Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Aug 09, 2010

sunnyP · Post by **sunnyP** » 10 Aug 2010 17:29

[youtube]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_JgQevmk8HI&hl ... ram><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_JgQevmk8HI&hl=en_GB&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/youtube]

Wonder if they somehow manage to blame the 'evil Hindus' for this one.

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 10 Aug 2010 17:31

Brad Ji,

The faithfools may not have the funds to contribute to Jihad during an economic downturm. But they will still be able to provide foot solders to the cause in the absence of hard cash in return for a share in rape and plunder of Kuffer. So I think that the risk of a large armed lashkar of desperados in serch of loot and plunder approaching Wagha increases during a downturn rather then decreasing.

JMT

vijayk · Post by **vijayk** » 10 Aug 2010 17:33

Brad Goodman wrote:Now these are the kind of headline captions that will give paki H+D some real takleef

Perfidious Pakistan

Zardari's response was predictable. He began with the claim that Pakistan belongs to the "international community" which, roughly translated, means Pakistan claims legitimacy and is working to avoid the "state sponsor of terrorism" label that attaches to nations such as Iran and Syria. In the following sentence, he stated Pakistan's fear that its government would fall to the Taliban monster it created.

Flash forward about five years to a conversation I had with a Marine pal recently returned from Afghanistan. He told me how in his presence American intelligence officers handed the Pakistanis about thirteen single-spaced pages of what my friend characterized as actionable intelligence on the Taliban operating in the city of Quetta (the now-infamous "Quetta Shura"). The Pakistanis received the information and then did nothing with it.

Even the possibility that Pakistan could fall to a Taliban invasion is apparently not sufficient to make Pakistan change its policy toward terrorism, at least as long as it believes it can walk the tightrope of sponsoring terrorism against India and rely on American and NATO forces to protect them.

The Pakistanis will be searching for ways to relieve the current wave of pressure long enough to turn the world's attention away. Their solution may be an October surprise.

The Obama administration has declined to list the Taliban as a "foreign terrorist organization." Former ISI chief Hamid Gul said, in a Sunday CNN interview, that the only person who can guarantee the end of terrorism in Afghanistan is Taliban founder Mullah Omar. Credible reports of Mullah Omar's capture by the Pakistanis have been circulating for more than a month.

Pakistan could be working to announce some breakthrough in negotiating a peace with the Taliban before the November US elections, perhaps revealing Omar's presence as a legitimate political leader. That would be a diplomatic home run: relieving the Taliban's pressure on Pakistan, forcing Afghanistan's government into a partnership with the Taliban, boosting Obama's war stock and diverting the world's attention from Pakistan's other dangerous actions.

We should expect something like that. It would fit perfectly into Pakistan's desire to be part of the "international community" without having to relinquish its proxy war in Kashmir.

Obama will sell India and Billion Indian lives in a second to get second term. Does MMS and Sonia have a clue?

Pratyush · Post by **Pratyush** » 10 Aug 2010 17:37

Guys,

Just a request.

The yanks are free to do as they please, but please don't needlessly drag the Indian govt in the thread.

Added later: Just eached 313 posts

AOA.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 17:51

vijayk wrote: Obama will sell India and Billion Indian lives in a second to get second term. Does MMS and Sonia have a clue?

To me thequestion that arose from reading the article was : "Does the author have a clue"

It is not clear to me that he does. He ends is article like saying "..and they lived happily ever after'. For a faiiry tale that is a good enough ending, but look at what the author says:

He says:
1. Be prepared for an 'October surprise"
2. The Pakis have probably "captured" Mullah Omar
3. Hamid Gul says "Only Mullah Omar can end terrorism in Afghanistan" (and the author seems to believe that)
4. The Pakis will produce a Mullah Omar to lead the Taliban and force the Afghan govet to negotiate. This will make Obma popular at home
5. Pakistan will continue to belong to the international community and will continue to sponsor terrorism against India
6. All will live happily ever after.

Could someone explain how this is supposed to work?

When people start living happily ever after, how will a Taliban government in Afghanistan

a) stop terrorism and become a member of the international community like Pakistan
b) be perfectly happy with the supplies and aid that come via Pakistan
c) flatly refuse any "aid" to Northern Afghanistan that will come via Russia and the CAR to rebels
d) allow Afghanistan that the Russians and Americans could not control to be controlled by the ISI/Paki army
e) sit tight and and ask Pashtuns on both sides of the Durand line to shut up and put up with Paki control because they now have Afghanistan and Kashmir to fight for.
f) banish all Saudis and Arabs and their unwanted jihads away.

With Mullah Omar as leader what has changed with the Taliban that shot women in stadia, made kafirs wear black bands and blasted the Bamian Buddhas?

The author is missing something. I don't think the Indian govt will miss what the author has missied out.

Nihat · Post by **Nihat** » 10 Aug 2010 17:57

SSridhar wrote:Pakistan says poverty had halved
Apparently, a World Bank report says this.
Quoting from the World Bank's July 30 report, "Country Partnership Strategy," the writer, Mehtab Haider, reported that the percentage of Pakistanis living the below poverty line had fallen from 34.5 per cent in 2001-02 to 17.2 per cent in 2007-08.

Why is the government so reluctant in releasing the poverty figures? There are two reasons for this. First, as Mehtab Haider has said "poverty reduced to half in Musharraf's regime…" The government wanted to suppress the figures because it never wanted to tell the people that they inherited only 17.2 per cent people living below the poverty line. Furthermore, it was politically suicidal to admit that poverty reduced to one-half in just six years during "Musharraf's regime".

Secondly, the government had formed a "Panel of Economists" headed by Dr Hafiz A Pasha in April 2008. The panel found that 35-40 per cent of the population was living below poverty line in 2007-08–up from 22.3 per cent in 2005-06.

the report (page 8 ) said: "Pakistan saw an impressive decline in poverty during 2001-02--2007-08; the share of the population living in poverty halved, down from 34.5 per cent in 2001-02 to 17.2 per cent in 2007-08. Both urban and rural areas saw significant reductions.

"This progress was made possible by growth in real per adult consumption expenditures and declining inequality during 2005-06--2007-08. Key human development indicators of educational attainment, health outcomes, and unemployment rates corroborate these trends through 2007-08."

Even a cursory look at these figures would reveal that not only poverty declined sharply in Pakistan from 2001-02 to 2007-08 but inequality was reduced as well. Meanwhile, social indicators improved and the unemployment rate dropped.
How did all these things happen in a country where nobody invests, tax collections are abysmal, whose economy has not set a scorching pace, where population is growing at 3.3% yoy, where terrorism rules the roost, whose export income dependent on just cotton and cotton-related products has taken a hit after the dismantling of preferential treatment etc. etc. ?

This certainly is a fudging of the highest order, a la shortcut Shaukat Aziz.

Saar , you seem to be lacking in the application of certain basic TSP concepts, i.e. Lawhori Logic and Madarsa Math.

Establishing this logic , a 3.3% population means more and more pure people on earth and pure people dont need to invest for growth - their mere presence on mother earth is sacred and gurantees prosperity for the Pure people.

The birth of new jihadis will bring about an economic revolution and revitalize the region and economic gowth will soon touch 72%.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 10 Aug 2010 18:00

The Afghan-Pak Transit Treaty: Ministry not interested in taking the Cabinet into confidence

The Commerce Ministry is not interested in taking the Federal Cabinet into confidence over the controversial Afghanistan-Pakistan Transit Trade Agreement (APTTA), recently agreed between the two countries. The country's business community believes that the pact, which is yet to be formally signed between the two countries, does not serve Pakistan's interests.

"The Ministry will clear the doubts of national leadership about the record notes, now being converted into a pact and signed in the presence of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Ambassador Richard Holbrook," sources said.

The top brass of Commerce Ministry, however, is worried that national leaders would criticise it, especially for offering a 'side letter', which would allow Indian goods to be transported through Wahgah border to Afghanistan at some future date. "Thanks to America, Afghanistan gets what India was dying for the last several years," commented one of the stakeholders.

Commerce Ministry also claims that the General Headquarters (GHQ) and Inte- Services Intelligence (ISI) were taken on board before the 'record notes' were signed with the Afghan delegation. This claim has not been substantiated from other sources, including ISPR.

The 'record notes', which would now be incorporated in the agreement, were finalised by the officials of the two countries at a local hotel. The 'record notes' show that the meeting was held between the Afghan Finance Minister Dr Omar Zakhilwal, who reached Islamabad on Saturday evening, a day prior to the signing, Dr Anwar-ul-Haq Ahady, Afghan Commerce Minister, Amin Fahim, Commerce Minister, and Dr Abdul Hafeez Sheikh, Finance Minister, on July 17, 2010.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 10 Aug 2010 18:06

SSridhar wrote:Pakistan says poverty had halved

How did all these things happen in a country where nobody invests, tax collections are abysmal, whose economy has not set a scorching pace, where population is growing at 3.3% yoy, where terrorism rules the roost, whose export income dependent on just cotton and cotton-related products has taken a hit after the dismantling of preferential treatment etc. etc. ?

This certainly is a fudging of the highest order, a la shortcut Shaukat Aziz.

This is exactly what we said on a discussion about India's poverty figures. IMF/WB and other international organizations pull these figures literally from their behinds. If Pakistan halved its poverty how could people BPL in India increase?

Brad Goodman · Post by **Brad Goodman** » 10 Aug 2010 18:13

Pratyush wrote:Brad Ji,

The faithfools may not have the funds to contribute to Jihad during an economic downturm. But they will still be able to provide foot solders to the cause in the absence of hard cash in return for a share in rape and plunder of Kuffer. So I think that the risk of a large armed lashkar of desperados in serch of loot and plunder approaching Wagha increases during a downturn rather then decreasing.

JMT

No army can fight with empty stomach. What return does the new Kasab get for waging war against India can he come to Mumbai slaughter people and then take madhuri dixit as war booty or loot reserve bank for sona like ghauri? Come on they all know their chances of return from IB or LOC is one in ten and so they need something in hand before they set on the mission like kasab's family got from lashkar. 72 is tempting but not tempting enough for mango abdul its more tempting for well to do RAPES like Headley & Sehzaad who have been spoit by riches.

Manishw · Post by **Manishw** » 10 Aug 2010 18:15

Nihat wrote: Saar , you seem to be lacking in the application of certain basic TSP concepts, i.e. Lawhori Logic and Madarsa Math.

Establishing this logic , a 3.3% population means more and more pure people on earth and pure people dont need to invest for growth - their mere presence on mother earth is sacred and gurantees prosperity for the Pure people.

The birth of new jihadis will bring about an economic revolution and revitalize the region and economic gowth will soon touch 72%.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 10 Aug 2010 18:27

Sigh. I did hazaar googling to try and locate a pretty tasvir of this Khalida begum, but did not succeed. I just figured that any Pakwimmen who writes such delicious whines is worth pouring some good wine for:

India’s cultural onslaught
Khalida Yasmin Marwat
http://thefrontierpost.com.pk/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=125

Sukwinder Singh, a well known Indian singer is going to sing the song “Aey mere watan (India) k logo, zara aankh mein bhar lo pani” on August 15 (the Independence Day of India) in a Star Plus programme “Voice of India”. Hundreds of audience hoisting Indian flag in their hands are seen dancing as the background is visualized by showing pictures of Dhyan Chand, Milkha Singh, Prakash Padekone, T Usha, Indian hockey team, Major Raywardnan Singh, Geet Sethi, Kapil Dev, and Mahindra Amarath, the heroes well know in their specific fields. Indian soldiers fighting against Pakistan and Indian cricket team enjoying victory against Pakistan are part of the footage. An 11-year old Ali is sitting in front of the TV, tapping on the song with same enthusiasm. The song changes and the singer starts “Chak De India” and because of the pop-up nature of the song, the little boy starts singing the same song with more patriotic zeal.

This is what our traditional rival wishes to. India is much stronger than Pakistan: militarily, politically and economically.

Since 1947, India never accepted Pakistan as an independent state and tried twice to maintain the status of Akhand Bharat” by merging Pakistan into India once again. Militarily India never succeeded in its aim but it has already launched cultural offensive against Pakistan through its media and diplomacy. It has made an ideological attack on Pakistan and has culturally cloned us.

By showing attractive dramas with adorable way of life, it is using such a tool which does not require any pressure or force. Through affective Media propaganda India is indoctrinating us...Cartoons which are source of entertainment for children have become culturally influenced Jay Hanuman Cartoons. Media which carries the status of biggest weapon of mass destruction is highly active and India is making an effective use of it against Pakistan.

Star Plus dramas are destroying our family system. The sari wearing by Indian ladies in their dramas has made self brand in Pakistan. The clothes which were selling by the name of Gull Ahmad, Vaneeza, etc. are replaced by the names as Sadna, Ragini, Tulsi and many more...Children are adopting Hindi language in their daily conversation and the school girls are impressed by the Indian dramas. Bhai (brother) which youngsters use for their elders in daily life is becoming a joke because of the Indian dramas and movies which are using this word Bhai for a criminal.

jrjrao · Post by **jrjrao** » 10 Aug 2010 18:31

OTOH, this is more serious, even though we know all this already:

Two Pakistans
Dr. Khalil Ahmad
http://thefrontierpost.com.pk/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=124

Anyone can see that there is not one Pakistan. After more than 60 years the two Pakistans can clearly be demarcated. One is for the ordinary lot of the people, and the second one is for the elite classes. Pay a visit to the ordinary Pakistan, and experience the ordinary life there, have a taste of some basic social services available there, and you will realize how neglected is this ordinary Pakistan of the ordinary people.

Likewise almost in every big city, there are two cities, one for the ordinary lot and one for the special elite. All other smaller cities including the vast rural expanse fall under the ordinary Pakistan. Now roam about some areas of the elite Pakistan such as GORs (Government Officers’ Residences) or Cantonments, and see the difference between these two Pakistans. In a number of cases, these two Pakistans adjoin but never in the quality of services. It is just unintelligible, for instance in Lahore, why some areas are permanently showered with tax money!

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 10 Aug 2010 18:34

shiv wrote:
To me thequestion that arose from reading the article was : "Does the author have a clue"

It is not clear to me that he does.

Shiv, I think the author is right on the money. He makes the profound, fundamental point, that we on BR know about but not too many in the west know about, namely, that TSP is very much part of the GWOT as a member of the "international community" as long as its terror against India is not dented. And every move, every breath that TSPA/ISI make is to keep their India objective in mind.

And thats why, Cameron's statement, not only caused a huge H&D takleef to TSP, but also operational fear that caused TSP. Nobody in the west, not even after the Mumbai carnage uttered a statement like Cameron did that implicated the TSP state so directly when for Inndians its as obvious as daylight. In other words, its not as if the west, especially US cares 2 bloody hoots aboout TSP slaughtering India or its dangerous confrontation over Kashmir at any cost; but rather, as the west pushes TSP to deliver the goods for the west, it overtly (as Cameron did) or inadvertently links the need for TSP to eliminate all kinds of terror. India gets the ancillary benefit of TSP having to eliminate India-specific terror as the west forces it to go after terrorists of interest to it. This is a big no no for TSP.

As for Indian govt, I hope and pray that at least in private, they are making it absolutely clear that this cannot be the end game, and final AfPak denounement cannot be a TSP bristling with anti-India terrorists and armed to the teeth so it can fight and torment India after US leaves. Personally speaking, as much as MMS is loath to even utter the word terrorism for fear that it would upset his TSP birathers, I would like to see India make more noises about this so its in the open and some of India's friends in the west will take notice and speak up agiinst any such diabolical deal that Obama and his team will strike with TSP to bolster their political fortunes.

Dilbu · Post by **Dilbu** » 10 Aug 2010 18:37

jrjrao wrote:Prakash Padekone, T Usha , Indian hockey team

Must be PT Usha.

James B · Post by **James B** » 10 Aug 2010 19:06

There is an email doing the rounds that tells us that our ISI is the best intelligence agency in the whole wide world. The ranking of the world’s intelligence agencies according to this email is as follows: our very own ISI (and more strength to it, I say), Mossad (Israel), MI-6 (UK), the CIA (US), MSS (China), BND (Germany), FSB (Russia), DGSE (France), RAW (India) and ASIS (Australia). Two immediate questions come to mind. If the ISI is really as good as it is made out to be, how come our country is in the state it is in? Second, if RAW is as bad as to be the 9th worst intelligence agency in the world, how come it can pull off actions as diverse as bombing Data Darbar and R.A. Bazaar in Lahore and Lahore cantonment respectively; arming and provisioning Baloch separatists; and attacking our Ahmadi brothers in their mosques in Lahore? Could it be that RAW is not as bad as the list would have us believe, and the ISI not that good?

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... -080-sk-04

James B · Post by **James B** » 10 Aug 2010 19:17

Letter to Daily Whines

I have travelled to the US many a time in the last 12 years or so. My uncle, cousins and friends, all American nationals, live there. Last month I was in Europe for two weeks. Thus it is beyond my comprehension why the concerned US authorities are taking so long to issue a visa to a bona fide and senior journalist like me. Indeed, it is not only frustrating and also painful waiting for a visa for the last nine months, but it seems that either my name has been included in the suspect list or I have become a security threat to the US.
MUHAMMAD ALI
Lahore

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 19:28

CRamS wrote: As for Indian govt, I hope and pray that at least in private, they are making it absolutely clear that this cannot be the end game, and final AfPak denounement cannot be a TSP bristling with anti-India terrorists and armed to the teeth so it can fight and torment India after US leaves. Personally speaking, as much as MMS is loath to even utter the word terrorism for fear that it would upset his TSP birathers, I would like to see India make more noises about this so its in the open and some of India's friends in the west will take notice and speak up agiinst any such diabolical deal that Obama and his team will strike with TSP to bolster their political fortunes.

No. On the contrary I am eager to see Afghanistan overrun by the Taliban. What you are asking for is for India to beg Ombaba to stay on. Much as the "staying on" of the US aids Indian involvement in Afghanistan and gives us a warm fuzzy all it does is ensure that Pakistan gets support for acting as conduit to supply US troops in Afgnanistan while the US troops do the fighting that protects the US and preserves Afghanistan.

Once the US is out the Afghans will be under Taliban control. So what? The US will no longer have to pay conduit fees. The US will only be paying Pakistan to fight the Taliban and that money will be used against India. So what? That is happening even now. Big deal.

But the big difference if the US goes is that the Taliban who are getting hit now by US and NATO troops will be free to do what they like. Do you seriously believe that Pakistan can control them? Fine. Lets see how Pakistan controls them .Control of Afghanistan by the iSI/Pakistan army will not be more harmful to India. It will be more harmful to the US.

I beg you, beseech you, I fall at your feet to explain to me why Taliban in Afghanistan is more danger to India? I beg you to explain how the Taliban that could not be controlled by the US or Russia will magically fall under control of the ISI and do the ISI's bidding against India. I beg you to explain to me how, even if the Taliban were under total control of Pakistan how they could do anything more to India than Pakistan is already doing with the US paying Pakistan billions as they are doing right now.

I think you are wrong and are making the same extrapolations that the author makes without thinking this whole thing through.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 19:37

As long as you take the attitude that
1) India is weak
2) Pakistan is weak and under US control
3) US is strong
..it is easy to reach the conclusion that the US can run away from Afghanistan and yet compel the Paki army to control the Taliban (which the US could not do) while paying the Pakistanis to fight India.

That is the most delusional set of thoughts I can think of.

The facts are
1) India may be weak
2) Pakistan is not strong enough to control the Taliban but is strong enough to resist US pressure
3) The US is weak

That means that the US will keep on paying Pakistan to fight India (so what's new?) but neither US money nor the Paki army will control the Taliban. The fun will then start. This is totally lost on the author of that article.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 10 Aug 2010 20:06

shiv,

As usual interestingly put, but if we go by what has happened you have to consider the following:

Taliban was created and controlled by Pakistan. Things have changed after 9/11. But still the shura was kept alive by Pakistan and in pakistan, no? The Taliban cannot exist on their own without support from pakistan or the lebensraum provided, can they? Even if they get the whole of afghanistan under them. That was the case before 9/11. Why would it be different now?

What makes you think that Taliban will not be controlled by Pakistan?

Also let us take your argument - what if Pakistan is not able to control Taliban that regains control of Afghanistan - (which has to be done with paki help by the way)? Would it not be then possible, that Taliban can do the reverse and control Pakistan- A pakistan with the N bomb? What does that mean to India?

If you consider only one postulated projection and not consider the probability of the other corollary postulated projections, that too is delusional, no?

Sorry for intruding. Please continue with your analysis. Makes for interesting reading.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 10 Aug 2010 20:07

Shiv:

I would agree with you on TSP & Taliban, namely, its probably delusional to think TSP can control Taliban once they assume the reins of power in Afganisthan.

IMO India is weak in securing its interests in the current set up & constraints arrayed against it. Do I need to remind BRites of the humiliation of Mumbai and its aftermath? I am arguing, as the author does, that TSP wants to consolidate its anti-India terror infrastructure as the AfPak denounement unfolds. And I think its time for India to swallow its "great power" nonsense, and beg, plead, or cajole US that its interests must not be sold down the Indus river as US prepares to exit. And India's interests can be clearly articulated as those of US, at least as was articulated during the start of GWOT. And if enough of India's friends in the US & west see through TSP perfidy, and Obama & Co's willingness to cut & run despite TSP perfidy, I am hoping that the disaster that could befall India can be averted. Then again, I do know, more than anybody else that Amercians: left, right, and center, are nationalists to the core, and will do whatever it takes to secure their interests first and foremost, and so its doubtful if India's pleas will get a hearing, but its worth trying. Right now, except for a few like Fareed Zakaria in the media or heavy weights like Cameron, nobody is talking about TSP's real perfidy in the face of wiki leaks.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 20:22

Raja Ram wrote: What makes you think that Taliban will not be controlled by Pakistan?

Also let us take your argument - what if Pakistan is not able to control Taliban that regains control of Afghanistan - (which has to be done with paki help by the way)? Would it not be then possible, that Taliban can do the reverse and control Pakistan- A pakistan with the N bomb? What does that mean to India?

Now you are talking. In fact I have spoken of this before and will merely repeat what I have said at least 10 times on this forum.

You will recall that India was first threatened by Pakistani nukes in the 1980s during the PVNR regime. I am not sure if that was the same as the Brass tacks episode. India was threatened again with nuking by various people. I recall Gauhar Ayub Khan saying that (as reported on this forum), Hamid Gul has stated that, and it is a known fact that Pakistani nukes were being readied to hit India during Kargil.

So my question to anyone who is wiling to tale it on is "When India is already under risk of being hit by Pakistanis nukes and has been threatened several times, what is the basis for the conclusion that the same nukes are somehow going to become more dangerous to India just because the Taliban take over Pakistan? Is there a hidden assumption here (not necessarily by you Rajaram-avarhal) that the Pakistan army are somehow more gentle and more rational towards India and that the Taliban control of those nukes somehow raises the risks for India.

How laughably naive.

It is the US and the rest of the world that face greater danger if the Taliban get nukes. The US was and is happy to note that Pakistani nukes are aimed only at India and would like to keep it that way. If you were a patriotic US citizen, you have every right to think in that way. But as an Indian I would love to see Pakistani nukes being pointed at everyone else so they too can enjoy the feeling.

After all if Pakistan has X nukes, all are pointed at India. if those nukes have to be used against others the numbers pointed at India are necessarily reduced. Why do people forget this and think like Americans?

OK suppose the Taliban take over Pakistan and supposing they toe the US line and keep the nukes pointed at India alone? how does that increase the risk to India.

in short a Taliban takeover of Pakistan either makes no difference to the nuclear threat that India faces, or reduces it. It will not increase it, unless you believe that Taliban are worse that the Paki army and ISI.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 10 Aug 2010 20:24

CRamS
Why should India plead? What have we got to loose by US withdrawal? When the Soviets left, India backed najib regime, that fell to paki backed Mujahdeen and then taliban, for more than a decade India lived with taliban in Afghanistan, that was backed by pakistan, the saudis and the US. It still held its own and created a presence there through NA. The US turned to the very same NA to help throw Taliban out. So who needs who?

If your hypothesis is based on what you believe and not what is observed, you may get your analysis wrong. Your belief is that India is weak, India needs the US in Afghanistan and Taliban back in Afghanistan means disaster to India.

All it means is trouble. More trouble. Something that India has experienced and handled in the past and is well equipped to handle in the future. Now this is also a belief. But one that is backed by a track record and observed actions. We may have our individual views on the present level of leadership in GOI, but to believe that we are weak or the GOI does not have any leverage is a wrong one.

At best the critque that can be made is this. India is subsuming its genuine concerns to collaborate with the international community, especially the US. In exchange, it expects that the US and the international community also take into consideration that there cannot be two set of rules and terror against India by Pakistan be stopped. We are walking several extra miles. The track record of these international partners is sketchy at best in terms of their delivering on their promise when it comes to terror against India. Why should we march to some one else's beat is the question?

An imaginative Indian leadership should sieze this opportunity to ensure the artificial terror entity called Pakistan goes to its logical conclusion. Some here would argue the GOI is doing exactly that. On this the judgement is still open, because once again the observable actions of GOI show no inclination of this. It seems that we are ok to live with a few thousand Indians dying to pakistani terror as long as the GDP grows by 9%. But then again, some Indians, even here, believe that is the right thing to do.

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 10 Aug 2010 20:28

shiv,
your response is along expected lines. My intervention is to make you examine a all threads that stem from an assertion. The rest of your piskological takes are for my entertainment and education onlee saare.

ps. I noted that you did not answer the first question

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 10 Aug 2010 20:36

The danger of flood was always there. Heavy rains broke the barriers

Pakistani officials have warned that an artificial lake formed by a landslide in northern Pakistan could burst its banks within days.

They say that about 25,000 people may have to be evacuated to higher ground as rising waters of the Hunza river threaten to submerge and destroy many villages.

Military engineers have been working to avert a major crisis and people are being evacuated to safer places.

Al Jazeera's Kamal Hyder reports.

[May 15, 2010]

Raja Ram · Post by **Raja Ram** » 10 Aug 2010 20:38

Now gurujis, pause to reflect on what will happen once the US "withdraws" from Afghanistan and there is in place a government there where taliban is also included. What will happen in that Afghanistan? With no US or NATO there, will the other groups accept this rule?

Just think, gentle readers. The key to the unravelling of Pakistan lies in the unravelling of Afghanistan as we know it. Any new dispensation that brings a pak controlled/supported group will mean exactly that. The pakis, if they are their usual tactically brilliant selves, will want US out of afghanistan, and taliban in hoping that the strategic depth has been regained. More important than the US going out, India should be out.

The bigger picture that is being missed is this. if there is no US, and this is a big IF, for there is a lot of reasons for the US to stay around, then Pakistan cannot hope to achieve the condition before 9/11 and this time Afghanistan will unravel and along with it Pakistan as they know it.

And US or no US, India can play a role in that situation. We have done it in the past.

manish · Post by **manish** » 10 Aug 2010 20:41

jrjrao wrote:Sigh. I did hazaar googling to try and locate a pretty tasvir of this Khalida begum, but did not succeed. I just figured that any Pakwimmen who writes such delicious whines is worth pouring some good wine for:

India’s cultural onslaught
Khalida Yasmin Marwat
http://thefrontierpost.com.pk/News.aspx?ncat=ar&nid=125

jrjRAW ji, do you think that perhaps it is time to restart/resurrect the classic 'Paki Towels Collection Thread'? I used to thoroughly enjoy its earlier avatar that ran a few years ago with contributions from you and others.

The article linked is a true gem - it is exemplary in its use of Pinglish!

Venkarl · Post by **Venkarl** » 10 Aug 2010 20:59

James B wrote:
There is an email doing the rounds that tells us that our ISI is the best intelligence agency in the whole wide world. The ranking of the world’s intelligence agencies according to this email is as follows: our very own ISI (and more strength to it, I say), Mossad (Israel), MI-6 (UK), the CIA (US), MSS (China), BND (Germany), FSB (Russia), DGSE (France), RAW (India) and ASIS (Australia). Two immediate questions come to mind. If the ISI is really as good as it is made out to be, how come our country is in the state it is in? Second, if RAW is as bad as to be the 9th worst intelligence agency in the world, how come it can pull off actions as diverse as bombing Data Darbar and R.A. Bazaar in Lahore and Lahore cantonment respectively; arming and provisioning Baloch separatists; and attacking our Ahmadi brothers in their mosques in Lahore? Could it be that RAW is not as bad as the list would have us believe, and the ISI not that good?
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... -080-sk-04

Hehe...do they realize that being on top means..all eyes on them? I am sure ISI is aware why it is on top....list would be believable in the reverse order

...

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 10 Aug 2010 21:04

now what gives courage to a lifafa journo to write bad things about teh ISI? who is his daddy?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 21:10

Raja Ram wrote: Taliban was created and controlled by Pakistan. Things have changed after 9/11. But still the shura was kept alive by Pakistan and in pakistan, no? The Taliban cannot exist on their own without support from pakistan or the lebensraum provided, can they? Even if they get the whole of afghanistan under them. That was the case before 9/11. Why would it be different now?

Let me answer you with a counter question.

The Taliban were controlled by Pakistan? Fine.

But what did the Taliban do to India?

If the Taliban did nothing to India what is there to worry about. In fact what harm did the Taliban do anyone, other hurting sentiment by destroying a few statues? I have the answer to this but let me check how much people remember of events that now go back nearly two decades.

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 10 Aug 2010 21:14

shiv, one crucial difference between then and now is that the dark clouds of the khilafat has gathered strength... that changes the equation for the TSPA... its either with them or against them...

Gus · Post by **Gus** » 10 Aug 2010 21:23

shiv wrote: I have the answer to this but let me check how much people remember of events that now go back nearly two decades.

IC 814 ?

Taliban ruled Afg provided one more layer of 'plausible deniability'. Not that we have gotten anywhere with them when that layer is not there anymore...

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 21:23

Lalmohan wrote:shiv, one crucial difference between then and now is that the dark clouds of the khilafat has gathered strength... that changes the equation for the TSPA... its either with them or against them...

Lalmullah - there is piskology here. We are needlessly adding new fears in our minds by introducing words like "Khlafat". That is all balls. Using that word or not using it makes no difference on the ground. That ragtag militia and the paki army ain't gonna set up no Khilafat although sparking fears in the minds of those who are asleep by psyops articles that speak of the new khilafat is a great idea. That is why I did not criticise that Khilafat article - it is a "hand wave" article.

Times have been bad for India. I want others to have a bad time. Things must get worse before they can get better. Pakistan must be swallowed by the Taliban.

However things may not pan out that way. In fact what I would like to see is the US being threatened by Pakistani nukes unless the US stops supporting the Pakistani army. That is the goal I want to see being reached. I want the US government to see that their support to the Paki army is making the Taliban stronger and that the Taliban is going to get all those nukes and some of them are going to hit US targets and US allies.

Having said that - the US is not stupid. if I can sit here and have these thoughts it is certain that the US already has this gamed out. The result will be that the US will not leave Pakistan. Mark my words and make me eat them a few years from now if I am wrong and alive after (or in the absence of) nuclear war.

Amber G. · Post by **Amber G.** » 10 Aug 2010 21:32

shiv wrote:
Amber G. wrote:Okay gurus - Can you guess where, why, when, by whom, to whom ..this protest?
(Without cheating and looking up the url etc)
Indian WKKs
Relatives of dead soldiers in AfPak?
Relatives of 9-11 dead?
26/11 memorial at the Taj?
Members of Parliament of Israel?

.. How about Deaf'n-Dumbers out side an Indian Restaurant holding BRF meet?

The protesters are Raza Don, Hameed Ullu Khan and Sony Javid, outside Mysore Woodlands in Chicago because someone selected this Indian Restaurant for not only a BRF meet but also (later) for a fund raiser - Rudra was correct the fund raiser was for -then Sen. Obama)

Link: Gay Liberation Network (Yes, Pakis are getting press exposure the media)

Other signs/chanting not in the picture, were "Obama equal Osama ", " Obama, Good speaker. But no clue (!) what to speak" (sign could be reused for Cameron, I guess), and chanting clearly (IMO) directed towards BRFites, "They are war mongers", "They are advocating bombing an entire nation", "This shows their true colors" ..and no one is their friend ... Neither Obama (agrees with them), nor .. . "Hillary Clinton is also not our friend. She called for not taking the nuclear option off the table."

Obama said he was not surprised by the protest .. and said:

I haven't heard anyone disputing the basic notion that Pakistan, although an ally, has not done as much as it needs to in terms of rooting out people who were directly responsible for killing ...

This is just to, hopefully, bring some balance, for all those who are going "sky is falling down .. MMS has no clue.."..

Meanwhile, Cameron has spoken to Obama, and this is White House readout

President Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron spoke by telephone today as part of their ongoing consultations on our shared global agenda.

The Prime Minister updated the President on his recent visits to India and Turkey. The leaders discussed Afghanistan and Pakistan, with the Prime Minister noting his recent constructive meeting with Pakistani President Zardari.

The two leaders also reviewed the security situation in the region and progress in Afghanistan. The President and the Prime Minister also discussed ongoing efforts to advance peace in the Middle East, and agreed on the need for the parties to move to direct talks as soon as possible.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 10 Aug 2010 21:32

When GWOT started in 2001, Indians thought, "Great, now USA will come and beat the ass up of all Pakistani Jihadis like JeM, LeT, etc. Nothing of the sort happened. USA only went after its Islamist-foes and left Indian Islamist-foes intact. The Great Hope shattered, and still we place our hopes on the Americans.

What would one conclude? That American intervention in Afghanistan was for nothing. It did not stop the jihadis baying for Indian blood, and Pakistan got a new breather, got an additional 18 billion dollars stuffed up its backside as booty for something they never delivered.

Does India have any reason to be felt let down?

No I think not. In the great Wheel of Time, American intervention was to indeed undermine Pakistan, not necessarily by design but by chance. American intervention have unleashed new forces in Pakistan, forces that are now beyond Pakistan's control. Pakistan is now riding the tiger, with 'Eat me' written on Pakistan's T-Shirt. Taliban will prove to be patriphagous.

So America has indeed done India a great favor in the end. India could not pull Pakistan to the left and make peace with it, so America pushed Pakistan to the right making Pakistan lose its balance. Now even if Americans leave, the Tiger is grown up enough with anti-Americanism meat, that it can hunt on its own, and does not need the old man Pak. The longer America remains in the neighborhood, the faster the growth of the tiger. So the question is whether the tiger is indeed grown enough or would a longer stay by the Americans help it further!

So even if India did not get the jihadis targeting India, India got something far more effective.

krisna · Post by **krisna** » 10 Aug 2010 21:38

Fearing unrest, Pakistan seeks more U.S. flood aid

The United States has already diverted six Chinook transport helicopters from the Afghanistan war to Pakistan over the past 10 days for rescue missions and aid delivery. It has also sent hundreds of thousands of prepackaged military meals and a pledge of more than $40 million in disaster assistance, far more than any other country.

A senior U.S. military official said transfer of additional helicopters, which are in short supply in Afghanistan, would require a political decision in Washington. "Do they exist in the region? Yes," he said. "Are they available? No."

Suleman estimated that the government needs 30 to 40 more transport and rescue aircraft. The six American Chinooks, as well as Pakistan's fleet of six U.S.-leased MI-17 transport helicopters, have been grounded during much of the past week by cloud cover and the torrential rains.

ombaba trying his best to win over pukis.

kamments section

Pakistan is as much victim of its home-grown and sustained terrorism as a suicide bomber of his own actions.

The GREATEST ever born double agent: “Pakistan”.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 10 Aug 2010 21:40

The Taliban enabled the IC 814 hijack in Kandhar to a successful conclusion which tarnished Indian image before the new millenium.

Meanwhile Philip wrote...

The jet stream, a massive ring of high speed winds, is moving quicker than usual over north western Pakistan, causing wet monsoon air to be sucked faster and higher into the atmosphere.

The stream, which is normally too high to affect every day weather but does influence large scale weather patterns by shifting the atmosphere around, is "supercharging" the monsoon, leading to some of the heaviest rainfall in memory.

.....

Scientists say the hyperactive jet stream is also causing deadly landslides in China and the drought in Russia, which is leading to wildfires.

The stream has split in two with one section heading north over Russia and the other going south over the Himalayas into Pakistan. Experts say it is very unusual for the stream to head that far south.

On Monday the United Nations rated the floods in Pakistan as the greatest humanitarian crisis in recent history with more people affected than the South-East Asian tsunami and the recent earthquakes in Kashmir and Haiti combined.

Although the current 1,600 death toll in Pakistan represents a tiny fraction of the estimated 610,000 people killed in the three previous events, some two million more people – 13.8 million – have suffered losses requiring long or short-term help.

{Bad way of conveying the losses! For its the surviving population that is affected and not the death toll.}

So Philip it was ill wind that wrought death and destruction to TSP's badlands.

Truly Wrath of the Djinns!

They need more Islam.

Krishna, They will take the MREs and still curse US.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 10 Aug 2010 21:58

James B wrote:Letter to Daily Whines

I have travelled to the US many a time in the last 12 years or so. My uncle, cousins and friends, all American nationals, live there. Last month I was in Europe for two weeks. Thus it is beyond my comprehension why the concerned US authorities are taking so long to issue a visa to a bona fide and senior journalist like me. Indeed, it is not only frustrating and also painful waiting for a visa for the last nine months, but it seems that either my name has been included in the suspect list or I have become a security threat to the US.
MUHAMMAD ALI
Lahore

Ali Janab,
Apna naam to dekho, Kaam to Dekho, Kabila tho poocho,
Phir Veeeeza kaise miiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiilna .
Just apply the Kanadian one , it will be stampted right there in Lahore at your home by local Mullah.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 22:00

Gus wrote:
shiv wrote: I have the answer to this but let me check how much people remember of events that now go back nearly two decades.
IC 814 ?

Taliban ruled Afg provided one more layer of 'plausible deniability'. Not that we have gotten anywhere with them when that layer is not there anymore...

Thanks for taking a shot
1. Twin tower bombing 1993
2. US embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya
3. Attack on USS Cole
4. 9-11

All these came out of Afghanistan. Only 9-11 got a response.

Now let us look at the story of the above 4 attacks on American targets We are saying Pakistan controlled the Taliban and the Taliban sheltered people who then attacked American targets. Finally the US lost patience, asked Pakistan to withdraw support, helped Pakistani advisers to evacuate (Kunduz airlift) and started war against the Taliban.

But the Taliban are still alive. And in Pakistan.

What does this mean? One meaning is that Pakistan and the Taliban are one and the same. The war against the west started long ago. But was war against the west restricted when the US sat in Afghanistan? More on that later.

Now if the US gets out of Afghanistan, what has changed to ensure that the war against the West is not resumed?

The answer to that question is stated by Pakistan as follows. Pakistan says to the US "You lost interest in us after the USSR withdrew and so we were unable to control the Taliban". In other words, if the US had kept on paying Pakistan, the latter would have been able to keep the Taliban in check and prevent attacks against the West.

Stemming from this excuse are three conclusions:
1) Pakistan lost control of the Taliban because of lack of money
2) It is the Taliban who who went out of control and started the war against the west.
3) If Pakistan is paid, they can regain control of the Taliban

So the US paid Pakistan after 9-11 to regain control of the Taliban. Has Pakistan regained control of the Taliban?

How many US soldiers have been lost to the Taliban since 9-11? How many terror attacks since 9-11 on Western targets. Without Googling I can come up with an equally big list in the 2002-2010 period as in the 1990-2001 period. London tube bombing, Richard Reid shoe-icide bomber, Madrid train bombing, Edinburgh airport bombing, Times square plot.

So paying Pakistan has not controlled the Taliban.

Conclusion? The Taliban are out of control, or the Pakistanis are the Taliban.

If the Taliban are out of control, the west can expect more attacks.
If the Pakistanis are the Taliban, paying them has not reduced the attacks on the west.

So what can the US/west expect when they leave Afghanistan to the Taliban and Pakistan whether or not they continue to pay Pakistan?

Answer: More attacks.

Prasad · Post by **Prasad** » 10 Aug 2010 22:01

shiv wrote: Let me answer you with a counter question.

The Taliban were controlled by Pakistan? Fine.

But what did the Taliban do to India?

If the Taliban did nothing to India what is there to worry about. In fact what harm did the Taliban do anyone, other hurting sentiment by destroying a few statues? I have the answer to this but let me check how much people remember of events that now go back nearly two decades.

Shiv,
By letting the taliban be in afghanistan, aren't we giving the pakis a carefree western border and leaving them with greater time and energy to spend on their eastern border? Isn't a conflict better than none for us in that by settling afghanistan, they can then spend more energy directing stuff against us? Rather than being any sort of advantage, for us, it just means that they can't spend as much effort as they could if the taliban are well settled. Plus, it gives them a lot more in terms of resources and training areas to nurture terrorists. More plausible deniablity too perhaps? If someone shows them sat pictures of terrorists training somewhere near the afghan border, they can always say it was the taliban training and not them. Not that it makes much of a difference but still. More deniability. Not to mention the whole hijack incident and chances of something similar happening too.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 10 Aug 2010 22:12

Prasad wrote:
Shiv,
By letting the taliban be in afghanistan, aren't we giving the pakis a carefree western border and leaving them with greater time and energy to spend on their eastern border?

Carefree western border? What carefree western border? The pakistanis are saying that the Taliban went out of control because the US stopped paying Pakistan after the USSR left. The US presence in Afghanistan is making the Pakis carefree because the US are themselves doing the fighting leaving Pakistan free to do Parliament attack, Kaluchak and 26/11.

Read my previous post please.

Prasad wrote:Isn't a conflict better than none for us in that by settling afghanistan,

Don't want this to get too personal. Are you overwhelmed by American media reports? Are you saying that the Pakistanis will "settle Afghanistan"? Can you explain how they will do that? When has that been done? Who has done it?