Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2012

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: 24236
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby SSridhar » 22 May 2012 08:08

svenkat wrote:http://dawn.com/2012/05/21/three-officials-face-court-martial-over-pns-mehran-base-attack/
An investigation committee was constituted after the attack, which after probing for months has recommended to court-martial Base Commander Raja Tahir, Commander of Mehran Base Israr and Lt-Commander Mohammad Absar.(AoA!)

For what crime are they being court-martialled ? For being negligent in their duty or colluding with the 'bad Taliban' ?

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21189
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Prem » 22 May 2012 09:13

http://dawn.com/2012/05/22/our-indian-agenda/
Our Indian agenda
Shaikh Chilli Khan

On the other hand, it is certain that Musharraf’s Kargil incursion was the last of its kind; the army has travelled far in grasping regional and global strategic realities and more importantly, the non-military dynamics of the social and economic sectors.
In India, unfortunately, the doctrine of a limited war under a nuclear overhang has not been finally abandoned. Even there, the sheer futility of huge military confrontations in 1986 (Operation Brasstacks), 1990 (Kashmir uprising) and 2001-2002 (terrorist attack on Indian parliament) is convincing decision-makers that the prevailing strategic stalemate cannot be easily overturned.
It is also true that some Indian hawks, in an exact replica of the Cold War, reduce it to a numbers game and wait for a tipping point when India would militarily prevail.The arrogant argument that India does not need to transact business with Pakistan already looks flat. There is a fair chance of the current direct India-Pakistan trade of $2.7bn rising to $6bn in the next few years though targets beyond that would require bigger political and economic decisions. So even if increasing trade is not exactly a game-changer, it should help create a more conducive environment.here has been talk in both the countries of ‘doables’, the low-hanging fruit, in particular Siachen and Sir Creek. On Siachen, the forthcoming meeting in June may turn out to be as unproductive as the one last June because of the Indian army’s veto on disengagement. Its insistence on the ‘authentication’ of the Actual Ground Position Line or AGPL — the Saltoro ridge — is seen in Pakistan to be integrally linked to high-cost projects portending indefinite physical occupation. Pakistani planners would not overlook the possibility that India would use blood, treasure and technology to jeopardise Pakistan’s land link with China.Pakistan will not undertake unilateral disengagement because of several apprehensions: India wants to dominate Pakistan’s northern areas and Shaksgam valley; Siachen is a triangular ‘strategic wedge’ between Pakistan and China, with the Karakoram pass being the primary focus; Indian ambitions to use Nubra valley and Siachen glacier’s Saser La pass for access to Central Asia; and finally, the belief that India will resume its northwest march the moment Pakistan lowers its guard.The fact that Pakistanis cannot go up and take the Saltoro ridge and that the Indians cannot come down to implement the imputed agenda should enable the political leadership to take the initiative to implement the once agreed disengagement. For potential future betrayals, there will be credible safeguards and iron-clad guarantees.Pakistan should energise the discussion on mutual strategic restraint. Given the Indian preoccupation with China, an across-the-board regime is impossible but considerable mutual assurance is achievable. India is now globally recognised as amongst the top military spenders. The more menacing the Indian posture towards Pakistan, the greater would be Pakistan’s counter-action to fortify its ‘minimum deterrence’; it has already waded into the domain of ‘tactical nuclear weapons’. There should be no let-up in efforts to make Indian leaders aware of the perils of the growing militarisation of Indian policy towards Pakistan just when the Pakistan Army was signalling support for a détente.

Notwithstanding inflexible negotiating habits, progress in many areas is possible as neither side now insists on any core issue: Kashmir from Pakistan, and Mumbai and overland transit to Afghanistan from India, being a pre-condition for it. A settlement of Jammu and Kashmir, however, remains indispensable to the quest for permanent peace. It may take time for ideas for a solution acceptable to India, Pakistan and the people of Kashmir to gain traction. Kashmir remains the worst example of India treating ambition as entitlement.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21189
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Prem » 22 May 2012 09:23

http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\05\22\story_22-5-2012_pg3_4
India in Afghanistan — Azz iz ulah Khaan

In Afghanistan, India has tactfully intertwined her interests with the interests of Afghans, thereby making it costlier for other states to strike at it. India is expanding her influence in Afghanistan through taking part in its reconstruction and rehabilitation, which is at present the prime need of Afghans. Doing so, she not only won their hearts and minds but also made them feel obliged to show deep concern with her reconstruction projects. Any state that might attempt to stop India from expanding her influence through reconstruction can do so only at the risk of antagonising Afghans and pushing them more strongly in her camp.India’s policy towards Afghanistan is the embodiment of the ‘soft power approach’. Soft power, in the crude sense, is the capacity of a state to influence others without twisting arms, threatening or compelling; in other words, it is the capacity to attract the target people and make them do your bidding. India is quite successful in this regard. She has carved a niche for herself in the minds of Afghans, which is allowing her influence in the war-torn country. She is perhaps the most-favoured state among Afghans, who view her as a state that is truly positive regarding them. Due to their destructive interference in Afghanistan, other regional states have a bad name with Afghans. India’s good reputation is also justified by the history of Indo-Afghan relations. With the exception of the Taliban era, both the states have had cordial relations, partly because of their hostility towards Pakistan. (The Taliban were hostile towards India due to her tacit support to the Northern Alliance, which was fighting against them.) As the Taliban are considered pariahs of Afghan society, therefore the exception has added trust to the relationship.What would happen to the Indian achievements if the Taliban came to power in Afghanistan? This question would be certainly looming large in India’s calculations but she has good reason to remain confident. First, observers of Afghanistan believe that the Taliban are now transformed. Having been dealing with the issues of war and peace for a decade, they have now developed diplomatic and strategic sense. They have relieved themselves of tribal simplicity like believing that a guest is a guest — be it Osama bin Laden, Gul Khan or Allah Ditta. Secondly, if this belief is right, then the recent US-Afghan Strategic Partnership (SPA) must have made the Taliban realize that they cannot come to power militarily. Were they to come to power, they could only do so through an all-inclusive political arrangement. Leaders from all strata of Afghan society will be given equitable representation, in which case the Taliban will not be Taliban but bearded politicians of Afghanistan. In both cases, there is a greater possibility that India will maintain and build on her achievements in Afghanistan.
Owing to the negativities associated with Pakistan, it has been continuously ignoring its (Pakistan’s) genuine interests at stake in Afghanistan. If she keeps up with this policy, there is a possibility that Pakistan will veto the whole process of rehabilitation and reconstruction of Afghanistan. Lest it happen, the US should satisfactorily address all genuine interests of Pakistan.What can be the best strategy or policy for Pakistan to counter India in Afghanistan? To do what India is doing in Afghanistan. To take a leaf from the Indian policy book for Afghanistan. All other options are outdated, counterproductive and undesirable.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Suppiah » 22 May 2012 10:41

Jhujar wrote:http://dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\05\22\story_22-5-2012_pg3_4
India in Afghanistan — Azz iz ulah Khaan

there is a possibility that Pakistan will veto the whole process of rehabilitation and reconstruction of Afghanistan. Lest it happen, the US should satisfactorily address all genuine interests of Pakistan.


Be it a so-called liberal, moderate or jehadi terrorist pig, the message and tone is all the same - do what I say, give me what I want or I use terrorists to deal with you..they never learn lessons. These sewer pigs have to be nuked. no choice.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Suppiah » 22 May 2012 10:42

SSridhar wrote:For what crime are they being court-martialled ? For being negligent in their duty or colluding with the 'bad Taliban' ?


Duty to who? Allah or mere mortals that are their bosses? They did their duty..followed the scriptures.
Last edited by Suppiah on 22 May 2012 10:43, edited 1 time in total.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4014
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby partha » 22 May 2012 10:42

http://tribune.com.pk/story/382385/saga ... pposition/
Appreciating Turkey’s stance on issues related to Palestine, Israel and Kashmir, Nisar said that taking such a position qualifies Erdogan to play the role of a spokesman for the Islamic world

When your own house is flooded with sewage water and you run the risk of dying by drowning in it, talk about a fight between 2 neighbors 10 blocks away.

RCase
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2063
Joined: 02 Sep 2011 22:50
Location: Awaiting the sabbath of Fry djinns

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby RCase » 22 May 2012 11:13

Chehra-e-Kitab blasphemes Al-Kitab

A day after the authorities briefly banned access to microblogging website Twitter due to ‘blasphemous’ material, the city capital police on the orders of a city court on Monday registered a case against social networking giant Facebook.

One of the complainants, Advocate Rao Abdur Rahim, told The Express Tribune that they had been informed in July 2011 that Facebook and a few other websites had been posting ‘blasphemous’ posts on their websites and the material was being uploaded from inside Pakistan. :shock:

Concerned government officials, Pakistan Telecom Authority (PTA) and police were requested to take action but they did not pay attention, therefore, Islamabad District Bar on July 27, 2011 filed a complaint for the registration of an FIR but no action was taken” said Rao. :lol:

“We gave three applications: one against Payam TV for telecasting a movie ‘Yousaf’, one against Facebook and three other websites and one against the US embassy in Islamabad for organising a gathering of gays and lesbians,” the petitioner said.

Accepting two applications, Judge Kamran Mufti directed Margalla police to register an FIR against Payam TV and Facebook, however the court turned down the application against the US embassy. :rotfl: {What to do ... imdad ka masla hai! Judge sahib also wants to ensure green card for his family}

Raja Bose
BRF Oldie
Posts: 19478
Joined: 18 Oct 2005 01:38

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Raja Bose » 22 May 2012 11:27

There is a possibility that Pakistan will veto the whole process of rehabilitation and reconstruction of Pakistan. Lest it happen, the US should satisfactorily address all genuine interests of Pakistan.

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Suppiah » 22 May 2012 11:49

RCase wrote:Chehra-e-Kitab blasphemes Al-Kitab

Concerned government officials, Pakistan Telecom Authority (PTA) and police were requested to take action but they did not pay attention, therefore, Islamabad District Bar on July 27, 2011 filed a complaint for the registration of an FIR but no action was taken” said Rao. :lol:


He should name them so the faithful can do the needful.

sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10115
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby sum » 22 May 2012 11:53

Raja Bose wrote:
There is a possibility that Pakistan will veto the whole process of rehabilitation and reconstruction of Pakistan. Lest it happen, the US should satisfactorily address all genuine interests of Pakistan.

And we want to have "CBMs" with such folks? :|

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Lalmohan » 22 May 2012 12:19

partha wrote:http://tribune.com.pk/story/382385/sagacious-advice-erdogan-offers-lessons-to-govt-opposition/
Appreciating Turkey’s stance on issues related to Palestine, Israel and Kashmir, Nisar said that taking such a position qualifies Erdogan to play the role of a spokesman for the Islamic world

When your own house is flooded with sewage water and you run the risk of dying by drowning in it, talk about a fight between 2 neighbors 10 blocks away.


i met a turkish gentleman recently. withing a few minutes of conversation, he started to talk glowingly about indian history and the turkish connection, and how turks were proud to be 'absorbed' into india. he then immediately started on 'wtf is wrong with pakistanis?' which amused me no end. he finally ended with 'a person is from their nation and culture first and religion second' - which i thought was perhaps an interesting revelation of the turkish educational model

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24236
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby SSridhar » 22 May 2012 12:47

partha wrote:http://tribune.com.pk/story/382385/sagacious-advice-erdogan-offers-lessons-to-govt-opposition/
Appreciating Turkey’s stance on issues related to Palestine, Israel and Kashmir, Nisar said that taking such a position qualifies Erdogan to play the role of a spokesman for the Islamic world

The Sole Spokesman would have been mightily displeased with the mantle not coming a Pakistani's way. All his efforts have gone a waste. Let the bad Taliban teach all these people a good lesson.

svenkat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4725
Joined: 19 May 2009 17:23

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby svenkat » 22 May 2012 13:19

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/05/22/2811391/pakistan-navy-court-martials-officers.html#storylink=cpy

Commodore Irfanul Haq told The Associated Press on Tuesday that the three naval officers were punished for their negligence, but there was no evidence they were linked to the militants or helped them attack the base.



Turned out to be premature e@%%%n.The paki afsars are less pious onlee.

Kanishka
BRFite
Posts: 330
Joined: 15 Aug 2010 06:44
Location: K-PAX

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Kanishka » 22 May 2012 16:24

Mohajirs demand a seperate state.
[youtube]drcwzTqKxPw#![/youtube]

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Suppiah » 22 May 2012 17:12

SSridhar wrote:The Sole Spokesman would have been mightily displeased with the mantle not coming a Pakistani's way. All his efforts have gone a waste. Let the bad Taliban teach all these people a good lesson.


The contest for sole spokesman has always been hot. Strange...Churchill may have said never have so many spent so much time going after something that means so little..even if you keep oil power in mind..

Suppiah
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2569
Joined: 03 Oct 2002 11:31
Location: -
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Suppiah » 22 May 2012 17:14

Lalmohan wrote:i met a turkish gentleman recently. withing a few minutes of conversation, he started to talk glowingly about indian history and the turkish connection, and how turks were proud to be 'absorbed' into india. he then immediately started on 'wtf is wrong with pakistanis?' which amused me no end. he finally ended with 'a person is from their nation and culture first and religion second' - which i thought was perhaps an interesting revelation of the turkish educational model


Lalmullah, may the lord forgive him for such ignorance and blasphemy. It is always religion first and then everything else is not even in the list. May be he is a misfit in Erdogan's turkey, and the pious will take care of him..

pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4130
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby pgbhat » 22 May 2012 17:20

Talking with Pak on issues more openly: Karzai
Mr. Karzai termed his brief encounters with Presidents Barack Obama and Asif Ali Zardari on the sidelines of the NATO Summit in Chicago as “just a photo-opportunity and not a meeting”.

“No, we didn’t have a three-way meeting. We had a three-way photograph taking,” Mr. Karzai told CNN, referring to the photo released by the White House in which the three presidents were talking to each other.

“Just a photo opportunity.”

When asked why a three way meeting was not held to discuss the most important issues Afghanistan, Pakistan and the U.S., he said, “it wasn’t for us to decide on the three-way meeting. The U.S. was the host and perhaps they saw it fit for some other time.”

vdutta
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby vdutta » 22 May 2012 17:28

have you guys seen the video where Gilani's security guards were man handled by local punjab police. looks like the PM of sindh is not very welcome in the land of sharif brother's punjab.

vdutta
BRFite
Posts: 682
Joined: 08 Nov 2002 12:31
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby vdutta » 22 May 2012 17:47

Kanishka wrote:Mohajirs demand a seperate state.
[youtube]drcwzTqKxPw#![/youtube]

even minorities demanded for a seperate province. i think its high time that ahmadis demand for for their own.

or may be the army should demand a province as well.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby harbans » 22 May 2012 18:11

The Omar Bakri YOu tube video posted by Sushupti ji in the Islamism thread is a must watch to understand Kashmir, Pakistan and it's relationship to India. It so because Bakro crystallizes what Islams relation is with the infidel so succinctly. The relation is either through a peace treaty; A Dhimmi relation ship or in a state of war. The peace treaty is applicable as long as say Islamist populations are 1-2% of the population or less. People think oh they are like us, and perfectly normal and they don't take the books violence literally. More so there are such passages in the NT, Jewish texts too. The second manifests itself in a preliminary stage Islamic Republic. Like Malaysia. Chinese, Indians don't have the same rights. Pakistan till the 60's could be considered such in spurts. The 3rd stage manifests itself when 90% types are Islamic in an Islamic Republic. Then quite often if it is read out to the minorities that Allah is the One and Only God and Mohammed his prophet, and if they don't accept it, then it is OK to be in a state of war with the family, girl, community, individual etc. Also there are blasphemy provisions and life for the minority becomes hell. Most would either leave, convert or suffer.

Kashmir the same arises. For centuries the locals allowed Muslims to settle down in the comfort of the himalayan vales. Things were peaceful and the biggest geographical part of Kashmir which is Ladhak/ Leh remained majority Buddhist till date. Why would Buddhists or for that matter Hindu's in Jammu want to live under Dhimmi or warlike conditions in an Islamic republic in the future. If at all Muslims do consider they cannot live under non sharia, they should not have settled down in Kashmir in the first place and if converted moved to a place under Sharia. By what measure should Buddhists or Hindus be allowed to live under Sharia?

Why should peace be applicable only if one is powerless, Dhimmitude if quite powerful, and war if complete power is established. Civilization demands peace be the bottom line even if powerful. IF that is not the case then the doctrine does not aim for peace. It aims for power to wage war on the infidel. That is why i recommend that video for all to see, if not as yet. IT is only a few minutes. So please do watch.

shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2201
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby shravan » 22 May 2012 18:59

10 killed in Karachi after firing on Awami Tehrik rally
http://www.samaa.tv/newsdetail.aspx?ID=47915&CID=1

---

Karachi violence: Live updates
http://tribune.com.pk/story/382510/firi ... n-karachi/

KARACHI: At least 11 people have been killed and 30 injured in violence that erupted after unidentified gunmen opened fire on a rally organised by the Awami Tehreek and banned Peoples Amn Committee (PAC) in Karachi on Tuesday.

Awami Tehreek President Ayaz Palijo, in a press conference, said that the police left the areas as soon as firing began and the PPP “stood there, watching Sindhis being killed”.

“I thank PML-N and Jamaat-e-Islami who supported us in the protest,” he added.

He further warned that every drop of blood that was shed in today’s riots will be avenged, “not from innocent Urdu-speaking people, but from terrorists”.

Rajdeep
BRFite
Posts: 491
Joined: 23 Aug 2010 20:48

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Rajdeep » 22 May 2012 19:33

vdutta wrote:
or may be the army should demand a province as well.


Army already has a province :twisted:

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby harbans » 22 May 2012 19:36

Obama seems really pisssed at the Paki's. This is a major H & D blow..but then the Paki is probably bred to be more thick skinned than an armadillo..

WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: In a clear snub to Pakistan, US President Barack Obama left off the country from a list of nations he thanked for getting war supplies into Afghanistan, signalling a deepening rift between the two nations.

"I want to welcome the presence of (Afghan) President (Hamid) Karzai, as well as officials from Central Asia and Russia, nations that have an important perspective and that continue to provide critical transit for ISAF supplies," host Obama said in his remarks at the NATO summit.

Obama's cold shoulder to Pakistan came despite President Asif Ali Zardari occupying a seat on the round table along with his foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar at the summit.

....

The US president stressed that the only exchange he had with his Pakistani counterpart was short, "very brief, as we were walking into the summit," US media reports said.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 393908.cms

Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12598
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Aditya_V » 22 May 2012 19:44

harbans wrote:Obama seems really pisssed at the Paki's. This is a major H & D blow..but then the Paki is probably bred to be more thick skinned than an armadillo..

WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: In a clear snub to Pakistan, US President Barack Obama left off the country from a list of nations he thanked for getting war supplies into Afghanistan, signalling a deepening rift between the two nations.

"I want to welcome the presence of (Afghan) President (Hamid) Karzai, as well as officials from Central Asia and Russia, nations that have an important perspective and that continue to provide critical transit for ISAF supplies," host Obama said in his remarks at the NATO summit.

Obama's cold shoulder to Pakistan came despite President Asif Ali Zardari occupying a seat on the round table along with his foreign minister Hina Rabbani Khar at the summit.


....

The US president stressed that the only exchange he had with his Pakistani counterpart was short, "very brief, as we were walking into the summit," US media reports said.


Pakis should take this lying low, the must punish the USA approriately to let thier feelings known






http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 393908.cms

pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4130
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby pgbhat » 22 May 2012 20:24

This is yet another pacqui drama. Whatever the outcome declare "victory". This will be projected as Pacqui defiance of Unkil and abduls will go AoA!!

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7024
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Anujan » 22 May 2012 21:56

Roperia wrote:+1, even during Obama Administration's time US has armed Pakis with AIM-120 BVR to fight the WoT, provided them with P-3 Orions to help Pakis search for Haqqani fighters who may have gone underwater etc.


Every american president seems to realize what Pakistaniyat means in their second term. Clinton took 1 term to recognize it, Bush took 1 term to recognize it, BO has also taken 1 term to recognize it. Maybe we should distribute the BRF TSP ebook to them to save them some time?

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby svinayak » 22 May 2012 22:13

Anujan wrote:

Every american president seems to realize what Pakistaniyat means in their second term. Clinton took 1 term to recognize it, Bush took 1 term to recognize it, BO has also taken 1 term to recognize it. Maybe we should distribute the BRF TSP ebook to them to save them some time?

These are negotiation tactics between GOTUS and Pakistan. By ignoring they will get the Pakistan elite to fall in line and concede to their demand in the 2nd term.

Even the current status of split is more of a tactic to get the maximum concession.

Pakistani elite are children in front of the Americans.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21189
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Prem » 22 May 2012 23:26

http://dawn.com/2012/05/22/sindhi-natio ... hyderabad/
Sindhi nationalist leader Muzaffar Bhutto’s body found in Hyderabad

HYDERABAD: After 45 days of mysterious death of chairman, Jeay Sindh Qaumi Mahaz (JSQM) Bashir Khan Qureshi, the bullet riddled body of another nationalist leader Muzaffar Bhutto was found in the outskirts of Hyderabad on Tuesday.Bhutto was central secretary general of Jeay Sindh Muttahida Mahaz (JSMM) which is headed by Shafi Burfat.His body was found stuffed in a gunny bag near Bukhari village in the limits of Hatri police station near Hyderabad.Muzaffar Bhutto was among missing persons of Sindh, as he was kidnapped on February 25, 2011 from national highway near Saeedabad town.The family members had been staging demonstrations for recovery of Bhutto while petition had also been filed in the apex court of Sindh. The slain leader has left a widow Saima Bhutto, two sons and a daughter.The body of slain JSMM leader was brought to civil hospitalHyderabadlate last night by some people who disappeared after leaving the body. Later, the relatives identified the body on Tuesday. The body of Muzaffar Bhutto was later sent to Sehwan, his hometown, where he would be laid to rest.The reports of death of Muzaffar Bhutto sparked reaction in different cities and towns of Sindh. In Qasimabad,Hyderabadand Kotri, the activists of JSMM resorted to aerial firing after which the hops and other businesses were closed.In Dokri town three people sustained injuries when the enraged people started firing. One of the injured Muhammad Zada succumbed to injuries at the hospital. The Larkana town was also completely shut after the reports of Bhutto’s death reached. The aerial firing was also reported from different areas.Reports from Nawabshah said all the commercial activities came to standstill in Nawabshah, Sakrand and Qazi Ahmed towns where the aerial firing created panic.The JSMM workers alleged that secret agencies were involved in killing of their leader. Meanwhile, Zain Bhutto, vice chairman, JSMM, condemned the murder of Muzaffar Bhutto and Dr Niaz Kalani, acting chairman, Jeay Sindh Qaumi Mahaz, has announced strike in Sindh on Wednesday to condemn the murder of nationalist leader
.

chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 24359
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby chetak » 22 May 2012 23:30

Rajdeep wrote:
vdutta wrote:
or may be the army should demand a province as well.


Army already has a province :twisted:



punjab or pakjab?

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21189
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Prem » 22 May 2012 23:31

Haram Ki Bhasha and Tamasha Deserve Gandassa

KARACHI: India could play host to Pakistan’s limited-overs series against Australia, Pakistan Cricket Board (PCB) Chairman Zaka Ashraf indicated on Tuesday.Ashraf, who will be flying to India to attend the Indian Premier League (IPL) final at the invitation of his counterpart N Srinavasan, said the neighbouring country could be a possible venue for the series scheduled in August.“We are seeing where the cost will be less,” Ashraf said.PCB is currently considering United Arab Emirates (UAE), Malaysia, South Africa and Zimbabwe as potential venues for the series prior to the World Twenty20 in Sri Lanka in September.Pakistan has been playing its ‘home’ series in UAE since 2009, but the cost of hosting matches in the Emirates has been reportedly dented the PCB finances.“If the cost is less (in India) there’s no harm in organising Pakistan’s home series at some good venue,” Ashraf has said.The PCB chief is also hoping to revive bilateral ties with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) during his upcoming tour.The bilateral series has been suspended since 2008 after the terror attacks in Mumbai that killed 166 people.Ashraf said he will be talking with his Indian counterparts on resuming cricketing ties. “Slowly the ice is melting,” he said.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21189
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Prem » 22 May 2012 23:40

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news- ... vided-ever
Sindh cannot be divided ever
PML-N Quaid Mian Mohammad Nawaz Sharif is the only leader of a national party, who has been categorical about how the PML-N considers division of Sindh equivalent to treason and how Pakistan's territorial integrity is linked to Sindh's borders not being tampered withOf late, we have all noticed that the signage for a separate province for Mohajirs is fast spreading in Sindh's big cities. We condemn such a movement and those forces who are actively assisting such a tehreek. Breaking Sindh in pieces would lead to bloodshed because every son and daughter of the soil would resist such a move peacefully. However, knowing the terrorist and fascists supporting such a movement, it is clear that our peaceful resistance would make us sitting targets for their firepower.There can be no distinction between any of them based on how new their entry has been in Sindh. Those who entered Sindh pre-Raja Dahir, post-Mohammad bin Qasim and post-1947 cannot be divided into bands of new and old Sindhis. It’s unheard of in the world to have separate provinces for immigrants, since by their very definition immigrants migrate to make their new homeland their home and not to carve it out into a separate home.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7024
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Anujan » 22 May 2012 23:47

Bilawal urges Obama to “show courage”, apologise
http://dawn.com/2012/05/22/obama-should-apologise-for-salala-bilawal/

“Pakistan deserves an apology,” he said...“I urge President Obama to show some courage. I understand he is running for reelection but if he is the same man who inspired the world with his message of hope and change the future of Nato mission in Afghanistan should be more important than poll numbers,” :mrgreen:

“I would like the American public to consider what their reaction would have been if American troops had been killed in such an attack on their border with Mexico.” {What about American troops killed in Af-Pak border?}

"We are at a crossroads. The future of the bilateral relationship could well determine the success of moderation against extremism in South and Central Asia.” 8)

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21189
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Prem » 22 May 2012 23:55

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2 ... istan.html
NATO Summit’s Big Loser: Behind Obama’s Snub of Pakistan
America’s broken relationship with Pakistan crashed again in Chicago. The details are not yet clear, but the damage to the already severely dysfunctional relationship with Islamabad is a major step backward.When Pakistan imposed the border closing last fall, it was confident that NATO would have to cry uncle fairly soon. For years most of NATO’s logistics came through Karachi, the mega-port on the Arabian Sea and Afghanistan’s traditional trade hub. At the start of the Obama administration, more than three quarters of NATO’s supplies arrived this way. But the president early on ordered the Pentagon to build an alternative route through Russia and Central Asia. By 2011 it was ready. Costs went up, but Pakistan no longer had a lock on NATO’s logistics. So Islamabad this spring finally realized it was hurting itself by keeping the border closed.
Still, powerful forces in Pakistan want the border to remain shut. Jihadist groups have coalesced since last fall into a lobby called the Defense of Pakistan. Led by Hafez Saeed, the leader of Lashkar-e-Taiba, the terror group that attacked Mumbai in 2008, the pro-closure forces have held huge demonstrations in Pakistani cities demanding no compromise with America and NATO, no border opening and an end to all drone attacks on terror targets. This spring the United States put a $10 million bounty on Saeed for his role in the Mumbai massacre that killed six Americans. He laughed in Washington’s face on Pakistani TV. He knows he has powerful backers in the Pakistani Army and the intelligence service, the ISI. Zardari has tried to reset relations with India this year, traveling there to visit a Muslim shrine and to meet with Prime Minister Singh. Zardari, unlike the jihadists and the ISI, understands that for Pakistan to prosper, the country needs to end its rivalry with India, open its border to trade and try to hook its economy to the growth of its bigger and richer neighbor. Zardari understands that Pakistan will remain poor and backward as long as it pours its resources into the Army and into the fastest-growing nuclear arsenal in the world.Zardari wants to reset relations with Washington as well. But his room for maneuver is very limited by the Army and the Parliament, which are demanding an apology for last November’s deaths and the end to the drone war. The jihadists just want to kill him. Now he has been snubbed by Obama, who would not meet with Zardari without a border deal. He got a session with Secretary Clinton instead.

RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby RamaY » 22 May 2012 23:56

^ :rotfl:

The little leader is getting trained properly, i would say...

The world should show courage and give Pakistan $500B, unlimited high-tech weaponry, civil nuke deal and UNSC seat.

Pakistan is perpetually at cross roads. The future of world's relationship with Pakistan could well determine the success of moderation against extremism in the entire world.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55197
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby ramana » 23 May 2012 00:12

What is this BS about showing courage and giving into Paki demands? How about TSP showing courage and getting rid of the T in their name?

Pakis have a very big sense of entitilement backed with a flailing strategy! It has convinced some BRF members show "courage" by giving them Siachen to add to POK.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 55197
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby ramana » 23 May 2012 00:47

Google News Headline
Pakistan supply route is crucial to NATO's Afghan exit


So NATO is fixed on pulling its combat troops out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014. However the cost and ease of the withdrawal depend on a third player - Pakistan


Essentially its about giving the Pak hafta to allow the NATO troops to be supplied. TSP is demanding more for they know the other routes are not so cheap. IOW this is a bazaari dialog between TSP and US.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby svinayak » 23 May 2012 02:01

One local lgora in the massaland openly says now that the maal has to be taken out

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7024
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby Anujan » 23 May 2012 02:21

ramana wrote:Google News Headline
Pakistan supply route is crucial to NATO's Afghan exit


So NATO is fixed on pulling its combat troops out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014. However the cost and ease of the withdrawal depend on a third player - Pakistan


Essentially its about giving the Pak hafta to allow the NATO troops to be supplied. TSP is demanding more for they know the other routes are not so cheap. IOW this is a bazaari dialog between TSP and US.


Najam Sethi had an interesting view in TFT. He pointed out that as long as Bush had a concept of unending war on terror with Pakistan as an ally (therefore guaranteeing that Pak will get money and arms forever) all was hunky dory with US and Pak. BO changed the calculus to withdrawal and assistance to Afghan forces to combat terror (thereby creating an armed constituency in Afghanistan which can shape its own destiny and possibly even overcome or fight the jihadi challenge from Pak), which makes Pak re-evaluate its alliance with the US. The OBL attack also showed that instead of using Pak as a base to attack targets in Afghanistan, US is using Afghanistan as a base to attack targets in Pakistan (this applies to drones as well). All of which was a big No-no to Pakistan. Essentially Pakistan has thrown the gauntlet and is forcing US to choose between Afghanistan and Pakistan (gone are the days when they used to challenge the US to choose between India and Pakistan!)

The latest hoopla is also about US troop withdrawal rather than supply. Based on supply constraints, US can decide the number, duration, deployment etc but if Pak refuses to co-operate, withdrawal will become a huge headache. Also, railways are probably the best for withdrawal (more security, accountability etc) so US is paying for upgrading the rail network and Pakis are shopping for locos from India.

r_subramanian
BRFite
Posts: 255
Joined: 17 Mar 2009 11:18
Location: Australia

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby r_subramanian » 23 May 2012 06:36

Short report. Posting in full
Drone strike kills 4 in N. Waziristan
Drone strike killed at least four people and injured several others in North Waziristan here, Geo News reported.
The unmanned aircraft fired two missiles on a house in Miranshah as a result four people lost their lives while several others sustained injuries. The house was completely destroyed in the attack.
It was the first drone strike after Chicago conference.

link

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 29 March 2

Postby shiv » 23 May 2012 06:43

WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: [b]In a clear snub to Pakistan, US President Barack Obama left off the country from a list of nations he thanked for getting war supplies into Afghanistan, signalling a deepening rift between the two nations.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/worl ... 393908.cms


Huh :?: :?: :?: :shock:

Pakistan has been "left out from a list"? And this is a snub? wtf? Is the US now reduced to getting satisfaction and revenge by saying "Nya ha ha you stoopid pukies. You are not on our list! You won't be invited to my 6th birthday party!

What kind of snub is this? Leaving out Pakistan from a list?


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: bharathp, rpartha, SriniY and 36 guests