Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 2011

The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7069
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Anujan » 03 Dec 2011 04:44

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011%5C12%5C03%5Cstory_3-12-2011_pg7_1
Pakistan has taken decision in principle to take up the controversy over Nimoo-Bazgo hydropower project having generation capacity of 45 MW with International Court of Arbitration (ICA) and has given a go ahead signal to Indus Water Commissioner of Pakistan (IWCP) for preparation on legal technicalities.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7069
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Anujan » 03 Dec 2011 04:53

Wasnt unfair's characterization of Pakistan as a "Condom nation" invented right here at BRF?

https://sites.google.com/site/brfdictionary/glossary/c/condom-nation

Sushupti
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5198
Joined: 22 Dec 2010 21:24

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Sushupti » 03 Dec 2011 04:58

Cosmo_R wrote:
For years, the Supreme Court egged on the Centre to expedite deportation of hundreds of Pakistani prisoners languishing in Indian jails even after completion of their prison term, but on Friday it was pleasantly surprised to learn that many did not want to go back.

Filing a comprehensive status report on Pakistani prisoners in India, the ministry of external affairs told a bench of Justices R M Lodha and H L Gokhale that as many as 53 Pakistani prisoners had challenged their deportation order before the Delhi High Court.

Additional solicitor general Parag Tripathi said out of 262 foreign prisoners, deportation orders were issued to 238 while four had escaped from detention. Only 20 such prisoners remained to be repatriated, he added. The MEA status report indicated that the 53 Pakistani prisoners were demanding political asylum requesting that they be treated as refugees.


:rotfl:

The Himalayan Yetis have one less issue to be outraged about! Outraged!

They may be Hindus



They are ahamadiyas.

Of the prisoners, 53, Pakistani nationals including women and children, were demanding political asylum in India. They requested that they be treated as refugees after claiming they were “Mehdis”.

http://tribune.com.pk/story/301635/some ... tay-there/

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21195
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Prem » 03 Dec 2011 05:05

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011\12\03\story_3-12-2011_pg1_3
Pakistan sticks to Bonn boycott
( Abb Aaya OCT 2001 in Dec2011)

[ISLAMABAD: The bi-partisan Parliamentary Committee on National Security endorsed on Friday the decisions taken at the government level ranging from cutting off NATO supplies, taking back the Shamsi air base from US forces and boycott of Bonn Conference on Afghanistan, amidst the declaration by Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani that Pakistan is being made a scapegoat for the failure of international policies in the war-torn Afghanistan.The in-camera meeting of the committee, which lasted for three hours, deliberated at length the situation arising out of the NATO aggression on country’s territory. Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani briefed the committee about the multi-faceted strategy of the government adopted in the aftermath of the incident. The committee was also mandated to give its recommendations to parliament to review the terms of engagement in war on terror.
“The committee fully endorsed the cabinet’s decision to boycott the Bonn Conference with majority of the members in favour of this decision and few reportedly against it. It also threw its weight behind the decisions of the Defence Committee of the Cabinet to cut NATO supplies routed through Pakistan and taking back the Shamsi air base from US forces.“Our efforts to improve our relations with Afghanistan and support for Afghan-led and Afghan-owned efforts for reconciliation and peace have been misconstrued and actively subverted by certain quarters,” Gilani said and remarked that there is a limit to our patience. Cooperation cannot be a one-way street. He termed it a “grave miscalculation” for any one to believe that stability and peace in Afghanistan can be restored or maintained by destabilising Pakistan and vowed that under no circumstances will we allow Pakistan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity to be jeopardised by ill-considered and rash actions such as the attacks on our territory by NATO/ISAF.Apparently stamping the orders of army chief Gen Parvez Kayani to respond to any aggression without any approval from the top brass, Gilani said that instructions have been issued to all units of the armed forces to respond, with full force, to any act of aggression and infringement of Pakistan’s territorial frontiers. Gilani pointed out that the coordination mechanism remained ineffective during the NATO strike as minutes after the attack occurred, our military authorities contacted the US/NATO and Border Coordination Centre. Relief and reinforcements sent from the nearby Pakistani posts also came under attack, he said.

MurthyB
BRFite
Posts: 704
Joined: 18 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: "Visa Officer", Indian Consulate #13,451, Khost Province, Afghanistan

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby MurthyB » 03 Dec 2011 05:18

Prem wrote:Apparently stamping the orders of army chief Gen Parvez Kayani to respond to any aggression without any approval from the top brass, Gilani said that instructions have been issued to all units of the armed forces to respond, with full force, to any act of aggression and infringement of Pakistan’s territorial frontiers. Gilani pointed out that the coordination mechanism remained ineffective during the NATO strike as minutes after the attack occurred, our military authorities contacted the US/NATO and Border Coordination Centre. Relief and reinforcements sent from the nearby Pakistani posts also came under attack, he said.


So basically one helicopter based attack on a remote post, and the Pakis are going to be like headless chickens, making local decisions, phyrring impotently in the air next time around in abject panic. No command and control. And this is a "professional army" :rotfl:

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby ramana » 03 Dec 2011 05:40

Reminds me of the Chini dramabazi after their Embassy in Serbia was bombed by NATO. This is from that playbook.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7069
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Anujan » 03 Dec 2011 05:43

Chini dramabazi and Paki dramabazi have a crucial difference.

Commie party of China has to impress upon their population that China is a superpower and cant be pushed around. They are very careful in doing this -- the Spy plane incident for example.

The Paki dramabazi is just insurance to make sure that Ashphuck and co. dont get Qadrified in their next camp visit.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7069
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Anujan » 03 Dec 2011 05:51

About Sherry from Outlook: http://outlookindia.com/article.aspx?279179

I wrote a column 'The Slanted Truth' (Daily Times, June 17,2010) in response to an op-ed 'North Waziristan — the final frontier', which Ms Rehman had penned for the Pakistani paper The News. I had noted then:

Upon a cursory read, both [the other article had been written by Mr Naeem Tahir in Daily Times] pieces might come across as opinions by liberal writers who are concerned about the curse of Talibanization afflicting Pakistan and trying to float an indigenous plan to fight it. A slightly deeper look, however, would reveal that, clad in a liberal cloak, the authors may be peddling the Pakistani security establishment’s view, i.e. that despite the clear and present danger that the Taliban and al Qaeda portend, we are not able to do much about it, especially in North Waziristan (NW) … The apologetics put forth by these two authors blend seamlessly with the collaboration between the Pakistani intelligence apparatus and the jihadist outfits, highlighted yet again by the recent London School of Economics (LSE) report. This partnership was never hidden and neither are the attempts by the security establishment to force even democratically elected leaders to toe their line.”

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55332
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby ramana » 03 Dec 2011 06:00

Which LSE report?

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shiv » 03 Dec 2011 06:09

Abhijit wrote:Deconstructing the psyche of la fair

Rangudu wrote:The thing about C.Fair is that she is a maverick. That is why she refused an offer to be Holbrooke's TSP advisor in the early days of the Obama admin (she's a Democrat).

R man, IMHO, c fair is a 'contrarian' rather than a maverick. she gets her kicks by opposing any plausibly reasonable view at any given televised forum. the higher the authority she gets to duel with, the more delighted she is in offering a contrarian view. luckily for her, geopolitics is a complex subject with highly nuanced aspects where anybody with a fair bit of knowledge and a very good intellect (I grant her that she possesses both these qualities) can successfully don the mantle of a 'contrarian'. if she were a physicist or a mathematician, she couldn't have been a contrarian - unless she reached the levels of Stephen Hawking etc. But in geopolitics, especially the murky world of pakiland, any reasonably informed academic can easily pass for an expert.

What is her contrarian modus operandi? in geopolitics, it is easy to disagree with anybody and anything even if the two parties are in a 'violent agreement'. She simply picks up anything that comes as a softball statement and pounces on it and leads the other party to the path of disagreement.

She is also an uber exhibitionist, especially in front of a south asian crowd. she uses her substantial knowledge of subcontinental languages to constantly try to impress the desis in any crowd. mind you, the goras couldn't care less if she was able to speak swahili also. all her urdu gaali antics are purely for the purpose of impressing the already swooning desi/paki crowd. As an uber exhibitionist, she 'needs' to 'floor' her audience, not just 'impress' it. Hence the intermittent use of chaste or rustic urdu and profanities that are bound to 'floor' the paki mards. She also gets kicks in talking the 'mard' lingo of gaali-galoch. Here she is trying to impress the goras as well. She takes efforts to transliterate her urdu swear words for the benefit of her gora audience. also her english itself is peppered with coarse language - not the F bombs, mind you! There are a million american women who freely use F words. that don't impress 'em much. but coarse language and a craftily conjured demure biting of the tongue, now that gets the gora attention.

Abhijit that is an interesting analysis. I agree that she is an exhibitionist, but I think she is pretty much spot on about Pakistan in a situation where "scholars" are keeping blinkers on. I have seen very few Pakistani experts with a "plausibly reasonable" view which can be believed instead of what Fair says. Have you?

dnivas
BRFite
Posts: 262
Joined: 05 Dec 2008 05:54

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby dnivas » 03 Dec 2011 06:10

Kati wrote:have you guys heard about this?......

That news came to me as a surprise,...and therefore wanted to cross check with BRFites.....


At my work, my co worker who is Pakistani is the son of a former ambassador to Canada, Holland and some other countries. I think the co worker said he retired last year and is now liquidating all his assets in Pakistan and has applied for a kanadian vija. He estimates that he should get it in January and will be in canada and settle there for good.

so in a way it slightly corroborates your story

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shiv » 03 Dec 2011 06:17

Manish_Sharma wrote:Wow computer literacy is catching fast among the poor of porkistan and the land of pious are really making good use of it:



This is one zaid hamid video no one should miss.
:rotfl:


What channel is this and how wide is its reach? Just curious.

Rahul M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 17074
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 21:09
Location: Skies over BRFATA
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Rahul M » 03 Dec 2011 06:23


SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5474
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby SBajwa » 03 Dec 2011 06:28

Veena Malik: ISI bare all its assets

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shaardula » 03 Dec 2011 07:11

diane rehm reaches a niche audience in the usa. very left chomsky-esque audience. you can see how even fair has her loose vocab in control. for these types of things to be said about TSP on DR show is some change. this like arundhati roy soliciting negative opinions about tsp.

Karna_A
BRFite
Posts: 432
Joined: 28 Dec 2008 03:35

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Karna_A » 03 Dec 2011 07:22

mayo wrote:I have a question.

If Imran Khan is being backed by TSP establishment for the top civilian seat, what will Musharraf do when he goes back in Mar(?) of next year?


It's simple.

Imran Khan becomes the President of Pakistan and Musharraf becomes the Cricket captain.
After all both posts need fresh losers.

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shaardula » 03 Dec 2011 07:24

:rotfl: :rotfl: ^^ like GB Shaw said when proposed by a beautiful dumb wimmens, ... but what if the kid gets your brains and my looks?

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24261
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby SSridhar » 03 Dec 2011 07:35

Abhijit wrote:Deconstructing the psyche of la fair

Abhijit, excellent characterization.

Roperia
BRFite
Posts: 778
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Roperia » 03 Dec 2011 07:42

Pakistan has right to self-defense so does US: Pentagon

"I've seen the comments attributed to General Kayani. I'm certainly not going to speak for him or for the government of Pakistan. But every sovereign nation has the right of self-defense and the right to order their troops to defend themselves. That's what my understanding is what he did: He reiterated their right of self-defense. We certainly respect that right of his. We have it as well,"
Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt John Kirby

Your more Ashphuck kiya-nahi! :rotfl:

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24261
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby SSridhar » 03 Dec 2011 07:44

ramana wrote:Which LSE report?

Ramana, a London School of Economics (LSE) research report released in June, 2010 detailed how even the Pakistani President himself was supporting the Taliban. It clearly exposed the nexus between the political class, the ISI, the Army and the Taliban.

Link

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24261
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby SSridhar » 03 Dec 2011 07:46

Arun Roperia wrote:Pakistan has right to self-defense so does US: Pentagon
We have it as well," Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt John Kirby

That is very pregnant with meaning.

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shaardula » 03 Dec 2011 08:00

CF to DR: the reason why america is unable to move through the variety of nests of TSP:
it is easy for US to think today that the enemy is taliban, but as of 2005 enemy was AQ. what US really had was interagency fight between CIA and DoD. CIA did not want to do anything that would compromise TSP's 'co-operation' on AQ. This remained the case until circa 2007. So, for many years US was not terriblly concerned about TSP's continued support of AFG. Talibs, 'coz US assumed AFG Talibs were ''vanquished''. Untill US finally realized that they had a resurgent resurgency in AFG. The other issue is ''many of the terrorist orgs like LeT and JeM, though they are horrible killers, US thought they were India's problem. Wasn't until the Mumbai attacks 2008, 'around thanks giving' that the US realized that they were ''our enemy''. US' ability to coerce TSP to go after LeT and JeM is hamstrung by their logistical requirement. 2014 is going to be an opportunity for the US to realize where its security interests lie, and come up with policy that will compel TSP to stop supporting terrorism, like it has done - ''not for a decade, not for two decades but literally since the origin of the state''.

:shock: something happened to kumari gori(Ms. Fair)!! I think she has signed up on the khan's plan to pass the buck to india and let india sort it out. the theme seems to be that. i really dont like it.
Last edited by shaardula on 03 Dec 2011 08:43, edited 1 time in total.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24261
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby SSridhar » 03 Dec 2011 08:13

shaardula wrote:Something happened to kumari gori(Ms. Fair)!! I think she has signed up on the khan's plan to pass the buck to india and let India sort it out. the theme seems to be that. i really dont like it.

Kumari Gori, :)
Shaardula, I do not buy her justification on why the Taliban was not on the US radar or the LeT, JeM types were India's problems. I will explain that in another post, perhaps.

She seems to be, as you said, propagating an American PoV. Possibly employed by them now full time to do so now that she has lost her tenure.

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shaardula » 03 Dec 2011 08:31

no. no. ku.go is not upto any good. as folks here have dissected, now that the ''hill'' (ameerkhani for the US parliament) has come under the camel, the world is suddenly topsy turvy and new virtues are being found where none existed before & kugo is singing new tunes.

meanwhile you please do find time and do write more.
Last edited by shaardula on 03 Dec 2011 08:41, edited 1 time in total.

parsuram
BRFite
Posts: 366
Joined: 31 May 2002 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby parsuram » 03 Dec 2011 08:32

2014 is a long ways away. The US is commited to getting rid of paki generated terrorism in Afghanistan - talibs of all stripes, assorted lashkars, and of course the paki army. It appears the US is not too concerned about the nukes. Interesting how that drum beat about those nukes is so quickly replaced by "we have the right to self defense as well ".

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Airavat » 03 Dec 2011 08:41

A Times of India report quoted Veena Malik while speaking during the FHM photo shoot:

“It’s tough standing on one leg, while trying to cover up with one hand and running the other through my hair – you guys are going to pay for this.”

In a new Times of India report, Veena has been quoted denying she has posed nude for the magazine. She says the photographs have been morphed.

“I have never posed nude. I have never done anything like that ever. My manager and legal team is looking into the matter. We will take legal action against them.”

“The picture has been morphed. Its not me. Definitely not.”


FHM India Editor Kabeer Sharma denies her claim and says the magazine has proof of the photo shoot.

“The photo shoot was done in Mumbai on November 22. We have a video of the photo shoot.”

“I also have an email from Veena in which she says she has seen the photos and is happy with them, and that she’s looking forward to seeing the cover.”

Veena Malik denies: 110 comments and counting

shaardula
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2591
Joined: 17 Apr 2006 20:02

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shaardula » 03 Dec 2011 08:46

guys can you please take VM off this thread. thanks.

RajeshG
BRFite
Posts: 277
Joined: 29 Mar 2003 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby RajeshG » 03 Dec 2011 09:08

As always Anujan Saar has it right.

Remember the cantonment tour that he took after the May 2 attack where mid-level officers could barely contain their anger? This will be similar.

Few things come to mind:
1. Ashphuck should be praying for less incidents with NATO rather than writing letters about "befitting reply". What are TFTAs going to do if NATO attacks them again? Scramble PAF? fire a few stingers? They are going to get their musharraf whooped. So better to not fight NATO again.


Until Kayani scrambles PAF he cant shake-off the charges of hijra-giri. By saying local guys can fire, Kayani is saying to wanna-be-qadris -> if you think you are a true gazi, go ahead and fire and see why i cant sleep these days. IOW he is saying he is not the only hijra in PakFauj, a hijra lurks in every TFTA mard. tatte chook bhai tatte chook...

Gazi nation, reduced to such levels.. tch-tch...

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shiv » 03 Dec 2011 09:50

shaardula wrote::shock: something happened to kumari gori(Ms. Fair)!! I think she has signed up on the khan's plan to pass the buck to india and let india sort it out. the theme seems to be that. i really dont like it.


With respect shaardula this is a disingenuous comment that makes no sense. Your post suggests that up until now India has not had to handle Pakistan by itself and that unkil was somehow involved in keeping Pakistan at bay. You know that is nonsense. If unkil stops helping Pakistan it can only help India. Now why are you so uncomfortable with that?

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby rajanb » 03 Dec 2011 10:06

Arun Roperia wrote:Pakistan has right to self-defense so does US: Pentagon

"I've seen the comments attributed to General Kayani. I'm certainly not going to speak for him or for the government of Pakistan. But every sovereign nation has the right of self-defense and the right to order their troops to defend themselves. That's what my understanding is what he did: He reiterated their right of self-defense. We certainly respect that right of his. We have it as well,"
Pentagon spokesman Navy Capt John Kirby

Your more Ashphuck kiya-nahi! :rotfl:


A very brilliant piece of articulation. Translation: "You have the right to shoot; we have the right to vapourise you. A challenge.

Are the gloves coming off now?

ManuT
BRFite
Posts: 595
Joined: 22 Apr 2005 23:50

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby ManuT » 03 Dec 2011 10:16

The AEI video, I actually dozed off watching it first time around. :oops: My 2 cents for having watched the video.

Initially I thought, Ms Fair has been given her brief and she is making the right noises now.
At least she says TSP wants to create Taliban Regime 2.0 (TR2.0), in her terms as Jurassic goons.
Now talking about containment 2014, (should it not begin in 2012?). Overall she seems to be learning a few things.
One thing is for sure she not planning to go back to TSP in the near future.

Disagree with her that Army is in a stronger position. (Has the Certification as part of KLB been approved for this year or is pending?)
If we review the last 1 yr (and as the host said) my take is, yes more valleys than peaks, but TSP has gotten jacked each time.
For US the weakest point IMO was when it was on the back foot during the RD affair.

In quick succession- OBL, Ilyas Kashmiri, Fai affair, Mullen (veritable arm), recent documentary from BBC and frontline (ISI, DCH, LET), Mansoor Ijaz-Haqqani memogate. It seems the ‘deep state’ in a way is being held to account by the US establishment. PAF forcing down IA chopper has all been shown as bumkum. Even China card has boomeranged. That being the case, Kiyani and TSPA is weaker to carry out a coup against the civilian govt.

(BTW, a shout to Rajiv Lather, who had been cooing coup alerts in after the OBL raid, which were confirmed in the memogate)

Here is my problem with her. Is seems the American Mission in Afghanistan is all about bringing the boys home, not a bad goal in itself but the goal of leaving a stable Afghanistan is left open to trade.

She has realized that Americans have been sitting on Indians whenever there is a terror attack on India plotted by ISI & Co. So she is getting close but not there yet. Nowhere have I heard ‘experts’ accepting that US made 2 big mistakes in Afghanistan, even after 10 years.
1. To rely heavily on TSP as part of the solution.
2. To totally exclude India as part of the solution, at the behest of TSP’s co-operation.

From these 2 blunders American policy has never really recovered.

Kamran Shafi's is in a difficult position (We are deep trouble friends). He put forth ‘deep state’ and non-deep state, which, I guess, kept the discussion focused as all other panelists picked up on it.

He was called out on the ‘moderate silent majority’ in the question, which was limited to alcohol and 6-7 seating for the voting pattern. Muslims Hindu & Christian minorities in TSP kind of unconvincing since TSP is a declared ‘Islamic’ state. I don’t know why he was asked a question on Kashmir.

(My opinion of him is, TSP might not make it, but because of people like him, at least TSPians will know why they went down, rather than blaming India or this or that. He is a marked man in TSP)

Tom Donnelly Too polite, a bit vague but covered a lot of ground particularly the China card.

Eli Lake, 'Mullen was the "Kiyani whisperer" '. I think he have just called Kiyani a dog :D . Sweet. US decieved for 8 years is nonsense. As for TSP, we know it has gone after some high value targets but it seems only when it kind of expect to pull something out of its Musharraf to keep US happy, even KSM was caught in a defence neighbourhood.

A good host and lastly no 'deep state' affiliated journos, in this one.

shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34982
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby shiv » 03 Dec 2011 10:22

rajanb wrote:Are the gloves coming off now?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epwvxaSNAfo

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby rajanb » 03 Dec 2011 10:25

^^^ Dream on Porkistan.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21195
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Prem » 03 Dec 2011 10:45

KIyanahi was heard whispering to Gilla Nahi

Musharraf pe parri Khan ki Laat, Mukh se nikle naa koi Baaat
Ki Goongroo toot gaye!!
Kush Talibani ka akkar bhi thaa, Kush Chiini Master ka Phakhar bhi thaa,
Par Unkle ne oootha di Khaat, Ourr Marri Jor se Mush pei laatt
Bola, Yehi terri apni auqaat ,
Ki goongoo toot gaye !!

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Airavat » 03 Dec 2011 11:20

x-post
P Chitkara wrote:As per the latest reports Kayani stated “It would have been better if the PAF could have also participated in the response.” (to NATO strike taking 28 mujahids to their hoories)

To which Musharraf (main bhi kabhi general tha) has responded thusly:
While Musharraf emphasized that the Pakistan Air Force is “very much capable” of monitoring the country’s airspace, he admitted that radar coverage along the Pak-Afghan border is not as strong as Pakistan’s eastern frontier. “Our radar coverage on the western border is not as much as it is on the east. The east has full radar coverage,” he said, adding that there exist dead zones in the mountainous region in the west where there is no radar coverage.

He also explained that the response to an airspace violation cannot always be immediate since military channels have to follow a procedure whereby a request must be forwarded to air channels before any action is taken. “We need to think about how capable we are of a military response. We need to evaluate if a military response will be in our favour,” he said, adding that the pros and cons of such action need to weighed before making a move.

And he has confirmed that after all the huffing and puffing of "hitting back" and otherwise throwing a hissy fit, it all comes down to:
When asked what diplomatic and military response he would have deemed appropriate in the aftermath of the attack if he were in power, Musharraf said that Pakistan’s response to the situation was fitting. “How can we go to the Bonn conference when our nation is infuriated?” he asked, adding that other diplomatic moves such as bringing the incident to the attention of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) and United Nations (UN) would also be appropriate.

He also said that monetary compensation for the deceased soldiers should be demanded, and other demands should be negotiated with Nato and America.

Allah ke naam pe de! :lol:

anishns
BRFite
Posts: 1348
Joined: 16 Dec 2007 09:43
Location: being victim onlee...

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby anishns » 03 Dec 2011 11:28

RajanB sir, the poster of the video on youtube "Abdul Pakee" is apna Hakim sahib under sarcasm burkha ;) me thinks!

rajanb wrote:^^^ Dream on Porkistan.

rajanb
BRFite
Posts: 1945
Joined: 03 Feb 2011 16:56

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby rajanb » 03 Dec 2011 11:42

anishns wrote:RajanB sir, the poster of the video on youtube "Abdul Pakee" is apna Hakim sahib under sarcasm burkha ;) me thinks!

rajanb wrote:^^^ Dream on Porkistan.


Good reverse "piskology" as he calls it. :mrgreen:

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Satya_anveshi » 03 Dec 2011 14:25

Some more masala from MI:

An Insider Analysis of Pakistan's 'Memogate' by Mansoor Ijaz

Zardari and Haqqani both knew the U.S. was going to launch a stealth mission to eliminate bin Laden that would violate Pakistan’s sovereignty. They may have even given advance consent after CIA operations on the ground in Pakistan pinpointed the Saudi fugitive’s location. The unilateral U.S. action, they might have surmised, would result in a nation blaming its armed forces and intelligence services for culpability in harboring bin Laden for so many years. They planned to use the Pakistani public’s hue and cry to force the resignations of Army chief Gen. Ashfaq Kayani and intelligence chief Gen. Shuja Pasha. Pliable replacements would have been appointed.

If it all went wrong, the Pakistanis could unite in their hatred of America for violating their nation’s sovereignty, with Zardari leading the chorus aimed at Washington. If it went to plan, the long-sought aim of putting civilians (i.e., Zardari & Co.) in charge of the Army would be complete. Washington would have bin Laden’s scalp; Zardari would have Kayani’s and Pasha’s. And U.S. taxpayer-funded aid would flow unabated under the Kerry-Lugar bill in which Haqqani had pushed so hard to include civilian-supremacy language as a sine qua non.

Not a bad plan. Really, not a bad plan.

Unfortunately, plans leave footprints. Consider that Operation Neptune Spear was approved by President Obama at 8:20 a.m. on April 29. After waiting one day for bad weather, the operation commenced. Ask Haqqani where he was during those fateful days prior to, and on the day of, the bin Laden raid. Answer: London. Coincidentally, he would have left at just about the same time Obama gave the green light. Why? Whom did he meet? What did he discuss with his British hosts? Why was he back for another round of meetings with the same people—Sir David Richards, chief of the Defense Staff (Admiral Mullen’s British equivalent), and Tobias Ellwood, parliamentary private secretary to the defense secretary—a week later? For what were characterized as private visits, Haqqani’s appointment agenda was pretty hefty—an agenda that only one man knew about beforehand: Asif Ali Zardari.

What private matter could be so important that it required Pakistan’s eyes and ears in America to be away from his desk on the very day his host country was about to execute one of the most daring military missions in history to kill the world’s most-wanted terrorist on Pakistani soil? Was Haqqani in London so he could plausibly deny having any knowledge of the bin Laden raid on the day it occurred, having just conveyed Zardari’s approval for the raid to the Obama national-security team? Or was he tasked with informing Pakistan’s key allies to keep everyone in the loop—playing the role of a back channel within his own government?

Satya_anveshi
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3532
Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Satya_anveshi » 03 Dec 2011 14:34

Involving foreign country in Pakistan’s affairs not treason - Hussain Huqqani talks for the first time after Memogate initiated.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7069
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 31 Oct 201

Postby Anujan » 03 Dec 2011 14:40

^^^^^
Popcorn and beer time


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Avinandan, Dumal, hnair, Rupesh, Thakur_B and 54 guests