:Pakistan's demographic dilemma
Perhaps someone can explain how urbanization is taking place without industrialization. Without an income how do you eat and where do you live in a city?
...

Its more like Islamization. The process creates more and more urban agglomeration. People want to be near large cities which host their mosques.

Feroz Tughlaq introduced fakirs and beggars as part of his Islamist drive in Dilli. And it has been growing since then.

saip · Post by **saip** » 12 Jul 2011 21:14

ravi_ku wrote:^^^flied ice??

Are u talking of 'flied lice' ? It is Fried Rice. Do you get it?

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 Jul 2011 21:32

Mort Walker wrote:^^^One of the comments were:

Hard to understand Pakistan's logic in protecting these groups when they are killing people inside the country that protects them. Its like feeding a pet alligator your children in the hope it won't eat you.

With 3.6 kids per "woman" and for 4 legal wives, that's 14.4 kids (not including goats and sheep) to each abdul. And you get to keep that alligator for show and tell. Am I being mean here?

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 Jul 2011 21:34

A_Gupta wrote:Perhaps someone can explain how urbanization is taking place without industrialization. Without an income how do you eat and where do you live in a city?

Kufr!! Don't you know Allah provides for all pakis?

saip · Post by **saip** » 12 Jul 2011 21:37

You are not mean but your math looks like madrassa math!. First of all, all the abduls cant get 4 bibis (the sex ratio is less than one). And there is no evidence that the fertility rate stays same if each abdul gets four wives. Chances are it will drop.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 Jul 2011 21:39

ramana wrote:
A_Gupta wrote:Perhaps someone can explain how ....Without an income how do you eat and where do you live in a city?
Its more like Islamization. The process creates more and more urban agglomeration. People want to be near large cities which host their mosques.

Cities are where Zakat and menial jobs are. Whoever heard of village folks in an Islamic country being charitable? To begin with, they themselves don't have enough to eat. Hence urbanization.

anupmisra · Post by **anupmisra** » 12 Jul 2011 21:40

saip wrote:You are not mean but your math looks like madrassa math!. First of all, all the abduls cant get 4 bibis (the sex ratio is less than one). And there is no evidence that the fertility rate stays same if each abdul gets four wives. Chances are it will drop.

Spoil sport!

ManuT · Post by **ManuT** » 12 Jul 2011 21:43

abhishek_sharma wrote:
SSridhar wrote: TSPA Capable of Fighting Without US Assistance
US aid cut: Pakistan threatens to pull back troops from Afghan border

Pakistan on Tuesday threatened to pull back its troops from the border with Afghanistan, as defence minister Chaudhry Ahmad Mukhtar said his country could not afford to keep forces deployed there following the suspension of US military assistance.

And now this is from 'the handbook of Op Parakram hissy fits'. So predictable. Boring. Yawn.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Jul 2011 21:50

Pulliing back those troops from Afghan border (if they are really there!) where they provide cover for Taliban terrorists will allow the US to conduct hot pursuit ops.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Jul 2011 22:15

IMO, without census, every statistic in Pakistan is based on sample surveys. Correctly weighting the samples to get a provincial or national average is tough, if you didn't have a census in the first place.

The sample design methodology is here:
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/fbs/content/methodology-4

Each city/town has been divided into enumeration blocks consisting of 200-250 households identifiable through sketch map. Each enumeration block has been classified into three categories of income groups i.e. low, middle and high, keeping in view the living standard of the majority of the people. List of villages published by Population Census Organization obtained as a consequence of Population Census 1998 has been taken as rural frame.

A. Urban Domain: Islamabad, Lahore, Gujranwala, Faisalabad, Rawalpindi, Multan, Bahawalpur, Sargodha, Sialkot, Karachi, Hyderabad, Sukkur, Peshawar and Quetta, have been considered as large sized cities. Each of these cities constitutes a separate stratum and has further been sub-stratified according to low, middle and high-income groups. After excluding population of large sized cities, the remaining urban population in each defunct Division in all the provinces has been grouped together to form a stratum.
B. Rural Domain: Each district in Punjab, Sindh and NWFP provinces has been grouped together to constitute a stratum. Whereas defunct administrative Division has been treated as stratum in Balochistan province.
Sample Size and Its Allocation: Keeping in view the objectives of the National/Provincial Level survey the sample size has been fixed at approximately 17600 households comprising 1252 sample villages/ enumeration blocks, which is expected to produce reliable results at provincial level. For the District level survey the sample is fixed at approximately 79600 households comprising 5563 sample villages / enumeration blocks, which is expected to produce reliable results at district level.

The above mentioned 5563 sample villages/enumeration blocks are 2333 Urban and 3230 Rural, as per the table given there.

There definitely appears to be an urban bias in the samples and further if the samples are not weighted correctly, then the district/provincial/national averages will be wrong.

I suppose if the urban sample is overweighted, the Pakistani stats **may**
1. overstate urbanization
2. underestimate fertility and pop. growth rate (assuming urban fertility is less)
3. underestimate rural population, total population
4. overestimate standard of living (if urban standard of living is higher than rural)

PS: what we should try to get and what might be reliable are rural averages and urban averages, separately.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Jul 2011 22:35

Pakistan's own stats
http://www.statpak.gov.pk/fbs/population_publications
do not support the story of urbanization.

Code: Select all

Millions
Year      Urban   Rural        Urban/Rural
2001     47.73    85.91       0.556
2003     49.64    89.33       0.556
2006     51.87    95.22       0.545
2007     52.80    97.05       0.544

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Jul 2011 22:44

A_Gupta shouldn't you X-Post Pak stats in the Economic Watch thread also?

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 12 Jul 2011 23:00

Apparently Petraeus replacement Gen. James Mattis was in TSP but Kayani was "unavailable" to meet him. He instead met with Gen. Wynne, the Chairman of JCSC

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 12 Jul 2011 23:02

saip wrote:
ravi_ku wrote:^^^flied ice??
Are u talking of 'flied lice' ? It is Fried Rice. Do you get it?

still too thick I guess

is it an acronynm for taller than gorges, thicker than blood, deeper than mountains chacha??

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 12 Jul 2011 23:03

ramana, done!

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 12 Jul 2011 23:25

Ravi_Ku, Yes. Its for PRC.

A-Gupta, Great.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 12 Jul 2011 23:52

Americans are used to having both Mooshee Pork and Flied lice for lunch or dinner. Guess, they are the one preparing the global menu.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 13 Jul 2011 01:20

Report says that poverty negatively correlates with support of terrorism in Pakistan. i.e., it is the RAPE who are the biggest $hits.

But we knew this already. Faisal Shehzad, the wannabe Time Square bomber, being a prime example. Parvez Musharraf being another. Assphuck Kiyani being one more. Sheikh Rashid Ahmed, Majid Nizami and on and on. The list goes on.

Pakistan's middle class extremists
By Graeme Blair, C. Christine Fair, Neil Malhotra and Jacob N. Shapiro

link

RajeshG · Post by **RajeshG** » 13 Jul 2011 01:22

SSridhar wrote:In spite of the fact that 120 Special Ops trainers were expelled from Pakistan after Abbottabad, I am somehow convinced that TSP is still swarming with enough CIA men to monitor such double-cross. Just two weeks back, the US accused Pakistan of leaking info about IED-making factories to the terrorists allowing them to escape. The PA/ISI must therefore be unsure about making any move wrt AAZ, not sure if they will be caught once again. This will be far more serious than anything before. The credibility of TSP is so low today (never been high though) that even if AAZ escapes on his own without PA/ISI's help, the world will believe the US if it says it has proof that the PA helped him escape. Such is the nutcracker.

Sridhar ji

IMHO both the yanks and the pakis were aware of OBL and are now aware of AAZ's location. To me it just doesnt make any sense with so much intel around TSP-land that such bigshots would be hidden.

In case of OBL I think both knew that the other party knew where OBL was. TSP just didnt expect yanks to go after OBL so brazenly. I believe that TSPA did come to know that yanks are in the process of taking OBL away but the hijras got scared with all kinds of stuff in the air and what not. I also believe that TSPA could have just sent a few khakis and lobbed a few grenades and the whole operation would have been called off by the yanks. But they got scared and couldnt call the yankee bluff. The yanks on the other hand called TSPA's bluff.

Here the case of AAZ is different. Now TSPA has been forewarned about the extent to which BO will go and are now bluffing that another such move by the yanks is going to result in the grenade lobbing and withdrawal of tropps. Yanks are again calling their bluff and escalating this to the next level by withholding the money. BO also has an election coming up next year and would love to show his mardangi.

Lets see what the TSPA is really made of and who is more TFTA.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Jul 2011 02:05

'Our partnership depends on cooperation'
http://pn.com.pk/details_en.php?nid=19956

WASHINGTON: The US administration Monday defended its decision to suspend $800 million of military aid to Pakistan, saying its uneasy ally needed to make a greater effort in the fight against Islamists."When it comes to our military assistance, we're not prepared to continue providing that at the pace that we were providing it unless and until we see certain steps taken," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said.The United States was particularly "looking to improve our cooperation in counterterrorism, in counterinsurgency," she told journalists.Nuland recalled that on May 25 Islamabad demanded that about 100 US advisers leave Pakistani soil, effectively halting military training, adding "we obviously can't do that in an environment where Pakistan has asked our trainers to go."US President Barack Obama's chief of staff, William Daley, confirmed in a television interview on Sunday that the United States has decided to withhold almost a third of its annual $2.7 billion security assistance to Islamabad.US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Monday the decision to suspend part of the security aid to Pakistan "does not signify a shift in policy."Our relationship with Pakistan is not always easy, but it's one that we consider vital to our national security and to our regional interest," she told reporters."That said the government of Pakistan must take certain steps and we have outlined those steps in more than one occasion to make sure that we can deliver all the military assistance."Clinton insisted: "Our decision to pause delivery on this portion of security assistance does not signify a shift in policy, but underscores the fact that our partnership depends on cooperation that's always been the case and it must continue to do so

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 13 Jul 2011 02:09

http://pn.com.pk/details_en.php?nid=19951
Speaking up in Pakistan
( Islam liberated women with all the false rights )

Nothing in the world scares me more than the thought of being born a woman or a eunuch in a country like Pakistan, where obscurantism has deep roots. It is very unfortunate that we make tall claims, full of pride, about the rights of woman granted by our religion and yet when I look around in underdeveloped Muslim countries in general and Pakistan in particular, I find things totally the opposite. Tragically, our interpretation and application of religion seem to begin and end with woman. Leave the five per cent urban educated elite aside, women seem to be the playground (battleground) where we practise a medieval form of religion.”

NikhilB · Post by **NikhilB** » 13 Jul 2011 02:14

This whole news about US suspending 800 M aid to pakis is just hoax, I think. This is just an gesture from US to save TSPA's face after Osama incident. As Shivjee pointed out few pages earlier on same thread, pakis needed this face saving desperately to keep up morale of abdul soldier and what better option than refusing US aid (war with India is not an option at the moment). Of course, they will receive money through back doors from US or through KSA.

US just needs pakis badly and it can go to any level to keep its pyada in this region.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 13 Jul 2011 05:32

A_Gupta wrote:Hmm, urbanization without economic growth is possible - African nations are the main examples, we are told. Is Pakistan a mini-Africa, economically speaking?

Studies of urban poverty in India have shown greater poverty in urban than in rural areas IIRC. A shift to urban areas per se does not indicate a healthy economy - it indicates an unhealthy rural economy. Need to cross check my statements though.

Here is an interesting paper of how poverty occurs in urban areas

Urban-Rural differences in poverty
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/21st_ ... /Myth7.pdf

ranjbe · Post by **ranjbe** » 13 Jul 2011 05:40

Paki Chutzpa on US aid cutoff, since 'tallel than mountain' fliend is going to bail them out. In Nutty Nation editorial "A Golden opportunity" of today:

The $800 million of aid that the Americans have decided to hold back out of $2 billion earmarked for Pakistan Army should not be taken as a punitive measure that it is intended to be. Instead, it should be treated as a golden opportunity to get out of the intricate web of Western aid, especially of the US and international financial institutions like the IMF.

Fortunately, we have a tried and tested friend, China, to fall back upon. For any shortfall, as an unnamed Pakistani official observed in reaction to the announcement made by White House Chief of Staff William Daley to withhold the aid, we can “fill the gap” from Beijing, which has time and again expressed its readiness to help us stand on our feet. Only the hesitation of our West-leaning ruling circles has stood against the development of Pak-China relations to the great potential that they have. Another story in TheNation yesterday quoted Director General of Three Gorges Corporation of China Wang Shoofeng as assuring that it could help Pakistan raise its generation capacity by 10,000MW within the next 10 years.

With addition of Pakiland to North Korea, Sudan et al, maybe PRC should have a new name, Protector of Rogue Countries.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 13 Jul 2011 06:21

A_Gupta wrote:IMO, if the urbanization figures for Pakistan are correct, then it is only apparently in dire financial straits, the underlying economy must be healthy.

http://www.riazhaq.com/2009/09/urbaniza ... st-in.html

Not clear how they arrive at such stats in countries where there is no census. Musharraf figures here.

I think that Pakistan's "underlying economy" was not unhealthy to start with. The only question is how much a population can increase without expanding the economy. Agricultural economies support only so many - and beyond that things need to move into exports of minerals, services, manufactured goods etc. That pdf you linked earlier about Pakistan's poverty and "opportunity" had a lot of typical Packee assertions that mixed an overestimated "bright side" with the bad news.

A rural to urban movement is called "urbanization" - not to be confused with building New Yorks or Shanghais. Dharavi is as urban as Napean sea road. The rural to urban movement seems to be based on complex decisions of cost versus benefit made by individuals

A rural increase in population leads to seasonal poverty as the there are more heads to feed. Cities offer more employment opportunities and there is an initial migration to cities by "pioneers". These pioneers offers "services" in the city - like domestic servants, sweepers, construction workers, waiters, washers of cars etc - and make life more luxurious for wealthy city dwellers at low prices. The "success" of the migrants in cities attracts even more rural to urban migration. That keeps salaries down and labor available in plenty but the migrants do not have homes or access to sanitation, clean water supply and healthcare. Their access to alcohol and drugs is higher.

China controlled the massive urge to migrate by using a permit system that does not allow free movement. Basically that splits families, but it reduces pressure on urban areas. It is a freedom of choice versus economy trade off. India and China have different views on this. Pakistan neither India nor China. Pakistan appears to have rural poverty and servitude in feudal set ups. But it does not have China like controls. Rural to urban migration in Pakistan could possibly be more attractive than in India because of sheer lack of rural development efforts in Pakistan. But that would typically need investment in city infrastructure to support migrants. In the absence of a suitable economy you end up with urban poor.

http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/21st_ ... /Myth7.pdf

Urban dwellers living within 50 metres of a
hospital or 100 metres of a water pipe often have as little chance of using these as
rural dwellers who are 20 kilometres from hospitals or water mains; proximity does not
mean access.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 13 Jul 2011 06:42

http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDe ... 7483&Cat=9

Pakistan chastised

Tanvir Ahmad Khan
Wednesday, July 13, 2011

The latest salvo in this game of duress has come in the United States ‘suspending’ $800 million worth of military assistance in a move, as New York Times puts it “to chasten Pakistan for expelling American military trainers and to press its army to fight militants more effectively”. ...........................The trouble with coercive diplomacy is that far from concentrating the mind on the merits of the situation it vitiates the atmosphere with highly emotive factors such as sovereignty, national pride and honour. In this particular instance, the defining image of the Pakistani armed forces is at stake. It is a cliché of international discourse that Washington regards Pakistan’s military as a mercenary force to be used at its discretion. General Musharraf had no urgent reason to dispel this assumption. General Kayani, working with an elected government and a volatile national media, cannot be indifferent to the task of uniting the army and the people.

While, flied lice, may help Pakis with $$$, no amount of money is going to recompense them, for the rather hard jhappad to their tattered ego. No amount of defiant talk or open threats are going to camouflage the shreds of ego left.

I hope the Americans, who have been blind to a lot of Pakistani misdemeanours over the last six decades, realise that they have hurt the collective ego of the majority of the Paki armed forces. Hot internal debates will ensue, as they did after the OBL raid, and methinks the hot headed voices will be more strident.

Revenge will be the only satisfaction. The revenge list, increased again. First '71, OBL killing, and now driving home, as the article says, that they are just a mercenary force!

And this moment in history, is where I hope our government is keeping a close watch on things, to ensure we are prepared in case we get caught in the crossfire.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 13 Jul 2011 07:02

shiv wrote:http://www.ucl.ac.uk/dpu-projects/21st_ ... /Myth7.pdf
Urban dwellers living within 50 metres of a hospital or 100 metres of a water pipe often have as little chance of using these as rural dwellers who are 20 kilometres from hospitals or water mains; proximity does not mean access.

Well, proximity could soon mean access at least in TSP. 2 ways to do this by: 1. kidnap said docs or service providers and forcibly extract whatever services can be had. For water, easier still, break open the pipe and have water. Steal whatever electricity is around. Etc. 2. Deny service to everybody else by blowing up said hospital till the message becomes clear that unless there's universal access to water and healthcare, there'll be no access only.

Just my thoughts on how to empower the armed and dangerous urban poor in TSP.

Airavat · Post by **Airavat** » 13 Jul 2011 07:10

Calling Pakistan's Bluff On Aid

The cut amounts to only a third of promised aid this year. And it was measured. The lack of trainers means that planned U.S. equipment can't be put into service, reducing some of the needed aid. The reaction from Islamabad was predictable. Its defense minister threatened to pull back troops from border areas where Islamist militants are active. But Pakistan already has failed to deploy troops to the region as the U.S. has requested, which is another reason aid was withheld.

Pakistan wasn't through huffing and bluffing. It said the financial snub would only push it into the arms of its "all-weather friend," China. But it's already there. In fact, there is evidence U.S. aid has been fueling a dangerous nuclear pact between Pakistan and China.

According to one report, Pakistani intelligence pays Taliban insurgents $2,000 for every IED bomb they plant, $2,000 for every Afghan army soldier they kill, $10,000 for every American soldier they kill, and $20,000 to the family of suicide bombers. "No one can separate Islam and Islamic sentiment from the armed forces of Pakistan," Syed Shahzad quoted a senior Pakistani military official saying in his investigative story for the Asia Times. Days after he published his report in May, Shahzad's tortured body was discovered. Last week, U.S. Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the Pakistani government "sanctioned" the killing of the reporter.

It's plain that Islamabad is playing both sides of the war on terror. Hold back the other two-thirds in aid.