Adm. Mike Mullen’s assertion last week that an anti-American insurgent group in Afghanistan is a “veritable arm” of Pakistan’s spy service was overstated and contributed to overheated reactions in Pakistan and misperceptions in Washington, according to American officials involved in U.S. policy in the region.
I don't think biladels are stupid. They would have learned a thing or two about TSP and its perfidy from this unkil's af-pak saga.Mahendra wrote:A clerical alliance in Pakistan has issued a religious decree (fatwa) saying that it is illegitimate (haram) to call the United States a "superpower" because "only Allah Almighty deserved the title." Decline-o-meter score: 4
Wonder what the comical alliance of sheikh chilli maulanas have to say about the soopah powah ambitions of more nourishing than melamine milk, sweeter than honey and hornier than lynn choos friend Cheena
Shiv Ji:shiv wrote:The Pakistanis are not making it better for themselves vis a vis the USA. But my real doubt is whether the US is capable of making it better for itself.
They have armed, strengthened and above all trusted the Pakistani army and made it into a monster. I will say it again, as I will continue to say it. Stop arming and funding the Pakistan army. It will be years before it becomes more weak, given what the US has done for it in the last 10 years. Self goal by the USA. Every time I said this on here I was told that the US has the Paki army in control and the funding and arming in US interests. The US works for its own interest and is not bothered about India.. That was utter rubbish - faith in the US based on flawed US calculations.It would be a mistake to imagine that China can somehow "take over" where the US left off. The US was not in control. China too will not control anything. One can hope that the Chinese are less stupid then the US wrt Pakistan.
Pratyush wrote:Meanwhile in un-kill land Ombaba is getting nervous by declaring [urlhttp://www.firstpost.com/politics/us-not-tilti ... 94134.html]US not tilting towards Delhi, say there’s no anti-American sentiment in Pak[/url]
WTF, does he mean be saying, "there’s no anti-American sentiment in Pak"
This is a bit rich! The Paki foreign minister Khar herself said there is Anti-American sentiment in Pakiland against Unkil and now Unkil is denying there is Anti-American sentiment in Pakiland. Just goes to show how much suit browning Unkil does when their pet mongrel barks. Superpower indeed! 
That is a fair take on what is likely to happen. It means continuing danger to India though, and probably to the US as well. Syria, Sudan and Iran together constitute 130 million people. Add about 170 million Pakis to that. The US can't do anything about all those countries but tries to restrict how other countries deal with them.Johann wrote: Whether they like it or not, as I've said here for a number of years the US is heading for a relationship with Pakistan that looks more like what it has with countries like Syria, Iran and Sudan. Four years ago few here could imagine it, and every passing year it gets a little less hard to believe.
Raja Bose wrote:Pratyush wrote:Meanwhile in un-kill land Ombaba is getting nervous by declaring [urlhttp://www.firstpost.com/politics/us-not-tilti ... 94134.html]US not tilting towards Delhi, say there’s no anti-American sentiment in Pak[/url]
WTF, does he mean be saying, "there’s no anti-American sentiment in Pak"
From 2001-2003, it wasn't just Musharraf who was "playing nice"... the US was keeping its part of the bargain as well, and actively working to save as many Pakistani "assets" in Afghanistan as possible. The Kunduz Airlift, when thousands of jihadis and ISI operatives were given safe conduct back to Pakistan is one case in point. The disappearance of OBL from under the very noses of coalition troops at Tora Bora is another.Johann wrote:
There's a reason that Afghanistan was so hopeful 2001-03, and saw saw much progress. Pakistan wasn't playing the spoiler role that it had for so long. The 'bad Taliban' is very much the product of Musharraf's almost unstinting support to the US in Afghanistan 2001-03.
The 'bad Taliban's' multiple attempts to kill Musharraf in 2003, and their ability to recruit enlisted military personnel, along with the US focus on Iraq convinced Musharraf and the PA from 2004 onwards that a change in their Afghan policy policy was both good and necessary.
.
In spite of the fact, these guys are basically here to beg...MUMBAI: A Pakistani minister, on an official five-day trip, drove to meet Maharashtra chief minister Prithviraj Chavan in an official car that did not have the Indian tricolour. Protocol in India requires a minister from another country to fly the tricolour, along with his or her country's flag, on the official car. The minister's car entered the Vidhan Bhavan premises without the Indian flag
Thought they would get away with it...The Fahim-led team, which will fly to New Delhi on Wednesday, discussed trade relations with Chavan
But, from the looks of it - this seems intentional...After electronic media representatives, who were waiting for interaction with the touring delegation, spotted the mistake, a hasty attempt was made to rectify it. But it too backfired. The Indian flag was inadvertently placed upside down initially. Electronic media representatives captured visuals of the flag in that position, following which the mistake was rectified.
The tricolour was on the car when the minister met governor K Sankarnarayanan on Tuesday. The driver said pleas to the team to put up the tricolour on Wednesday were overlooked.
The US is reviewing whether to designate the entire Haqqani network as a foreign terrorist organisation, even as it has already slapped sanctions against seven of its top leaders, including Badruddin Haqqani who was designated as a global terrorist.
"We are continuing to review whether to designate the entire organisation. Quite a sizeable number of the Haqqani kingpins have been individually designated, but we are continuing to review the issue with regard to the whole organization," the state department spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, told reporters.
The Pakistani military establishment is secretly lobbying for a bilateral defence pact with China. But senior Pakistani officials say there is little hope for an immediate breakthrough as Beijing was cautious about any such pact.
“He put forward Pakistan’s desire formally”, said a senior military official who was privy to the development but requested his name not be mentioned.
However, the Chinese leadership advised Pakistan not to push for an agreement that could put Islamabad and Beijing in trouble with both Washington and New Delhi. A spokesperson for the foreign ministry Tehmina Janjua refused to comment on any bilateral defence pact between China and Pakistan.
Islamabad: Pakistan has informed the US that it will be forced to retaliate if American forces attempt to launch a unilateral strike on the country's tribal belt that the US has said is a safe haven for Taliban elements, according to a media report on Wednesday.
The message was personally delivered by Inter-Services Intelligence powerful chief Lt Gen Ahmed Shuja Pasha to CIA head Gen David Petraeus during the former's recent trip to Washington, an official familiar with the development told The Express Tribune newspaper.
The unnamed official said Pasha had informed Petraeus that the "Pakistani people will not tolerate any US misadventure" and the government will be left with no other option but to retaliate if American troops launch a unilateral raid, the report said.
Ok how I wish a Paki Agosta sub now fires a excet missile against an American destroyer. We can then export some WKK's to lahore to join the rapes.Lalmohan wrote:can someone compare the pronouncements in the urdu media on defying america to the english media?
this message is 400% for domestic consumption
Do not be surprised if the Exocet missile homes back and hits Agosta sub.Aditya_V wrote:Ok how I wish a Paki Agosta sub now fires a excet missile against an American destroyer. We can then export some WKK's to lahore to join the rapes.Lalmohan wrote:can someone compare the pronouncements in the urdu media on defying america to the english media?
this message is 400% for domestic consumption
The Plight Of The Generals
September 27, 2011: The United States has stopped "playing the game" of pretending that the Pakistani military does not control or cooperate with Islamic terrorist groups. Senior American commanders have told the public, and in closed meetings with senior American politicians, presented the classified information that proves this Pakistani involvement continues. It's no secret in Pakistan that this connection exists. The military began backing Islamic terrorists in the late 1970s as a way to cure the corruption that was crippling the economy, while also providing a weapon that could defeat India. The corruption is still there and India remains undefeated. In the 1980s, this move to Islamic terrorism became fashionable when the Russians invaded Afghanistan and Pakistan became a base for Afghan "holy warriors" who fought back. When the Russians left in 1989, Pakistan continued to back Islamic terrorist groups in Afghanistan (most famously the Taliban, which the Pakistani army created) and sustained the civil war there. This war was still going on when September 11, 2001 came along. It's still going on today, and it's still being sustained by the Pakistani military. The Afghans are not happy with this, they never have been. Afghans point out that Pakistan has been interfering with Afghan internal affairs since Pakistan was created in 1948. The Afghans want this interference to stop, and have been pressing the U.S. to help.
Now, the U.S. has come to agree with the Afghans. So do many Pakistanis, who are unhappy with the share of the national income the military takes for itself. Pakistanis are also disturbed that this military support of Islamic terrorism has backfired, and now Pakistani civilians are most often the victims. Meanwhile, it's obvious that the military, particularly the officers, live better than the vast majority of Pakistanis. Yet the army has never been able to defeat the Indians, or anyone else for that matter. The Pakistani military has been supporting Islamic terrorists for over 30 years and now some of these radicals are killing Pakistanis. The military denies any responsibility. This has long been a big problem in Pakistan, getting anyone to take responsibility. It always seems to be someone else's fault.
The Pakistani military responds to all this by portraying itself as a victim of Indian and American plots. When all else fail, there is always paranoia and denial. The Pakistani military denies all the American and Afghan accusations and dares the Americans to do something about it. The Americans have told Pakistan that if the Pakistani military does not take down the Haqqani Network, and assume control of North Waziristan (where Haqqani and similar groups have a sanctuary) the Americans would. Pakistani generals responded that American "boots on the ground" would mean war. At this point, the U.S. seems unconcerned about that. It seems to be a question of who blinks first. Will Pakistan finally take control of their military, or allow their generals to drag the country into another war they will lose? This is entirely possible, for Pakistani public opinion portrays Pakistanis as victims of all manner of local and foreign conspiracies. Most Pakistanis refuse to take responsibility for anything, preferring to play the powerless victim. Pakistanis don't like to admit that this attitude is self-defeating. But for most Pakistanis, this victimhood is more comfortable than trying to fix things. Meanwhile, the U.S. has told the Pakistanis that military aid will be reduced and the money transferred to civilian uses. But the U.S. wants more ability to ensure that the aid gets to its intended recipients, rather than being stolen by corrupt officials.
Afghanistan accuses Pakistani intelligence (ISI) of using Haqqani to try and destabilize the Afghan government via terrorist attacks on high-profile targets. Pakistan denies everything. Meanwhile, Pakistan is refusing to honor international arrest warrants for retired ISI officials, accused to responsibility for past support of Islamic terrorism.
Faced with the prospect of losing American aid, or even being at war with America, Pakistani diplomats are seeking a stronger alliance with China. But the Chinese are not willing to offer the amount of aid the U.S. provides, or the degree of military assistance. In the meantime, China is demanding that Pakistan wipe out Islamic terrorists from western China, who have been based in the Pakistani tribal territories for most of the last decade. Pakistan cannot do this, because it would mean invading North Waziristan, a sanctuary for pro-government Islamic terrorist groups.
.......
India continues to make progress against its communist (Maoist) rebellion in eastern India and Pakistani-backed Islamic terrorists in the northwest (Kashmir). Thus India suffers only about 10-20 percent as much violence as does Pakistan (which has one-sixth the population of India.)
September 25, 2011: Afghan diplomats accused Pakistani troops of firing over 300 shells and rockets into Afghanistan during the last five days. The Pakistanis were firing at areas believed to be used by Pakistani Taliban, who fled Pakistan in the last year as the Pakistani army cleared areas north of Waziristan of Taliban fighters. The areas on both sides of the border are inhabited by the same tribes or clans. The Pakistanis want the Americans and Afghans to move troops into that border area, and drive the Pakistani Taliban gunmen back into Pakistan. But American and Afghan troops are occupied elsewhere in Afghanistan hammering the Afghan Taliban and drug gangs. The Afghans don't trust the Pakistanis to actually cooperate if the Afghans send troops to this part of the border. Afghans do not trust Pakistan much at all, and they have good reason not to. The Afghans are more interested in punishing the Pakistani military than going after the Pakistani Taliban. That's what might happen, especially since Pakistan and Afghanistan have never formally agreed to exactly where their common border is.
September 24, 2011: A Pakistani army spokesman admitted that the army maintained contact with the Haqqani Network, but insisted that the army had no operational control over Haqqani. The U.S. insists that it has proof of this control, but does not want to make it public because this would show the Pakistanis exactly how their secret communications have been broken into by the Americans. This would enable the Pakistanis to temporarily improve their communications security and keep some of their operations secret, at least for a while.
September 22, 2011: In Pakistan, police have placed a prominent Sunni Islamic cleric under house arrest to stop him from preaching hate, and violence, against Shia Moslems. This cleric had been released from prison two months ago, after spending 14 years in captivity for leading deadly attacks on Shia. This is a growing problem, because about a quarter of Pakistanis are Shia, and this Sunni radicalism against Shia (encouraged by al Qaeda and most other Sunni groups) has created Shia radicals who fight back. This creates small war zones all over the country. Generally, the Sunni groups are the instigators, but Sunni terror groups are most often allies of the Pakistani military. This situation has become complicated.
September 21, 2011: The U.S. and Pakistan have completed negotiations over how many U.S. troops can serve in Pakistan. The number has been cut in half, to about 150. Most of these are trainers or intelligence specialists. These negotiations were triggered by the May 2nd American raid that killed Osama bin Laden, who had been living in the midst of Pakistani military facilities for over five years. The Pakistani military denied any knowledge of bin Laden's presence. Americans did not believe this.
September 20, 2011: Pakistani nuclear weapons scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, who has largely escaped punishment for Pakistani selling nuclear secrets, has been releasing documents this year, to insure that the Pakistani government does not bow to foreign pressure and punish him. The latest Khan document details how, in the 1990s, China helped Pakistan learn how to enrich uranium enough so that it could be used in a nuclear weapon. Several months ago, Khan revealed a 1998 letter from a North Korean official that discussing how North Korea paid $3.5 million for nuclear weapons technology in the late 1990s.
In Orakzai, Pakistan (north of Waziristan on the Afghan border), over a hundred Pakistani Taliban, believed to be from Afghan bases, attacked a Pakistani army checkpoint. The Taliban were repulsed, with at least twenty being killed. The army suffered about a dozen casualties. The army has been heavily involved in Orakzai for about a year, seeking to break Taliban control
Looks like tarrell than mountain friend is in no mood to stick his neck out to protect TSP. Only Gilani is making absurd statements and embarrassing the chinese.“We hope Pakistan and US relations will improve and develop which is conducive to regional peace, development and stability,” the Dawn quoted Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Hong Lei, saying.
“Pakistan is an important country in South Asia, and also at the forefront in the international counter-terrorism campaign. It has made important contribution to multinational fight against terrorisim,” he added.
China had earlier reaffirmed support to Pakistan’s sovereignty, and pledged to work with the country to maintain peace and progress in the region.
Pakistan Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani met China’s Deputy Premier Meng Jianzhu, and described that country as a close friend.
“A friend of China is Pakistan’s friend, its enemy Pakistan’s enemy and China’s security Pakistan’s security,” Gilani said.
The Pakis really do take their whoring business seriously!!“A friend of China is Pakistan’s friend, its enemy Pakistan’s enemy and China’s security Pakistan’s security,” Gilani said.
From Rezaul H Laskar Islamabad, Sep 28 (PTI) The Pakistani military today denied a media report that said the Inter-Services Intelligence agency chief had informed the CIA chief that Islamabad would be forced to retaliate if US forces launch a unilateral strike in the country''s tribal belt.A spokesman for the Inter-Service Public Relations contradicted the report published in The Express Tribune daily, saying its contents and remarks attributed to the ISI chief were "factually incorrect and misleading"."Media should refrain from speculative reporting on such sensitive issues related to national security," the spokesman said.
WASHINGTON: India's view on terrorism in the region is increasingly being "believed and subscribed to", Indian Ambassador to the US, Nirupama Rao has said, even as the Obama Administration stepped up pressure on Pakistan to rein-in Haqqani network, which allegedly has links with ISI.
Rao said India has repeatedly said that one can't have segmented approach when it comes to applying pressure on any terrorist groups.
One has to deal with all the groups that threaten peace and stability in the region, she argued.
"India's point of view (on terrorism) is increasingly believed in and subscribed to," Rao said here at a panel discussion on India-US Strategic Relations organised jointly by the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry and the Brookings Institute, a Washington-based think-tank. peace and stability in the region, she argued.
No offence but it looks like I am reading Indian version of a post on deaf and dumb forum - just replace China = India, and India = Pak, and emotional = political for dominance of "thousand years"parsuram wrote:Varoon Shekhar:
While tangential to this thread, no question that thePRCees are constantly and always looking over their shoulders at India. They have a trmendous inferiorority complex when it comes to the Indians. There is record of Mao exploding on being told that Nehru was bitter about the PRCees taking over Tibet. That it was a needless move to show dominance, not the sort of thing to do in newly decolonized Asia. Mao was reported to have said that India, through Buddhism, had excercized intelectual and emotional dominance over China for thousands of years, and that was going to change in the new China. Even earlier, At Bandung & establishment of the Non Aligned Movement, China was relegated to an also ran, infuriating Mao. So yes, China will continue to have an inferiority complex wrt India. They may hide it, or mask it with an overly swaggering superiorority complex (classic response by a person with an inferiority complex, as he over compensate). This hidden chinese inferiority complex towards India goes a long way to explain their relationship to the paki.
"Turns out they are disloyal, deceptive and a danger to the United States," fumed Republican Representative Ted Poe last week. "We pay them to hate us. Now we pay them to bomb us. Let's not pay them at all."
For many in America, Islamabad has been nothing short of perfidious since joining a strategic alliance with Washington 10 years ago: selectively cooperating in the war on extremist violence and taking billions of dollars in aid to do the job, while all the time sheltering and supporting Islamist militant groups that fight NATO troops in Afghanistan.
AoA.. Mr. Khar has a peechaddi in strategy management.More than 30‚000 Pakistanis have been killed by “the monster of terrorism” in the past decade‚ Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar said on Sept. 27, appealing for greater international trust in her government’s efforts.
The minister set out Pakistan’s case to the U.N. General Assembly as her government faced U.S. demands that it clamp down on an allegedly Pakistani-based group blamed for an attack on the U.S. embassy in Kabul. “We must demonstrate complete unity in ranks‚ avoid any recrimination‚ build greater trust and more importantly bring about the requisite operational coordination in combating this menace‚” Khar said. “Otherwise only the terrorists will gain.”
Ok how I wish a Paki Agosta sub now fires a excet missile against an American destroyer. We can then export some WKK's to lahore to join the rapes.
"WASHINGTON - The United States threat last week that "all options" are on the table if the Pakistani military doesn't cut its ties with the Haqqani network of anti-US insurgents created the appearance of a crisis involving potential US military escalation in Pakistan.
But there is much less substance to the administration's threatening rhetoric than was apparent. In fact, it was primarily an exercise in domestic political damage control, although compounded by an emotional response to recent major attacks by the Haqqani group on US-North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) targets, according to two sources familiar with the policymaking process on Afghanistan and Pakistan.
One source close to that process doubted that there was any planning for military action against Pakistan in the immediate future. "I'm sure we're going to be talking to the Pakistanis a lot about this," the source told Inter Press Service (IPS).
Despite the tough talk about not tolerating any more high-profile attacks on US troops, the sources suggested, there is no expectation that anything the United States can do would change Pakistani policy toward the Haqqani group.
[...]
Looming over the discussions about how to react to the latest attacks is the firm conclusion reached by the Barack Obama administration in last December's AfPak policy review that it was futile to try to put pressure on Pakistan over the issue of ties with the Haqqani group.
The Obama administration had tried repeatedly in 2009 and 2010 to put pressure on Pakistani army chief Ashfaq Kiani to attack the Haqqani network in the North Waziristan tribal area, but without any result. Finally, in the December policy review, it was agreed that attacking Pakistan publicly for its ties with the Haqqani network and its refusal to attack those forces in North Waziristan not only would not achieve the desired result but was counter-productive and should stop, according to sources familiar with that review.
But a rising tide of Haqqani group attacks on US and NATO targets in 2011 has made the Obama administration's AfPak policy much more vulnerable to domestic political criticism than ever before.
The New York Times reported on September 24 that the number of attacks by the Haqqani group was five times greater and the number of roadside bombs had increased by 20% in 2011 than during the same period of 2010, according to a senior US military official.
Even more damaging to the administration's war policy, however, was the impression created by the attack by the Haqqani network on the US Embassy and the US-NATO headquarters in the most heavily-guarded section of Kabul on September 13, and a truck bomb attack on a NATO base three days earlier that wounded 77 US troops.
Top US national security officials had no choice but to cast blame on Pakistan for those attacks and to suggest that the administration was now taking a much tougher line toward Islamabad, despite the knowledge that it was not likely to shake the Pakistani policy, according to the two knowledgeable sources.
"We're in a situation where the administration could not do nothing," said one of the sources.
[...]
In testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on September 22, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Michael Mullen made the unusual admission that the Haqqani network's attacks in Afghanistan had become "more brazen, more aggressive, more lethal" than ever before, but explained it as a function of ties between the group and Pakistan's ISI.
He portrayed the Haqqani group as "a veritable arm of the ISI" and suggested that there was "credible evidence" that the ISI was behind the truck bomb attack on the NATO base on September 10 as well as the attack on the embassy and the International Security Assistance Force headquarters a few days later. He used oddly contorted language in characterizing that evidence, saying that "the information has become more available that those attacks have been supported or even encouraged by the ISI".
That same line, which only suggested ISI "encouragement" as a possibility, was then peddled to Reuters and CNN, among other news outlets. CNN Pentagon correspondent Barbara Starr quoted a "US military official" on September 23 as claiming ISI "knowledge or support" in regard to Haqqani network attacks - another formula revealing the absence of hard intelligence of ISI complicity.
And Mark Hosenball and Susan Cornwell of Reuters reported on September 22 US officials had conceded that information suggesting that ISI had encouraged Haqqani attacks on US forces was "uncorroborated".
[...]
Even those who had held out hope in the past that pressure on Pakistan could lead to change in its relationship with the Haqqani group have now given up on that possibility. The New York Times reported on Saturday that officials who once believed Washington could manipulate the Pakistani military to end its support for the Haqqani group "through cajoling and large cash payments" were now convinced that Pakistan would not change its policy as long as it feels threatened by Indian power. {There you go, lay it at India's doorstep. Delhi should do more to ease Paki fears.}