Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 06 Dec 2011

sum · Post by **sum** » 15 Dec 2011 15:29

^^ But why do they go out of control and target the TSPA/ISI itself when things arent in a mango jam? Shouldnt they be quiet even then if the TSPA had complete control unless one faction of the TSPA uses it against the other?

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2011 15:36

sanjaykumar wrote:Is she really a serious professor tweeting such supercilious stuff.

I think you mean superficial, but is BRF really a serious forum when such idiocy is posted?

My apologies for posting it - my thought was that the tweet sort of illustrates how the narrative of Pakistan is constructed by Westerners (and even many Indians). They are bewitched by their individual experiences with Pakistanis who turn on the charm and then miss seeing the forest for the trees. Only actual unmistakeable evidence of perfidy like OBL in Abbottabad wakes them up, for a while, but eventually they may relapse.

The memes that infect Pakistanis that keep them from thinking straight are maladaptive for long-term civilization; so they have to have more than one way of propagating, else it wouldn't have survived. It can't be just the madrassa. There is something there that works to draw in people. It must act on even the least bit of any outsider's insecurities, and make them feel gratified at being accepted.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2011 15:39

sum wrote:^^ But why do they go out of control and target the TSPA/ISI itself when things arent in a mango jam? Shouldnt they be quiet even then if the TSPA had complete control unless one faction of the TSPA uses it against the other?

When everyone seems to be moving in the direction of being purer, the virulence is lessened.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 15 Dec 2011 15:39

sum wrote:^^ But why do they go out of control and target the TSPA/ISI itself when things arent in a mango jam? Shouldnt they be quiet even then if the TSPA had complete control unless one faction of the TSPA uses it against the other?

Sum, there is a possible explanation to your question (and I shudder at the very thought).

That the TSPA/ISI are so diabolical that to keep up the charade of TIRP being subject to the "same terrorism" (and hence getting their begging bowls filled), attacks like the ones you talk of are collateral damage and allowed when the coins roll into their outstretched palms! The point I must research is whether such acts took place before 9/11?

If anyone else has a less sordid reason, I would love to hear it.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2011 15:58

Non-tariff Barriers

They further said CBM has clearly stated that cross LOC trade is barter trade between two divided parts of Kashmir with zero tariffs but even then the traders have to pay Rs 70,000 at time of crossing to TATA at respective terminals at Chakothi and Titrinote. In contrary to it, the traders of Indian side of Kashmir have to pay only one percent taxes to government during the transportation of goods to others states of India, they added. They alleged that FBR authorities have repeatedly been contacted regarding the legal and political dynamics of the trade but they are bent upon to create hurdles and are in habit of ceasing the goods and imposing the custom duty and fine on the stakeholders up to Rs 500,000 per truck. The traders are dubbed as smugglers and some times fine and custom duty is charged double to the goods, they disclosed. They added that problems being faced by traders were brought in the notice of Azad Kashmir but every attempt was proved a cry in wilderness. They also demanded of the government not only to remove the hindrances in the smooth flow of trade but also refund the illegal charged custom and fine to Loc traders.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2011 16:08

US House freezes $700 M aid to Pakistan

US House of Representatives has passed a massive $662 billion defence bill that freezes $700 million for Pakistan until the defence secretary provides Congress a report on how Islamabad is countering the threat of improvised explosive devices.

Passed Wednesday with a 283-136 vote with bipartisan support in a bitterly divided Congress, the measure is expected to be approved by the Senate Thursday before it is sent to President Barack Obama for his signature.

However, in practical terms, the Pakistan aid freeze provision is unlikely to have any major impact as officials have made clear that Washington in no hurry to turn the tap off amid a tense stand off with a key ally over the killing of 24 Pakistani soldiers in a NATO strike last month.

As State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland Tuesday explained once the aid freeze provision becomes a law, the Obama administration would find ways of complying with it.

"If this legislation becomes law, we'll work with the Government of Pakistan on how we can fulfil the requirements. But, this requires us to maintain a strategic perspective and to be clear with our Congress about the strategy," she said.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 15 Dec 2011 17:17

Washington: Contending that US relationship with Pakistan had reached a dead end, an American lawmaker has said there was a sense among Congressmen that time had come to "side" with India to "cut off the ISI".

Senator Mark Kirk said at a discussion forum by prestigious Washington-based think tank, Foreign Policy Initiative, that a US-India tie-up was ISI's "horror story" but time had come for it to evolve.

"You know, Yogi Bear said when you reach a fork in the road, take it. I think we hit the fork in the road in August and September between the United States and Pakistan. We saw a large truck bomb assembled, lit off next to a US base, 77 US casualties," Kirk said.

In recent times US' ties with Pakistan, a key ally in the region, have plunged to an all-time low following a series of incidents over the year, including the killing of two people by a CIA contractor, the Abbottabad raid, and finally the NATO airstrike that killed 24 Pakistani soldiers.

"My sense of the Senate and probably the House is we're ready to take that fork in the road. We're ready to side with India, to cut off the ISI," the Illinois Senator said.

"It appears to me the Pakistani horror story of us siding with India should now evolve. Pakistan has decided we're leaving.

Pakistan has decided that they can cripple the civilian government," he said.

The United States, he said, needs a stable party in the region who has a status quo pro-civilian anti-terror interest, which is India.

"And in many ways, this is the ISI horror story, but I would say they picked this, and we should now arrange that fate for them," he said in response to a question. Kirk urged General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to play what he called "hard ball" with Pakistan.

"Get in with the Indian Intelligence Service, the Indian Chief of Staff, bring Indian, not just economic but military assistance on line, and build some long relationships so that in the mid-presidential term next time, the 2014 time frame, you have a steady partner with new money coming on the table that can send an important signal to Afghanistan," Kirk said.

Appearing on the same discussion forum, Congressman Adam Kinzinger, noted that in many cases, actors react more favourably when you are willing to use the stick as a way to get your will done.

"I think as a nation, we have to begin exploring more of those options. How to be a little more difficult, how to be a little harder, how to hold the Pakistanis a little more accountable," he said.

Kirk said he saw the war on terror in the Af-Pak region as a Vietnamese scenario for the US, which should not allow this to happen.

"At the same time, I see this as kind of a North Vietnam scenario, we are fighting in South Vietnam while the North Vietnamese are fighting against us, and we simply allow it to happen," the Congressman said.

"At the same time, there should be no doubt that going into the stick approach talking about reducing aid, talking about allying with some of their strong enemies, is going to create a big heartburn in the area. It is going to make it worse. It is going to make it difficult," he said.

link

If India wants a big role in Asia we must pay a price. The price here is to help America save their H&D.

Aditya_V · Post by **Aditya_V** » 15 Dec 2011 17:25

More than India, US has to take the call on Baluchistan, if Baluschistan is separated, then some of these unnecessary problems can be avoided for Massa and RAPE

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Dec 2011 17:28

johneeG wrote:It could also be that Unfair knows the right buttons to push...

Yes. I think the lady is more intelligent than we give her credit for. After removing off their chaddis in public she is saving their echandee in a way that will really make them happy. So she will receive warmth and protection when she next visits Pakhanaland.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Dec 2011 17:30

Altair wrote: If India wants a big role in Asia we must pay a price. The price here is to help America save their H&D.

You mean India pays America to get this role? What does America do? Pay Pakistan to save Indian ass?

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 15 Dec 2011 17:35

"Peanuts!",as Gen. Zia famously said.

700 million is just peauts for the crore commanders who have been raking in the billions over the years.The amount that the ISI/Paki military also make from the drug trade is allegedly also iwith the same number of zeros.Even if the US freezes this paltry figure,it is also "peanuts" for either the Saudis or Chinese to make up for Pak by way of deferring payments for oil or weaponry.The freeze by the US is also symbolic and means little .It would've been a different matter if there was a total freeze on all military supplies and aid! Now that would be a painful spike up the military's butt!

The coming US pres election will consume the time and energy of Uncle O and US mandarins.I forsee more military men running the Paki policy while the politicos start campaigning in earnest.The west's economic worries are also far more important and need the atention that it deserves and in any case Osama has been exterminated-a job well done and the sh*t is all over the unforms of the paki generals.Keeping Karzai alive and kicking in Kabul will be a hard task for the US as the Taliban/ISUI/Pakis plot and plan.SExcuring a route from the north for supplies to western forces and Kabul,is going to be tough,but achievable.The obvious route is through Iran,but it would need a Nixon-like act of statesmnship for Obama to go to Teheran and cut a deal with the Ayatollahs and Ahmed-in-a jacket .Faint hope of that happening!

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2011 17:39

Altair wrote: If India wants a big role in Asia we must pay a price. The price here is to help America save their H&D.

No, India must play the role earned by itself, not that granted by the Americans. The basis of India is India, not American bounty.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 15 Dec 2011 17:58

A_Gupta wrote: No, India must play the role earned by itself, not that granted by the Americans. The basis of India is India, not American bounty.

shiv wrote: You mean India pays America to get this role? What does America do? Pay Pakistan to save Indian ass?

Gurus,
No need to get all emotional here
All I am saying is India put an expeditionary force in Kabul to fight the Taliban. We can sandwitch Pakis from both east and west.
India gets foothold in Afghanistan and Unkils gets to save his sorry a$$.
What is wrong in the bargain?
Altair

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 15 Dec 2011 18:02

Altair wrote: What is wrong in the bargain?

Logistics and role. How do we support the men and material in Afghanistan? What are they supposed to do there exactly? What would be the desired end point militarily so this is not the start of an endless military campaign?

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 15 Dec 2011 18:08

Altair wrote:What is wrong in the bargain?

US a$$ will be replaced with Indian a$$. Why you want to put your nose when someone else is doing your work. Will you accept loss of at least 1000 soldiers every year and cost of maintaining 150K troop??

Currently, Afg people are close to India, they will also go away once we are involved with military as there will be civilian causalities no matter how careful someone is....

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 15 Dec 2011 18:31

shiv wrote:
Altair wrote: What is wrong in the bargain?
Logistics and role. How do we support the men and material in Afghanistan? What are they supposed to do there exactly? What would be the desired end point militarily so this is not the start of an endless military campaign?

Desired End Point: Liberation of Baluchistan and Sindhudesh, If it takes 10 years and 10,000 soldiers lives and Rs.100,000 Crores, then so be it. A Pakistan state intact 10 years from now will cost more to an average Indian than the price.
Regarding logistics there are very very smart people in Armed forces whose only job is logistics for the men on the frontline. I trust them to figure out a way. India will manage and emerge victorious.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 15 Dec 2011 18:38

RKumar wrote: US a$$ will be replaced with Indian a$$. Why you want to put your nose when someone else is doing your work. Will you accept loss of at least 1000 soldiers every year and cost of maintaining 150K troop??

Currently, Afg people are close to India, they will also go away once we are involved with military as there will be civilian causalities no matter how careful someone is....

Someone else is leaving that place and Pakistan will be a bigger menace than it currently is to our children.

yes, I accept the loss of 1000 soldiers every year for 10 years. I know the price of a sacrifice.

We will be fighting shoulder to shoulder with Afghan Army. It will form a strong bond for generations. It is exactly this kind of a bond Pakistan is worried about.

We will be investing not just in security forces. We will have access to the infrastructure and mining projects in Afghanistan.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 15 Dec 2011 18:52

Actually, I'm coming to quite the opposite conclusions. As time-pass, poking at Pakistan is OK, but really, Pakistan would not come in India's top ten priorities. Pakistan is a distraction, a fatal distraction even, for India. Pakistan itself is framed in terms of ideas that were current in the nineteenth century or earlier, and we are drawn into the embrace of those ideas, to our detriment, by the necessity of fighting them. Bakasura kept hitting Bhima, but Bhima ate without interruption, and dealt with Bakasura only when he was done with priority one, which was eating before the food was spoiled.

Right now, India must eat.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Dec 2011 19:00

Arun_Gupta ji,

There are considerations which force us to deal with Pakistan at the earliest.

Increase in Nuclear Arsenal
Improvement in Chinese MIC; Build-up of the Two-Front Axis
Demographic Expansion
Islamization drive in Pakistani society

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 15 Dec 2011 19:05

You would be responsible if we fail in 'War on Terror': Pak to US

Foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar on Thursday warned that the US would be responsible if Pakistan failed in the war on terrorism, a remark that comes in the backdrop of a move by American lawmakers to freeze aid worth $700 million to Islamabad.

The US would be responsible if Pakistan failed in the war on terrorism or if there were problems, Khar was quoted as saying by TV news channels here.

She made the remarks while briefing the Parliamentary Committee on National Security, which met to discuss the issue of reviewing Pak-US ties.

Khar said Pakistan's relations with the US were "on hold" and would move forward if parliament allows it.

She provided details to the parliamentary panel of two formal agreements with the US regarding NATO supply routes and defence cooperation.

Absolutely. I agree with Ms. Khar. Pakistan was never responsible for any of its actions, commissions and omissions. It is always the fault of others.

Hari Seldon · Post by **Hari Seldon** » 15 Dec 2011 19:17

In Today's Dawn...
Monkey business for India, Pakistan
Associated picture

LOL.

johneeG · Post by **johneeG** » 15 Dec 2011 19:23

SSridhar wrote:
You would be responsible if we fail in 'War on Terror': Pak to US
Absolutely. I agree with Ms. Khar. Pakistan was never responsible for any of its actions, commissions and omissions. It is always the fault of others.

...including Pakistan's creation. Pakis seem to believe that,"jisne paida kiya, wohi palan/poshan karega."(one who gave birth will also rear/care)

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 15 Dec 2011 19:37

Aditya_V wrote:More than India, US has to take the call on Baluchistan, if Baluschistan is separated, then some of these unnecessary problems can be avoided for Massa and RAPE

Absolutely, they are still trying to preserve Munna.

Neela · Post by **Neela** » 15 Dec 2011 19:39

SSridhar wrote:You would be responsible if we fail in 'War on Terror': Pak to US
Foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar on Thursday warned that the US would be responsible if Pakistan failed in the war on terrorism, a remark that comes in the backdrop of a move by American lawmakers to freeze aid worth $700 million to Islamabad.
The US would be responsible if Pakistan failed in the war on terrorism or if there were problems, Khar was quoted as saying by TV news channels here.
She made the remarks while briefing the Parliamentary Committee on National Security, which met to discuss the issue of reviewing Pak-US ties.
Khar said Pakistan's relations with the US were "on hold" and would move forward if parliament allows it.
She provided details to the parliamentary panel of two formal agreements with the US regarding NATO supply routes and defence cooperation.
Absolutely. I agree with Ms. Khar. Pakistan was never responsible for any of its actions, commissions and omissions. It is always the fault of others.

Is this a gun on TSP's head?
Or a gun on Amreeki's head?
Is it a gun?
Nutty nation just got nuttier!

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 15 Dec 2011 19:49

NOt only Mr Khars statement is one with a gun to ones head, but it's also a threat. It threatens to not being responsible for terror attacks against US/ West/ India. If there's another 911 type or JDAM type thing..please don't blame Gutterstan, blame yourselves for killing Paki soldiers and cutting aid off. We were fighting terrorists and you killed our soldiers and cut aid off..So better it is interpreted as a threat.

RKumar · Post by **RKumar** » 15 Dec 2011 19:55

Altair wrote:Someone else is leaving that place and Pakistan will be a bigger menace than it currently is to our children.

yes, I accept the loss of 1000 soldiers every year for 10 years. I know the price of a sacrifice.

We will be fighting shoulder to shoulder with Afghan Army. It will form a strong bond for generations. It is exactly this kind of a bond Pakistan is worried about.

We will be investing not just in security forces. We will have access to the infrastructure and mining projects in Afghanistan.

From my PoV, better to train Afg army/police before and after someone leave ... I am totally against sending our troops there for day to day fight. It should be done by the Afg people, we can provide some hardware let unkil support with heavy hardware. It will be big mistake on our part to leave north-east unguarded and get busy with little chap pk. It is a trap and we should avoid it at all cost.

Better to put some money on medical and infrastructure for the betterment of Afg ppl. e.g. pk provided training and hardware (China) and Sri Lanka is thank full to them. By playing the same game, we should beat pk in their own back yard.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 15 Dec 2011 20:38

RKumar wrote:
From my PoV, better to train Afg army/police before and after someone leave ... I am totally against sending our troops there for day to day fight. It should be done by the Afg people, we can provide some hardware let unkil support with heavy hardware. It will be big mistake on our part to leave north-east unguarded and get busy with little chap pk. It is a trap and we should avoid it at all cost.

Better to put some money on medical and infrastructure for the betterment of Afg ppl. e.g. pk provided training and hardware (China) and Sri Lanka is thank full to them. By playing the same game, we should beat pk in their own back yard.

It appears we hold diametrically opposite view points. Let us agree to disagree.

arunsrinivasan · Post by **arunsrinivasan** » 15 Dec 2011 20:45

Altair wrote:Regarding logistics there are very very smart people in Armed forces whose only job is logistics for the men on the frontline. I trust them to figure out a way. India will manage and emerge victorious.

However smart the people in Army logistics are they cannot work around the geography!! The only possibility is via Iran & dont see if Iran would allow Indian army supplies to go to Afghanistan esp when they are fighting TSP / its proxies.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 15 Dec 2011 20:54

arunsrinivasan wrote:
Altair wrote:Regarding logistics there are very very smart people in Armed forces whose only job is logistics for the men on the frontline. I trust them to figure out a way. India will manage and emerge victorious.
However smart the people in Army logistics are they cannot work around the geography!! The only possibility is via Iran & dont see if Iran would allow Indian army supplies to go to Afghanistan esp when they are fighting TSP / its proxies.

Why? Everything is for trade in this world. Everything has a price and everything is negotiable. India and Iran have a very long history of trade relations even when there was no currency. The only thing here which matters is how much political capital New Delhi wants to invest in breaking up Pakistan. Everything will fall in place.

Pranay · Post by **Pranay** » 15 Dec 2011 21:06

Altair wrote:Desired End Point: Liberation of Baluchistan and Sindhudesh, If it takes 10 years and 10,000 soldiers lives and Rs.100,000 Crores, then so be it. A Pakistan state intact 10 years from now will cost more to an average Indian than the price.
Regarding logistics there are very very smart people in Armed forces whose only job is logistics for the men on the frontline. I trust them to figure out a way. India will manage and emerge victorious.

Regarding your "Desired End Point" - It's very easy to make grandiose statements when one's own life and money are not at stake...

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 15 Dec 2011 21:07

For Afghans to remain independent, they have to believe that independence is worth fighting for. India can help them, but boots on the ground are counter productive. Training, yes. Hardware, yes. Perhaps even military advisers. But no boots on the ground are called for.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 15 Dec 2011 21:22

US and TSP are made for each other. If India offers help prematurely it will be rebuffed just as after 9/11. The duo need each other a little bit more.

Altair · Post by **Altair** » 15 Dec 2011 21:29

Pranay wrote: Regarding your "Desired End Point" - It's very easy to make grandiose statements when one's own life and money are not at stake...

Yes. Very True. But, Atleast I am attempting to come up with a solution rather than whining about problems.
If IG thought like you in 1971 when we had serious economic problems and a super power breathing down our neck we would have had much bigger problems today.
Pathetic!

Charlie · Post by **Charlie** » 15 Dec 2011 21:37

Minnesota banks plan to suspend money transfer to somalia to stop terror funding

In light of the above.. should a series of articles appear (to pressurize pakis)urging to stop money transfer from PAK-Americans to terroristan. I know there will never be a ban on money transfer including to Somalia but exposure in the US media will hurt PAKI H&D. Anyway every other week some Paki is arrested for hawala money transfers to terror organizations.

Mihaylo · Post by **Mihaylo** » 15 Dec 2011 21:42

Neela wrote:
SSridhar wrote:You would be responsible if we fail in 'War on Terror': Pak to US

Is this a gun on TSP's head?
Or a gun on Amreeki's head?
Is it a gun?
Nutty nation just got nuttier!

This is a gun to TSP's behind. You pay me money or I will blow my A** off and then no more GUBO which you so much like.

They deserve each other

Pranay · Post by **Pranay** » 15 Dec 2011 21:51

Altair wrote:Yes. Very True. But, Atleast I am attempting to come up with a solution rather than whining about problems.
If IG thought like you in 1971 when we had serious economic problems and a super power breathing down our neck we would have had much bigger problems today.
Pathetic!

No whining here... but your attempts at problem resolutions are commendable.

At least they need to be realistic, and the casual flippancy with which you are willing to sacrifice "10,000 soldiers and Rs. 100,000 crores" should be avoided.

IG and 1971 was a case where appx. 10 million refugees had flooded into India, about 3 million Bengalis were massacred in a systematic genocide by the Pakistani military in Bangladesh, etc... No such catalyst is present in either Baluchistan and Sind.

As for my thought process.... I have served in the military (U.S Navy) and have put my life on the line in armed conflict and have a chest full of medals on my old uniform - i don't need to prove anything to anyone. I know what war is all about...

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 15 Dec 2011 21:56

Mihaylo wrote:This is a gun to TSP's behind. You pay me money or I will blow my A** off and then no more GUBO which you so much like.

Great one!

stryker · Post by **stryker** » 15 Dec 2011 22:29

Seriously bad economic news coming from TSP, especially current account deficit. A few gentle squeezes of their nuts by the US and they could be headed for debt default. Z.A. Bhutto's prediction that we will eat grass may come true sooner rather than later. The morons running the place seem oblivious to serious economic issues but talk about BS like sovereignty. Maybe the breakup of TSP is not that far off. Would be the best solution as TSP is not part of the civilzed world community.

Venkarl · Post by **Venkarl** » 15 Dec 2011 22:40

Guys,

Any idea what opinion does TSP/TSPA/ISI carry on Sonia Gandhi and her son?

TIA

Lalmohan · Post by **Lalmohan** » 15 Dec 2011 22:49

RajeshA wrote:
Mihaylo wrote:This is a gun to TSP's behind. You pay me money or I will blow my A** off and then no more GUBO which you so much like.

Great one!

yes, but as i said a while back, for jarnail - gubo is a pleasure, for unkil it is a 'who's the daddy?' duty of top-dog
jarnail may shoot himself in the foot still