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.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24010
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 05 Dec 2011 17:28

Aditya_V wrote:But hasn't Pakistan used it Nuke Umbrella to give Sanctuary to L-E-T, Taliban and various Terrorist Orgs, they have been blackmailing like this for 20 years. In fact, one could argue much of the world's terror would not exist today if China did not give Pakis Nukes

Oh yes, you are right. But, now Pakistan is threatening the very nation that allowed it to acquire the nukes and their delivery systems. That is a kind of gratifying. When TSP threatens China as well, the circle will be complete and very satisfying indeed. Insh'a Allah.

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 17:45

I was glad that I was wrong about Porkistan attending the Bonn Conference. Porkistan is growing to be twice the IqBal it was! Apparantly karzai turned down the offer of having the Porki Ambassador attending the Conference.

Looks like after the 24 meeting their wotever, there maybe a bit of hesitation from both sides of the border to be overt, as the Porkis were before to create trouble on the Afghan side of the border.

The Paki tactics will be to delay whatever normalisation that the Yanquis were hoping for. After all, 2014 is not too far away.

Now the ball is in the Yanqui court. Will they go about it as business as usual? Will they cross the border as freely as they have done before? 23rd December is still three weeks away. And the winter tends to slow down activities there.

Interesting scenario to guage whether the Yanquis have learnt any lessons.

Virendra
BRFite
Posts: 1205
Joined: 24 Aug 2011 23:20

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

Postby Virendra » 05 Dec 2011 17:55

Vivek_A wrote:US attack on Pakistani posts ‘unpardonable': defence expert

Guess who the defense expert the nutty nation is referring to.....go ahead....guess :mrgreen:


Zahil Hamid ? The best they have :D

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

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

Postby Altair » 05 Dec 2011 17:58

There is a sudden overt outpouring of support from US Consuls inside Pakistan towards Balochis who have been killed and dumped by the ISI. Some Balochis have been termed Hero's by the Consul General's on behalf of US Government.
Clearly the new policy has trickled across all branches of US.It has changed from "appeasement" to that of "provoke and confront".

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12163
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

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

Postby Aditya_V » 05 Dec 2011 18:04

My only hope is the Pakis push Uncle to the Brink where the US has to take a hard decision on Baluchistan.

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

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

Postby Altair » 05 Dec 2011 18:06

Aditya_V wrote:My only hope is the Pakis push Uncle to the Brink where the US has to take a hard decision on Baluchistan.

Like targeting US Consul's for praising Balochi's. An attack on Consulate premises is an attack on the sovirginity of US.

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 18:24

http://www.dawn.com/2011/12/05/us-govt-must-take-action-against-mansoor-ijaz-malik.html

Posted partly. The funny part.

US govt must take action against Mansoor Ijaz: Malik


ISLAMABAD: Minister for Interior Rehman Malik Monday said that the United States government must take action against Mansoor Ijaz for violating US laws and issuing false statements against the armed forces and against Pakistan’s leadership. :rotfl:


Regarding Ijaz’s statements of the country’s leadership and Haqqani’s knowledge of the Abbottabad operation, Malik said the US had itself admitted that the Pakistani government and Haqqani were not aware of the operation so the US must take action against Ijaz for giving false statements.

“Pakistan has always been asked to do more but it is time for the US to take action against the person who is violating its laws by misguiding the international community :rotfl: ,” Malik told media representatives after a meeting at the Interior Ministry on the law and order situation during Muharram.


I never stop getting amazed by the cheek of these people. They don't mind sounding like shameless idiots and beggars. Always trying to get something from someone. And the best part is the Yanquis have been fooled by this lot for decades w/o catching on! :eek:

Obviously these statements go down wellwith the mango apeduls because after >60 years of independence is this their progress on the road to building a grand caliphate of the peure?

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 » 05 Dec 2011 18:31

Folks let me ask you a rhetorical pisko question in MCQ format. If you were Pakistan army and the US conduced a raid under your nose to take out bin Laden, what response would be the best in order for you to save your echandee? Choose one.

1. Admit that you knew nothing about it
2. Say that you found out about it but did not respond
3. Say that it is not possible to respond against the US
4. Say that you knew all along and your silence was part of the game to get bin Laden.

Altair
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2620
Joined: 30 Dec 2009 12:51
Location: Hovering over Pak Airspace in AWACS

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

Postby Altair » 05 Dec 2011 18:38

shiv wrote:Folks let me ask you a rhetorical pisko question in MCQ format. If you were Pakistan army and the US conduced a raid under your nose to take out bin Laden, what response would be the best in order for you to save your echandee? Choose one.

1. Admit that you knew nothing about it
2. Say that you found out about it but did not respond
3. Say that it is not possible to respond against the US
4. Say that you knew all along and your silence was part of the game to get bin Laden.


obviously No. 4.
Pakis have not totally realized that US has changed its policy towards Pakistan. They still think it is a game. So , unless US is fooling everyone including India, Pakis are playing it wrong. The only option Pakis have is to defend.

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 18:44

shiv wrote:Folks let me ask you a rhetorical pisko question in MCQ format. If you were Pakistan army and the US conduced a raid under your nose to take out bin Laden, what response would be the best in order for you to save your echandee? Choose one.

1. Admit that you knew nothing about it
2. Say that you found out about it but did not respond
3. Say that it is not possible to respond against the US
4. Say that you knew all along and your silence was part of the game to get bin Laden.


Now Shiv, this is not me speaking.

This is the PORKI ARMY SPEAKING:

Major Gernail Utter Gasbag said: 4. That we knew all along and our silence was requested as a part of strategy to get bin laden. In fact our air force was on high alert to provide support like CAS/CAP/CAD/CAM in case the AQ AF got involved.

Psst: was it a serious question? :oops:

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 05 Dec 2011 18:49

Shiv Ji, good questions.. Will attempt the answers:

1. Admit that you knew nothing about it
A: Easiest way out.

2. Say that you found out about it but did not respond
A: Bad for echandee. Quadri would not be impressed with the PA chiefs answer to that.

3. Say that it is not possible to respond against the US
A: Bad for echandee, Quadri will take the nearest AK and head for GHQ if that is the answer.


4. Say that you knew all along and your silence was part of the game to get bin Laden.
A: Bad for echandee..multi Quadri's will jump on their AK's and head for GHQ..being with the Kufr and going for the Purest is sure to enrage the faithfools.
.
So i would go with A and seethe inside. Let the Haqqani's loose on some US assets to vent out..

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 05 Dec 2011 18:53

Rajan Ji, didn't the PA admit not knowing anything about that. US wouldn't risk telling any Paki about the operation. Remember the Paki radars on the Western side were down for maintenance that night. Wouldn't be surprised if the Americans deep fried some electronics to avoid detection prior the operation.

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

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

Postby parsuram » 05 Dec 2011 18:56

Aditya_V wrote:Wont all these problems for the West regarding distribution of supply, access to CAR etc. for the West be solved if Balushistan moves to its natuaral state where it is a separate republic.


Aditya ji: In all the commotion created by the paki after a couple of dozen of its jihadi cannon fodder were burnt for heat and light to illuminate the paki's self gratifying activities in the dark, with the paki blustering about cutting off overland access to Afghanistan by NATO/US, an interesting alternative is overlooked. A cursory atlas check shows that overland access as well as via air corridors to Afghanistan can be provided through India ( Ladakh) and China ( Tibet /Xingsiang). This would require China to play a construtive role in the situation in Afghanistan, which in turn will:(a) put some constrain, apply brakes on the runaway madness of the paki, (b) put the US in a position of dependence towards the Chinese, which, considering their complex and mutually dependant economic relationship, will be a much more of a stable situation than depending on the paki or Russia for NATO/US and (c) enhance the constructive level of the Chinese relationship with India. All in all, it is a far better situation for China than to be lying in the gutter with the paki.
Last edited by parsuram on 05 Dec 2011 19:08, edited 1 time in total.

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 19:02

harbans wrote:Rajan Ji, didn't the PA admit not knowing anything about that. US wouldn't risk telling any Paki about the operation. Remember the Paki radars on the Western side were down for maintenance that night. Wouldn't be surprised if the Americans deep fried some electronics to avoid detection prior the operation.


Harbans ji. Sure I know that. But if you notice under sudden escalation in pressure the Porkis have known to wilt. 1) Surrender of Dhaka and 2) Running to Bill Clinton during Kargil.

The Porkis got confused. But if they had their wits about them and blithely (as they have been doing for decades) lied and said "We Knew" Add a twist to that: the agreement with the Yanquis was that OBL would be taken alive and we are upset that he was killed.

This would have put the Yfronts in a massive twist and as for mango abduls could, they could have been handled. Knowing that the terror groups are nothing but an extension of the ISI, they could have been handled too.

Sriman
BRFite
Posts: 1858
Joined: 02 Mar 2009 11:38
Location: Committee for the Promotion of Vice and the Prevention of Virtue

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

Postby Sriman » 05 Dec 2011 19:18

shiv wrote:Folks let me ask you a rhetorical pisko question in MCQ format. If you were Pakistan army and the US conduced a raid under your nose to take out bin Laden, what response would be the best in order for you to save your echandee? Choose one.

1. Admit that you knew nothing about it
2. Say that you found out about it but did not respond
3. Say that it is not possible to respond against the US
4. Say that you knew all along and your silence was part of the game to get bin Laden.

Option 1 but would remain fairly muted.

There aren't really any sections of the Paki society who would be angry that the army did not co-operate with the americans. So from a domestic POV, it makes perfect sense to deny and express outrage that the Americans muscled in and killed the Sheikh. It's not exactly an echandee saving position but there isn't such an option available anyway. Short term people would be angry that the Army didn't protect him, but that's preferable to being seen as ones who sold him out.

As for the Americans, it's a transactional relationship anyway. So in any other case, this would have been seen as a grin and GUBO situation. But Pakis have pulled this act one too many times for even the ever patient unkil to let them off the hook easily. Also there aren't a lot of sacrificial pawns left anyway. It'll be pretty painful from here on. Kayani doesn't have a lot of room to manouver right now. He must be under tremendous pressure within the Army.

Gus
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8216
Joined: 07 May 2005 02:30

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

Postby Gus » 05 Dec 2011 20:52

shiv wrote:Folks let me ask you a rhetorical pisko question in MCQ format. If you were Pakistan army and the US conduced a raid under your nose to take out bin Laden, what response would be the best in order for you to save your echandee? Choose one.

1. Admit that you knew nothing about it
2. Say that you found out about it but did not respond
3. Say that it is not possible to respond against the US
4. Say that you knew all along and your silence was part of the game to get bin Laden.


All of the above - so you can't be pinned on one.

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

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

Postby shaardula » 05 Dec 2011 20:53

RCase wrote:Trying this again ...

I would appreciate if someone can explain why is a big deal made out of Pakis not attending Bonn? Wouldn't it be advantageous to the world if the Pakis were kept out of the meeting as they are the problem?

Thnx


I think TSP pulled out of the conference because they are not interested in its agenda. The conference is really about the drawdown of the western forces from AFG. For the westerners and AFGs that means bolstering the sovereignty of AFG, mainly its forces and govt. Which also means they have to establish some sort of social coherence amongst the various peoples in AFG. Something that makes Kabul meaningful to the non-pashtuns.

TSP does not want to contribute to this agenda since they are in fact opposed to it. TSP’s one point agenda is to make AFG their vassal. Which means not let AFG develop internal coherence. In Taliban they have a socially divisive and yet powerful agent, that will keep Afghanistan weak, and hence not independent of TSP.

In other words, there is a possible way out for AFG, but it can only work if TSP DOES NOT play the spoiler. In this conf everybody’s plan would have involved TSP not be a spoiler. And these are NOT the ideas TSP is interested in. The ideas that TSP is interested in, the AFG’s are not interested in, and others cannot openly agree to. TSP itself has NO constructive ideas for AFG that is agreeable to all. Net it would have been a bad conference for TSP to attend, since this would only end up restating the problem – which is TSP. As they say, ‘end up proving the case for prosecution’.

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 21:33

^^^ I agree with you.

If the Yanquis play their cards right, even if Porkis haven't attended the conference I have the following thoughts:

a) Memogate has stirred the divide between PA and the Porki Govt. So who can be trusted at the conference? The Ambassador, who according to reports was not invited, at the insistence of Karzai.

b) if the Porkis had attended, they would have had to listen to diplomatese, but an underlying message of countries joining into a group, which would have been a panic situ. How would they have responded? (in panic situs they normally down hill ski.)

c) But their absence can be seen as a boon. Because the same group of countries can discuss the issue more aggresively.And the Porkis will not be their to come up with trumped up excuses, their evil charm. (Ofcourse, if their chini biraders are there some of it may leak to the Porkis)

d) The timeline of the drawdown of ISAF troops is going to be kept. But the intervening period to 2014 is going to be ramped up to really make it hot for the porkis.

e) And cross border hellphyre is going to continue.

my 2 euros

harbans
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4883
Joined: 29 Sep 2007 05:01
Location: Dehradun

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

Postby harbans » 05 Dec 2011 21:35

IF the Americans are really serious on getting Paki's to attend, they just have to invite India..watch the Paki turnaround then..

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 21:40

harbans wrote:IF the Americans are really serious on getting Paki's to attend, they just have to invite India..watch the Paki turnaround then..


Out of the 85 countries/organisations attending, isn't India there?

Venkarl
BRFite
Posts: 962
Joined: 27 Mar 2008 02:50
Location: India
Contact:

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

Postby Venkarl » 05 Dec 2011 21:49

Last edited by Venkarl on 05 Dec 2011 21:51, edited 1 time in total.

chaanakya
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9513
Joined: 09 Jan 2010 13:30

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

Postby chaanakya » 05 Dec 2011 21:50

rajanb wrote:
harbans wrote:IF the Americans are really serious on getting Paki's to attend, they just have to invite India..watch the Paki turnaround then..


Out of the 85 countries/organisations attending, isn't India there?

yes India is very much there.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... 681982.ece
India goes into the Bonn conference with the tag of being the only country with which Afghanistan has signed a security pact. The U.S., which has invested the most, is still finalising the contours of a similar pact.


http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes ... -officials
NEW DELHI: Foreign minister SM Krishna will emphasise on the role of regional countries in ensuring peace in Afghanistan at the Bonn conference next week, notwithstanding the absence of important neighbours like Iran and Uzbekistan from the international meet meant to discuss the future of Afghanistan as force drawdown plans start to take effect.
Last edited by chaanakya on 05 Dec 2011 22:08, edited 1 time in total.

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 » 05 Dec 2011 22:05

shiv wrote:Folks let me ask you a rhetorical pisko question in MCQ format. If you were Pakistan army and the US conduced a raid under your nose to take out bin Laden, what response would be the best in order for you to save your echandee? Choose one.

1. Admit that you knew nothing about it
2. Say that you found out about it but did not respond
3. Say that it is not possible to respond against the US
4. Say that you knew all along and your silence was part of the game to get bin Laden.


I get the feeling that Pakhani army has settled on 4 as the safest bet. They started with 1, because they did not know what hit them. But when domestic criticism started they had to say that it was a deliberate very chankian ploy to keep quiet and that they and the sooperpower were right up there and equal - i.e sooperpower could not have done it without them.

The US initially denied that and then decided not to ruffle Paki feathers too much and went along with 4.

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 22:16

^^ So Force Majeure Gernail Utter Gasbag was correct. :rotfl:

After all reverse kargil is a Force Majeure condition. 8)
Last edited by rajanb on 05 Dec 2011 22:18, edited 1 time in total.

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 » 05 Dec 2011 22:16

Yes. The distance between Zardari and Haqqani knowing to Kiyani and Paki Army also knowing about Osama raid is short and can be smooth. Not recessarily non-violent. Why not civvies spread the rumour along such and put the millies also at risk?

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

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

Postby rajanb » 05 Dec 2011 22:23



Thanks Venkarl. Hope our chaps stir the pot. Bubble bubble toil and trouble for the Porkis.

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

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

Postby Lalmohan » 05 Dec 2011 22:24

the irony is that zardari and friends are continuously trying to pull a coup against the jarnails even though they are sitting in government... something very quixotic about this situation...

JE Menon
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7044
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby JE Menon » 05 Dec 2011 22:25

mahadevbhu wrote:
Rudradev wrote:
The way I see it, if India offers to facilitate NATO supplies via a Mumbai-Ambala-Kabul route:



rudradev, can you do a back of the envelope calculation about how cost effective is one route over the other.

I'll pose the question thus:

1 tonne of cargo is shipped from houston to bagram air base via 4 routes. the problem is to approximate the cost of shipping of each route, leaving aside the unkowns like bribes paid, cost of terrorist attacks etc.

a. Houston-Dubai shipped and then flight to bagram using a c130 hercules.

b. Houston-Karachi shipped and then truck to bagram.

c. Houston-Karachi shipped + c130 J flight to Bagram.

d. Houston-Mumbai shipped+truck to Ambala +flight c130 hercules to Bagram.

thanks.



I have been reliably informed that:

The best solution from US Gulf to Bagram would be as follows :

US Gulf – Mundra : By Sea

Mundra – Ambala : By Broad Gauge Rail

Ambala – Bagram : By C 130 Hercules

Please note that the Distance from Suez to Mumbai is 2,959 Nautical Miles whereas the Distance from Suez to Mundra will be about 2,850 Nautical Miles.

"Again Mundra to Ambala should be about 150 to 200 Miles less than Mumbai to Mundra."

The Port of Mubai or even Jawahar Lal Nehru Port might entail “Berthing Delays”. Mundra, however, has two Container Terminals with Two Beths each and there is hardly any delay as I am not aware of Mudra handling Four Container Vessels at the same time. In addition Mundra has a “Roll On – Roll Off” Terminal.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8284
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

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

Postby anupmisra » 05 Dec 2011 22:38

AfridiSpeak
Afridi for Vice President!

Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13262
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

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

Postby Lalmohan » 05 Dec 2011 22:41

US forces logistics work in more complicated ways that that. they operate airlift out of the central US, but the bulk of goods and equipment are shipped by sea first. they have major logistics nodes in germany and the gulf - bahrain/doha - which will be major depots. they have a very highly developed logistics capability that rival the DHL's and Fedex's of the world - they understand their costs and requirements very very well and their logistics commanders are highly trained.

for bulk shipping to indian ports they are just as likely to use the pacific route as to come via europe and suez

jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 869
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

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

Postby jrjrao » 05 Dec 2011 23:00

If the US appears to be a deer that is both, frozen in the headlights, and also has a thumb/hoof up its musharraf, when dealing with Pakisatanis, then idiots like Brzezinski can take most of the blame:

Our Frenemy Pakistan -- Former national-security advisers counsel patience with our wayward ally
...former national-security advisers counsel patience with Pakistan, mostly because the U.S. has no other choice.

To understand Pakistan’s double-dealing, Zbigniew Brzezinski, national-security adviser to Pres. Jimmy Carter, says to look to Pakistan’s southern neighbor: India. Ever since Pakistan declared independence in 1947, it has considered its much larger rival an existential threat. And though the U.S. considers Indian assistance to Afghanistan a welcome boon, Pakistan considers it encirclement by the enemy. “The Pakistani perspective is, without controlling Afghanistan, they are vulnerable to India,” he explains. “Their basic interest is in having a situation in which Afghanistan is responsive to Pakistan’s security interest.”

Moreover, Pakistan is distrustful of the U.S., Brzezinski argues, because “we are inclined to reach agreements with India which greatly enhance India’s nuclear capabilities” as a way to counter China. “Sometimes, in a difficult situation, you have to prioritize what you do,” he adds. And the U.S. has never made that choice: What is its priority? Building Afghanistan or confronting China?

Brent Scowcroft, national-security adviser to George H. W. Bush, agrees. “We’ve done some pretty egregious things in the past,” he says. “We sold Pakistan some F-16s and then we cut off military aid to both Paksitan and India and would not deliver the F-16s — nor did we give back the money to them.”

Meanwhile, Bud McFarlane, national-security adviser to Reagan from 1983 to 1985, suggests we remind Pakistan that it needs us as much as we need it. ... because of its conflict with India, particularly over the Kashmir region, 70 percent of its budget goes to military spending and debt service. If the U.S. helped Pakistan “relieve those problems . . . [it] could allow Pakistanis to generate enough disposable income to lift themselves out of poverty, build better roads,” etc.

To foster greater cooperation, Scowcroft adds, the U.S. should do more “to give Pakistanis a sense of confidence” in us, such as by providing trade assistance. “Textiles, for example, are a huge Pakistani export, and we have very high tariffs on those textiles,” he says. “We have to be the more mature party in this, because the Pakistanis are in a difficult region.”

These country-club idiots are so far removed from the Dover KIA processing center, and from the freshly dug graves at Arlington and at cemeteries all around the US, in which lay buried freshly dead young Americans, all because of the Pakis.

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby svinayak » 05 Dec 2011 23:12

jrjrao wrote: And the U.S. has never made that choice: What is its priority? Building Afghanistan or confronting China?

These country-club idiots are so far removed from the Dover KIA processing center, and from the freshly dug graves at Arlington and at cemeteries all around the US, in which lay buried freshly dead young Americans, all because of the Pakis.

Do not underestimate these guys.
India is needed only for this or India is to be discarded. The question should be - Can anarchy rule the region just because one country has a problem. Why are they taking the concerns of Pakistan when Pakistan is not taking the concerns of regional countries.

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4177
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

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

Postby KLNMurthy » 05 Dec 2011 23:56

Acharya wrote:
jrjrao wrote: And the U.S. has never made that choice: What is its priority? Building Afghanistan or confronting China?

These country-club idiots are so far removed from the Dover KIA processing center, and from the freshly dug graves at Arlington and at cemeteries all around the US, in which lay buried freshly dead young Americans, all because of the Pakis.

Do not underestimate these guys.
India is needed only for this or India is to be discarded. The question should be - Can anarchy rule the region just because one country has a problem. Why are they taking the concerns of Pakistan when Pakistan is not taking the concerns of regional countries.

Under Carter and Reagan these individuals put together the architrcture of dependency on TSP. Their egos won't allow them to admit that TSP can't be a part of any solution.

Some enterprising media personality should get CFair and these alter cockers into a debate and watch the ratings fly as CFair curses them out for cynically colluding in the murder of America's finest youths with American money.

nachiket
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7765
Joined: 02 Dec 2008 10:49

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

Postby nachiket » 06 Dec 2011 00:30

jrjrao wrote:....

Brent Scowcroft, national-security adviser to George H. W. Bush, agrees. “We’ve done some pretty egregious things in the past,” he says. “We sold Pakistan some F-16s and then we cut off military aid to both Paksitan and India and would not deliver the F-16s — nor did we give back the money to them.”


Scowcroft is either misinformed or just lying. The US never gave India any military aid to begin with.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54560
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 06 Dec 2011 01:08

They are all grand poohbahs/has beens of US National security safely esconsed in their ivory towers. Most of them are the architects of the failed US poliicy towards TSP. Asking them for advise is asinine.

Basically they are justifying their choices by saying TSP is recalcitrant but for India.

Ask the ones with more recent experience like Gen Jones et al.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21163
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 06 Dec 2011 01:20

Lalmohan wrote:the irony is that zardari and friends are continuously trying to pull a coup against the jarnails even though they are sitting in government... something very quixotic about this situation...


Zardari must go so Sindh can burn. Deparure of Dus percenti will hasten Paki demise by 20%.

RCase
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2046
Joined: 02 Sep 2011 22:50
Location: Awaiting the sabbath of Fry djinns

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

Postby RCase » 06 Dec 2011 01:25

rajanb wrote:^^^ I agree with you.

c) But their absence can be seen as a boon. Because the same group of countries can discuss the issue more aggresively.And the Porkis will not be their to come up with trumped up excuses, their evil charm. (Ofcourse, if their chini biraders are there some of it may leak to the Porkis)


Precisely! That is why I am having a hard time understanding why the West is begging TSP to attend and TSP is refusing to attend as a result of wounded HSR&D (self-respect got tacked on recently). I would have expected exactly the opposite. Even if they 'agreed' to any terms, TSP has had a history of not abiding by those terms and will continue to play spoiler to further its own proxies and agenda. This would be a great opportunity to come up with punitive terms towards TSP and have the blessing of the attending countries.

Arjun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4283
Joined: 21 Oct 2008 01:52

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

Postby Arjun » 06 Dec 2011 01:29

Brezinski pretty much fathered the creation of Pakistani terrorism, and the rise of China - the two biggest security threats for the US today. And the US continues to fete this idiot and turn to him for advice...!!! :roll:

svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14223
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

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

Postby svinayak » 06 Dec 2011 02:02

Arjun wrote:Brezinski pretty much fathered the creation of Pakistani terrorism, and the rise of China - the two biggest security threats for the US today. And the US continues to fete this idiot and turn to him for advice...!!! :roll:


Need to understand why!

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

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

Postby shaardula » 06 Dec 2011 02:49

Hamid Mir's take on the goings on at Bonn

http://www.rediff.com/news/special/germ ... 111206.htm


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Ardeshir, isubodh and 39 guests