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.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

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

Postby abhishek_sharma » 13 May 2012 05:26

From The Hindustan Times

Cricket will bridge deep 26/11 divide

Then we should have started cricket matches on 28 Nov 2008.

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5372
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

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

Postby SBajwa » 13 May 2012 05:33

nothing surprising here..

Gallup poll: 77% of Pakistanis marry within family



Not only they married but their parents and grand parents did the same! so They are BCs from generations!!!

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6959
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

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

Postby Anujan » 13 May 2012 05:37

Xposting from IWT dhaaga

chaanakya wrote:Delay in Chinese loan puts Neelum-Jhelum project in doldrums

According to the Indus Water Treaty the country that first completes its project on Neelum tributary will have the priority rights on the water of Neelum River.

The officials are surprised that Beijing has immediately released $130 million for the Chilas Road in Sakrdu, whose PC-I is even not approved just because of the fact the said road would connect border of China, but when it comes to the country’s strategic project, it is delaying the disbursement of the loan.


It bears repeating, but this is actually not true. India is allowed to divert one tributary of a river into another (which is what India is doing in this project) if there is *no pre-existing* Pakistani project downstream. There was no project when India announced the construction of Kishenganga and there was none when Pakis were given time to object to the project, there was none when initiation of project was delayed due to Paki perfidy and there was none when construction started by India. There is still no pre-existing use of water by the Pakis. So India is allowed to build Kishenganga.

Interpreting the IWT as some kind of race towards *completion* of the project is nonsense. If that were the case then India and Pakistan would have made substantial investment running this race with the losing side set to lose all its investment and construction. No sane treaty is written this way. Dams are not built this way and banks dont give out loans this way. If they did, they are literally betting on a horse race! That is precisely the reason why foreign funding agencies are reluctant to fund the Pakis, because *they wont get their money back* either through operating tariffs or electricity tariffs after the construction.

Pakis on the other hand will be relying on India's Amonkey Asha and large heart for India to stop the project. But thankfully even WKKs cannot do that now because contracts have already been given out, loans taken and construction started. Pakis can now rely only on three things to stall India's project
1. Do some terrorism as usual
2. Promise some future deals in return for India stopping the project
3. Get Arundhatis riled up about environment/Indian oppression of people living in the Kishenganga river/Gandhis with guns who regularly bathe in the river.
Last edited by Anujan on 13 May 2012 05:42, edited 3 times in total.

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

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

Postby Roperia » 13 May 2012 05:38

Our Raksha Mantri said on the floor of the parliament that he needs more funds because he is worried about a two front war. (see videos posted in Intelligence & National Security Discussion thread)

Our FM is convinced that Paki army is not serious about the peace process and has applied the breaks on trade talks. He is also convinced that Pakis are not serious about prosecuting the perpetrators of Mumbai attacks. (see article below)

Its beyond me that why is MMS hell bent on peace process with Zardari, who is sitting there just because of some clause in Kerry-Lugar bill and that toppling the civilal govt might invite President Obama's wrath.

Why is Congess President Sonia Gandhi allowing Dr. MMS with his foolhardy strategy?

Pakistan army derailing peace process, S. M. Krishna tells Hillary Clinton

...
He is also believed to have told her that the Pakistan Army was behind the cancellation of the commerce secretary-level talks this May.
...
According to the Indian assessment, while the civilian government in Pakistan wanted the talks, it was the general headquarters in Rawalpindi that shot it down. The talks would have paved way for the 'Most Favoured Nation' status being accorded to India.

...
. But Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani seems to have torpedoed it.

...
He is believed to be not fully behind the peace process and even though the civilian government in Pakistan wants to move forward on issues such as trade, there is a confirmation that the army has applied the brakes on the proposal.
...
According to Krishna's assessment, the Pakistan Army is providing tactical support to the dialogue owing to internal compulsions and because of strained relationship with the US. "It is not a strategic change in their position, but a tactical shift," he is learnt to have told Clinton.

...

Krishna told his US counterpart that there is no seriousness in Pakistan to bring the perpetrators of 26/ 11 terror attacks to justice. As the two leaders exchanged frank views, both agreed that the Haqqani network was being supported by the Pakistan intelligence agency, the ISI, and was responsible for recent terror attacks in Afghanistan.They agreed on the need to strengthen their intelligence cooperation to tackle the Haqqani network, which was posing a huge security challenge for Afghanistan.
...

SBajwa
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5372
Joined: 10 Jan 2006 21:35
Location: Attari

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

Postby SBajwa » 13 May 2012 07:26

by Roperia
Its beyond me that why is MMS hell bent on peace process with Zardari, who is sitting there just because of some clause in Kerry-Lugar bill and that toppling the civilal govt might invite President Obama's wrath.


He want the annual piss prize issued from Oslo and not the economics prize from Stockholm.

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby arun » 13 May 2012 07:30

X Posted from the Oppression of Minorities in Pakistan thread.

A fine display of the art of Taqiyya in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with Shahbaz Shariff claiming that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan is tolerant of religious minorities :wink: . This claim despite the frequent cases of Mohammadden slaughtering Mohammadden for the "religious crime" of nothing more than belonging to a minority sect and not to mention the frequent cases of Mohammadden's persecuting Non Mohammadden’s for nothing more than to highlight the status of Non-Mohammadden's under Mohammadden religious law as Dhimmi's:

Pakistan best place for religious minorities, says Shahbaz

menon s
BRFite
Posts: 720
Joined: 01 May 2010 09:51
Location: Bangalore

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

Postby menon s » 13 May 2012 09:32

CNN interview with Gilani.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/377664/cnn- ... -faux-pas/
When asked about the latest Gallup poll which suggests that one-fifth of Pakistanis want to leave the country, the premier didn’t hesitate to respond: “Why don’t they just leave then”.
The matter-of-fact response was followed by, “Who’s stopping them?”


These americans have so long been used to Pakistanis telling lies, that, someone speaking the truth upsets them. :D

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21161
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 13 May 2012 09:38

1/3 who want to leave Poqarbilla are kaffirs . No true Muslim will ever leave the land which represents pure Islam in action. Unless, they all want to mov eto Saudi Arapia.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6959
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

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

Postby Anujan » 13 May 2012 09:41

US Pakistan relationship can only be improved through increased trade ties, liberal visa regime, increased people to people contact and settling all outstanding territorial disputes between US and Pakistan. About 1/5 of Pakistanis want to leave Pakistan and denying them visas is radicalizing them and strengthening the hands of extremists. If these 1/5 were not in Pakistan, the number of extremists in Pakistan will drop by 20%

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54524
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

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

Postby ramana » 13 May 2012 09:49

What is the locus standi of the qazi in Lucknow to opine about a Pakistani actress does or doesn't?

-------------

Anujan the fear that the countries have is so far most terrorist incidents have a Paki connection. So giving visas to the 1/5 th Pakis is a self goal!!!

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21161
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

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

Postby Prem » 13 May 2012 10:25

http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news- ... -programme
Indian nuclear submarine programme
Our vision has been obscured by an un-Indian wave of pacifism. Ahimsa is no doubt a great religious creed, but that is a creed which India rejected when she refused to follow Gautama Buddha. The Hindu theory at all times, especially in the periods of her historic greatness, was one of active assertion of the right, if necessary through the force of arms.” So wrote Mr K.M. Panikkar in India and the Indian Ocean just a few years before the British withdrew from South Asia. It would appear that the strategic planners of India in the post-British era took their ideological cue from Mr Panikkar’s maritime vision, which he succinctly encapsulated by stating that “To the Indian Ocean we shall have to turn, as our ancestors did, who conquered Socotra long before the Christian Era and established an Empire in the Pacific, which lasted for 1500 years.” The hegemonic elements of this strategic vision are obvious by the nostalgic reference to an era when they exercised control over an area extending from the Red Sea in the West to Fiji in the Pacific Ocean. Given the rather modest fleet that the Indians inherited from the British in 1947 and the fact that the “historic greatness” Panikkar referred to was so far distant in time, it was indeed an act of vision and courage that the Indian planners decided to convert the strategic concept into policy. The first manifestation of the policy was acquisition of the aircraft carrier Vikrant in the fifties and the decision by Mrs Indira Gandhi in 1970 to construct a nuclear-powered submarine under the garb of an “Advanced Technology Vehicle” (ATV) .
Though the Indian programme is centred on the indigenous construction of SSBNs, the SSN has not been ignored. Russia has leased two SSNs to India for 10 years. Chakra II was transferred to India in December 2011. This development has given the Indian navy a distinct advantage over all regional navies, including Pakistan, at the tactical naval warfare level. It has also provided it an underwater escort for its strategic nuclear strike force, the SSBNs

Being a neighbour and a country whose persistent desire and effort to develop friendly relations with India have met with partial success, the introduction of this strategic element is of particular interest to Pakistan. India has acquired credible means of effectively projecting its military power in all continents, thus introducing an element of diplomatic “persuasion” that could help it obtain cooperation at various individual state or collective levels that was absent earlier. This may also enable it to negotiate with other states possessing similar capabilities at a level it could not do before it obtained this capability. The economic benefits that could follow are self-evident. Since no other regional country has nuclear submarines, India has the freedom to operate its nuclear submarine in any tactical role it may want without diminishing its strategic value and effectiveness. Australia, Republic of South Africa and all countries on the East African Coast and those Middle Eastern countries that were out of land-based and airborne missile range are now within the Indian nuclear reach.
The introduction of Arihant to India’s al reckonable naval and nuclear arsenal has introduced a fundamental strategic imbalance in the Indo-Pak context. Pakistan is now in a situation where its nuclear capability could be neutralised without it (Pakistan) being able to do the same to India. Thus, a post-Pokhran I situation has developed again, i.e. a situation that existed between 1974 and May 1998. This was the time between India’s “peaceful nuclear explosion” in 1974 and Pakistan’s nuclear tests in 1998. Some may say that this situation is fraught with the danger of the possibility of Pakistan being exposed to Indian nuclear blackmail. The diplomatic consequences of this situation would no doubt be of interest to our Foreign OfficePakistan Navy is now in a situation where the country of its primary concern has acquired a weapons system that cannot be effectively neutralised by it. This is because Pakistan possesses only conventional submarines and in a submarine to submarine combat between a conventional submarine and a nuclear submarine, the conventional submarine is likely to come out second best.The “strong fence” that had been built between Pakistan and India in the 1990s has been breached by the imbalance caused by the introduction of Arihant. In order to enjoy the benefits of good neighbourly relations with India, Pakistan needs to repair this breach quickly and effectively. It is for the decision makers to determine the best way to do this – perhaps, by revisiting the commendable response of the nation to the post-Pokhran I situation.

The writer was a Lice Eating Mice in the Pakistani Navy

arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

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

Postby arun » 13 May 2012 10:27

X Posted from the Pakistan Economic Stress Watch thread.

A full blown energy crisis unfolding in the Islamic Republic of Pakistan with 16 hour daily loadshedding:

PAC informed: 16-hour power loadshedding in last two weeks

The energy crisis has resulted in widespread riots across Pakistan occupied Punjab.

Editorial in the News:

Power riots

Things are not much better on the electricity load-shedding front in Sindh province:

Demos held against KESC

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

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

Postby Roperia » 13 May 2012 10:31

The Paki neh-shun should impose stringent sanctions on EU if the EU doesn't issue an unconditional apology for this grave provocation. This is betrayal of the highest order after the Islamic Republic of Pakistan had to concede giving MFN to India in return of India agreeing not to oppose this in WTO.

Well atleast the Pakis will now blame EU for not getting economic benefit out of this concession and not India.

Limited access: EU to open gates for Pakistani goods but not for long

...
In the latest blow, dashing Pakistani exporters’ hopes of making significant gains from the proposed trade concessions, the EU has decided to cut the waiver period from 36 months to just 18 months. It has also decided to place ceilings on the quantity of duty-free goods being imported from Pakistan.

...

A Pakistani diplomat working in Brussels said the “economic benefits of the package have almost eroded and the only importance of the concessions, for both Pakistan and EU, is claiming political victory. According to initial estimates, the waiver could increase exports to $300 million and with the latest proposed changes the benefit would be less than $100 million, or just 0.3% of last year’s total exports.

...

The EU reduced the time period and made five more products subject to tariff rates quotas after some member states refused to sanction the concession package following deepening economic crisis in their states. They also questioned whether Pakistan’s industry will be able to deliver amid the prolonged power outages.

...

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6959
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

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

Postby Anujan » 13 May 2012 10:42

Interesting article which brings out the permanence of Pakiness

http://dawn.com/2012/05/13/ayubs-us-remarks-called-silly-threats/

Ayub’s US remarks called ‘silly threats’

An American reaction was available yesterday to President Ayub’s interview to a foreign agency correspondent in Rawalpindi last week in which the President had indicated that the present trend of US policy towards India might force some of India’s neighbours to “look for protection elsewhere”. New York Times chief Washington reporter, James Reston, who is regarded by some as President Kennedy’s conscience keeper in the Capitol Press Corps, had this to say: “Washington need not get too excited by Pakistan’s silly threats to look for protection elsewhere if Kennedy doesn’t do what it wants.”

Lilo
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4071
Joined: 23 Jun 2007 09:08

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

Postby Lilo » 13 May 2012 10:50

Roperia wrote:
In the latest blow, dashing Pakistani exporters’ hopes of making significant gains from the proposed trade concessions, the EU has decided to cut the waiver period from 36 months to just 18 months. It has also decided to place ceilings on the quantity of duty-free goods being imported from Pakistan.

...

A Pakistani diplomat working in Brussels said the “economic benefits of the package have almost eroded and the only importance of the concessions, for both Pakistan and EU, is claiming political victory. According to initial estimates, the waiver could increase exports to $300 million and with the latest proposed changes the benefit would be less than $100 million, or just 0.3% of last year’s total exports.

...

The EU reduced the time period and made five more products subject to tariff rates quotas after some member states refused to sanction the concession package following deepening economic crisis in their states. They also questioned whether Pakistan’s industry will be able to deliver amid the prolonged power outages.

...

Good call by MEA.
Getting a noncommited MFN "commit" from Pakis in exchange for an ultimately useless EU textile waiver. :rotfl:

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

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

Postby Gus » 13 May 2012 10:53

harbans wrote:I really don't see anything extraordinary in that VM pic. That is standard at any nightclub or party in India. That sort of picture maybe clicked even between not intimate persons. People in a group just having fun and a chilled time. But for a nation fed on goats and sheep..i guess frustration at seeing someone having fun runs high.


misery loves company. nothing annoys a miserable person more than seeing somebody happy.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24004
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 13 May 2012 11:35

Jhujar wrote:http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/columns/13-May-2012/indian-nuclear-submarine-programme
Indian nuclear submarine programme
The introduction of Arihant to India’s al reckonable naval and nuclear arsenal has introduced a fundamental strategic imbalance in the Indo-Pak context.

So long as Pakistan does not recognize its own limitations and capacities, such heartburns as above will exist and add more and more to its long list of woes. The GERD will have to be cured by the 3½ defraying the costs. May be, the beggars will ask the Chinese for a Han class boat now.

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4004
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

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

Postby partha » 13 May 2012 11:49

Roperia wrote:Our Raksha Mantri said on the floor of the parliament that he needs more funds because he is worried about a two front war. (see videos posted in Intelligence & National Security Discussion thread)

Our FM is convinced that Paki army is not serious about the peace process and has applied the breaks on trade talks. He is also convinced that Pakis are not serious about prosecuting the perpetrators of Mumbai attacks. (see article below)

Its beyond me that why is MMS hell bent on peace process with Zardari, who is sitting there just because of some clause in Kerry-Lugar bill and that toppling the civilal govt might invite President Obama's wrath.

Why is Congess President Sonia Gandhi allowing Dr. MMS with his foolhardy strategy?


I think it is important for India to be seen as trying its best to resolve all issues with Pakistan and to be seen striving to establish peace in the region. This will make India's case stronger in case of war with Pakistan. The fact that Vajpayee had done the bus yatra to Pakistan just before Kargil gave an extra punch to India's case against Terroristan. The statement "Pakistan backstabbed India by starting Kargil war when India had taken lot of peace initiatives unilaterally" is so much stronger than say "Pakistan started Kargil war". Just because MMS has offered to talk doesn't mean there will be a sellout.

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

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

Postby Rajdeep » 13 May 2012 12:21

Insufficient evidence to arrest Hafiz Saeed: Gilani

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Insufficient-evidence-to-arrest-Hafiz-Saeed-Gilani/articleshow/13118569.cms

"If you arrest him, that means he will be released by the courts. For the courts you need more evidence," telegraph.co.uk quoted Gilani as saying.

"You know the judiciary is completely independent in Pakistan."
:rotfl: :rotfl:

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

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

Postby Roperia » 13 May 2012 12:27

Rajdeep wrote:Insufficient evidence to arrest Hafiz Saeed: Gilani

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/Insufficient-evidence-to-arrest-Hafiz-Saeed-Gilani/articleshow/13118569.cms

...

"You know the judiciary is completely independent in Pakistan."
:rotfl: :rotfl:


Inside Pakistan, PPP is blaming the Pak-jabi judiciary for only going after its corruption cases but Paki PM from PPP is unable to prosecute Hafiz 'Pig' Saeed because his judiciary is independent.

There are certain no-go areas for Paki politicians. They've been told to take a particular line on those matters and there is no point pressurizing them in hope of doing anything. Before more reporters waste their time, here are the answers that you'd be getting.

Q. Why are you not prosecuting Hafiz 'Pig' Saeed?
A. Insufficient evidence!

Q. Why are you not co-operating in WoT?
A. Pakistan has lost 30000000000 people, 35000000 security personnel and $7000000000 billion in economic losses due to America's WoT.

Q. Why have you not caught Mullah Omar/OBL/Zawahiri?
A. US should give us actionable intelligence, we're co-operating with US. Almost all Al-qaeda leaders have been caught in Pakistan due to our co-operation.
Last edited by Roperia on 13 May 2012 12:34, edited 5 times in total.

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 » 13 May 2012 12:29

I completely agree with Gilani. He is right. In the Islamic Republic of Pakistan it is perfectly legal to run Militant training camps and assorted Madrassas that teach Jihad against infidels. How can any independent Islamic court every convict Prof? One has to be an utter idiot to think he can be convicted for waging Jihad in an Islamic republic. Subramanium Swamy in the conversation with Hameed Gul frankly was completely lost. Hameed Gul won hands down that debate. Same with Gilani with the NYT (?) woman interviewer. He did absolutely flawlessly for the circumstances.

ArmenT
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 4239
Joined: 10 Sep 2007 05:57
Location: Loud, Proud, Ugly American

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

Postby ArmenT » 13 May 2012 13:00

Roperia wrote:The Paki neh-shun should impose stringent sanctions on EU if the EU doesn't issue an unconditional apology for this grave provocation. This is betrayal of the highest order after the Islamic Republic of Pakistan had to concede giving MFN to India in return of India agreeing not to oppose this in WTO.

Well atleast the Pakis will now blame EU for not getting economic benefit out of this concession and not India.

Limited access: EU to open gates for Pakistani goods but not for long

...
The EU reduced the time period and made five more products subject to tariff rates quotas after some member states refused to sanction the concession package following deepening economic crisis in their states. They also questioned whether Pakistan’s industry will be able to deliver amid the prolonged power outages.

...

BRF ahead of the curve as usual. I already called this correctly in two posts back in February, when the EU first announced some concessions for the Paki textile industry :).
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1236598#p1236598
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=1248588#p1248588

Speaking of Paki textiles, I just happened to buy some shop rags in the local hardware store for approx. $10 for a 50 pack. When I got home, I found out that these towels (if you can call them that) are made in Pakistan. So maybe they still have a market in rag manufacturing :).

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14167
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

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

Postby pankajs » 13 May 2012 13:20

Jhujar wrote:Kerry warns Pak to be more cooperative
Chacha Chodhri: Bole Paki Bole Terra Kaun Abba

WASHINGTON: Top American Senator has warned Pakistan that the US would have no other option but to resort to “self-help” if Islamabad does not become more cooperative in the war against terrorism.
Such a warning, ahead of the Chicago summit later this month which is expected to take crucial discussions related to Afghanistan, came from none other than Senator John Kerry, Chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee and architect of the Kerry-Lugar-Berman Bill that allotted USD 7.5 billion to Pakistan for five years.“I personally think it is simply unacceptable to have a zone of immunity for acts of war against armed forces and against the collective community that has tried to accomplish what it has tried to accomplish,” Kerry said in his remarks at a Congressional hearing convened by him on the upcoming NATO Summit in Chicago.
That means Pakistan has to become more assertive and more cooperative, and we may have to resort to other kinds of self-help, depending on what they decide to do,” said Kerry, who in the Obama Administration is considered to be the best friend of Pakistan. Several times in the past three years, Kerry has flown to Pakistan to troubleshoot when all other means had failed , be it the Raymond Davis Case or the helicopter that got damaged in the Osama bin Laden raid at Abbottabad a year ago. Such a remark coming from Kerry is reflective of the changing mood in the United States particularly at a time when the two countries are holding crucial negotiations on the reopening of the ground lines of communications and other related issues between them

On the same lines a week old edit from the daily whine.
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2012\05\08\story_8-5-2012_pg3_1
EDITORIAL: Pakistan-US impasse
Defence Minister Ahmed Mukhtar has warned that if the NATO supply routes are not restored, Pakistan risks being subjected to sanctions under international law. This is because apart from the inherent rights of landlocked countries like Afghanistan to access through neighbouring countries, the struggle against the Afghan Taliban has the authorisation and mandate of the UN Security Council in the wake of 9/11. Mukhtar also shared in a press conference the proposal Pakistan had put forward for joint management of the by now controversial drone attacks. As though to underline US resolve, Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has stated in interviews in the US that the drone strikes are set to continue. If Washington and Islamabad cannot narrow their differences over the apology demanded by Pakistan for the Salala attack, drone strikes, etc, and as a consequence the NATO supply route remains closed, we could see in fact an intensification of drone strikes since the US increasingly is wary of Pakistan’s intentions vis-à-vis the Taliban groups on its soil, particularly the Haqqani network. It is this network that is being blamed by the US/NATO forces for the series of coordinated attacks on Kabul and other cities not so long ago. Coming as these did in the midst of the impasse between Pakistan and the US, it served to harden opinion in the US administration regarding Pakistan. As it is, sentiment in the US Congress is turning increasingly hostile to Pakistan, which many American legislators now regard more as an enemy than a friend. Washington too is warning that if the issue of the blocked NATO supply routes is not resolved, it could have “multiple repercussions”. The US embassy in Islamabad has tried to soften the message by saying the UN and the US want the supply routes opened, but this should not be construed as a threat. Regardless of this ‘diplomatic’ explanation, it is obvious that an increasingly annoyed US has the power to switch off not only its own aid to Pakistan, but also persuade its western allies and multilateral institutions not to do business with Pakistan. With the economy in dire straits already, Pakistan then will find itself in greater difficulty than ever. Media reports even hint at the US abandoning reliance on the PPP and looking for other ‘partners’ in the political firmament of Pakistan. Special Representative Marc Grossman’s belated recent meetings in Islamabad indicated that the US is running out of patience. Domestic political considerations in the run up to presidential elections in the US have virtually ruled out any possibility of an apology for Salala in the foreseeable future.

As is usual with us, now critical voices are being raised after the event that the recourse to parliament for resetting the terms of engagement with the US may not have been wise, since it gave anti-American and populist sentiment free rein to harden Pakistan’s positions and this has now become an obstacle to the foreign office finding some pragmatic face-saving formula to get things moving forward. There are also sceptics pointing to the military establishment’s ‘comfort’ with the umbrella or shield provided by parliament from any US pressure. However, the military establishment too now finds itself on the horns of a dilemma to resolve the issues dividing the two ostensible allies. In the post-2014 endgame that is looming in Afghanistan, Pakistan runs the additional risk of being rendered more and more irrelevant to the outcome. Perhaps in recognition of this and the apprehension of international isolation, President Asif Ali Zardari will lead a delegation to NATO’s Chicago summit on May 20, given that the prime minister has his hands full with the contempt issue and its political fallout.

The chickens of Pakistan’s ‘strategic depth’ policy of duality have now come home to roost with a vengeance. If Islamabad finds itself in a cul-de-sac vis-à-vis handling relations with the US in the changed scenario, no one can be blamed but ourselves, and particularly the military establishment which, for all intents and purposes, still calls the shots on the Afghanistan policy. *
The thing to watch out is how far Obama is pressed on AfPak by the Republicans. If Republicans are able to put enough pressure, who know how far Obama may have to go to demonstrate clearly his resolve in dealing with the pakis.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14167
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

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

Postby pankajs » 13 May 2012 16:22

Generals fail to untie key knots at tripartite forum
The leadership of International Security Assistance Force (Isaf) headed by General John Allen and accompanied by its Afghan military counterparts arrived in Pakistan reportedly with a ‘grim’ message for the country – open Nato supplies or face Pentagon-sponsored ‘other’ set of options.
They actually tried to iron out the fault lines on major issues but reportedly the effort ended in frustration with western-side repeating the US stance on not inviting Pakistan in Nato summit in Chicago, refusal to apologise over Salala incident, continuance of drone attacks and threats of toughened aid conditions for Pakistan.
The Isaf-led delegation was purportedly ‘unflagging’ in conveying to its counterparts at GHQ that future of ‘extensive’ Pak-US strategic prospects hinged on Pakistan’s decision on Nato supplies. The ‘warning shot’ was said to have been categorically fired that Nato command was in favour of not inviting Pakistan to the upcoming Chicago moot unless its supplies were restored.
Pakistan’s military and government have lately struggled for finding a way out of this stalemate. While the military establishment got the anti-American hype risen so high that it cannot simply backtrack now and that too without receiving the major assurances it has long sought. The political divide and domestic opposition to supplies restoration have narrowed down the options for military and government.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14167
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

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

Postby pankajs » 13 May 2012 17:10

For comprehensive security- Munir Akram
The undetected Abbottabad incursion, the Mehran base destruction and the Salala border attack, as well as the regular terrorist toll, are vivid indications of the tattered state of Pakistan’s security. This steady deterioration is no doubt demoralising for Pakistani civilians and soldiers, yet it is not entirely surprising.

For 60 years, Pakistan’s military capabilities and deployments were designed to deter and repel the threat from India. Today, largely as a result of our own tactical and strategic mistakes, the threats to Pakistan’s security have become multidimensional and complex, internal and external, emanating from foe and friend, east and west. The gaps in Pakistan’s security cannot be addressed or overcome solely by the armed forces. National security is the business of the entire nation.What is required is the formulation and implementation of a comprehensive and multifaceted military, political, diplomatic and economic strategy to provide 100 per cent security to Pakistan. This strategy should address the five categories of threats facing Pakistan: Al Qaeda and affiliated terrorism, the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan and the Baloch Liberation Army insurgencies, the threat emanating from the US-Nato military presence and the predicament in Afghanistan, India’s conventional arms build-up, and the preservation of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence capabilities.

Considerable progress has been made, largely due to Pakistan’s contribution and collaboration with the US, to destroy the leadership and command structures of the ‘original’ Al Qaeda initially located in Afghanistan and evidently pushed into Pakistan after the post-9/11 US intervention in Afghanistan. Despite frequent US insinuations, there is a broad consensus in Pakistan to eliminate these foreign terrorists from Pakistani soil. Unless, due to the current estrangement with Pakistan, US-Pakistan cooperation is terminated, the goal of defeating Al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan (unlike in Yemen, Somalia and elsewhere) is achievable.{Hmm...Is that not an indirect threat?}

Combating the TTP and the BLA will be more challenging. While the grievances that led to the emergence of the two groups were domestic, there is compelling evidence that these groups are being utilised by Pakistan’s adversaries – the Afghan and Indian intelligence. Some in Pakistan are convinced that these groups have the benediction of the US and some other western countries also. Success against both groups will involve military operations, political negotiations and adroit diplomacy.

A single-track approach, military or political, will fail, as in the past. A generous and wise response to genuine Baloch grievances can help to end the insurgency there. There is much less space for compromise with the core of the TTP. But this group’s components are disparate, with different local and ideological agendas, which can be exploited to divide and defeat this insurgency.

The threat posed to Pakistan by the US-Nato military intervention in Afghanistan was inherent but initially blurred by the initial successes of counterterrorist cooperation. Pakistan has been significantly destabilised by this 11-year Afghan conflict. The Abbottabad raid and the Salala border attack are only the most visible signs of a tactical alliance that is fast turning into a strategic nightmare.

In accordance with the Pakistan parliament’s guidelines, measures can be taken to enhance border security, such as no-fly zones {Does it mean the TTP & BLA have air assets that threaten bakistan?}and border fencing. The larger danger arises from the likelihood that a continued US military presence in Afghanistan will prolong and exacerbate a civil war; effectively divide the country along north-south ethnic lines, and spread the threat of ethnic division to Pakistan.

It is thus in Pakistan’s interest, when resuming engagement with the US, to bring about the orderly, honourable but full withdrawal of US-Nato forces from Afghanistan as soon as possible. Simultaneously, Pakistan should secure the cooperation of Iran, China and Russia to help evolve an inter-Afghan political solution which could end the civil war and enable complete US-Nato withdrawal from Afghanistan.{So you do not want a US base in Af? Perhaps it will interfere with your concept of strategic depth.}

Meanwhile, the traditional threat from India’s conventional military capabilities is also growing. The current improvement in Indo-Pakistan atmospherics should not lead Islamabad to forget that India is now the world’s largest arms importer. Its shopping list includes: 120 strike aircraft; nuclear submarines; AWACs; Anti-Ballistic Missiles; satellite and space capabilities. It is vital for Pakistan to retain the capacity to resist and repel India by conventional means.{Sure...but who will fund the wish list? China? or perhaps that is the reason you desire an honorable exit for US-nato forces and the old equations could again flourish. }

In the absence of credible conventional defence, Pakistan will be obliged to rely almost exclusively on its strategic capabilities, significantly lowering the threshold for escalating a conventional conflict to the nuclear level. Pakistan can acquire conventional capabilities to neutralise the Indian build-up, at a much lower cost through cooperation with China.

Last, but not least, Pakistan needs to preserve the credibility of nuclear deterrence. Absent a secure and usable nuclear weapons capability, Pakistan would probably have been at war with India in 1987, 1990, 1999 and 2002, and today would face threats of military strikes like Iran. There is no more vital national security objective than safeguarding this capability from destruction, sabotage or hostile takeover.

The threat to Pakistan’s strategic capabilities has been heightened by the presumption that it emanates now from not only India but also the US and its allies.

The credibility of Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence against India could be eroded in three ways: first, Pakistan’s offensive and defensive capabilities could over time be neutralised by India’s access to nuclear and other advanced technologies which are denied to Pakistan; second, India’s nuclear weapons arsenal could become quantitatively much larger than Pakistan’s because, with fuel supplies for its civilian reactors being provided by outside powers, India will be able to devote its entire indigenous fuel to its nuclear weapons, and third, Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic capabilities could be destroyed in a pre-emptive conventional or nuclear strike.

To counter these possibilities, Pakistan’s diplomacy should secure access to the latest technologies, by any means available; refuse to accept any agreement to halt fissile material production, and enhance the alert status of its nuclear weapons and acquire a second-strike capability — hardened missile silos and nuclear submarines.

There is a growing belief in Islamabad that the more immediate threat to Pakistan’s strategic capabilities emanates from the US.{If that is the case who will fund the conventional buildup? Who will ramrod your case on access to advanced tech. in the NSG? Who will provide you with a patrol capable nuclear submarine and SLBMs free of cost?}

Its media and officials have painted scenarios in which Pakistan’s nuclear weapons fall into the hands of ‘Islamic radicals’. Some believe that on these grounds, the US could seek to legitimise, perhaps through the Security Council, the seizure or destruction of Pakistan’s nuclear and strategic capabilities.

US officials have asserted that they have contingency plans for the takeover of Pakistan’s nuclear weapons in an emergency.

Pakistan will need to continue projecting the safety and security of its nuclear weapons, threaten retaliation against any attempts at takeover or sabotage, and seek credible and open guarantees from the US that it will not attempt any such action.

The task of formulating and executing a strategy for Pakistan’s comprehensive security should be entrusted to a high level group of diplomats and military personnel. Even if 100 per cent security cannot be assured, at least Pakistan’s civilian and military leaders should make a 100 per cent effort to promote comprehensive security for Pakistan.

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24004
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 13 May 2012 17:26

partha wrote:I think it is important for India to be seen as trying its best to resolve all issues with Pakistan and to be seen striving to establish peace in the region. This will make India's case stronger in case of war with Pakistan.

Partha, such a thinking has never helped India, IMO. Where will it make India's case stronger ? In the UN or the ICJ or among the comity of nations ? That was the premise that Nehru started with in J&K and what happened ? Is there any nation today that does not understand Pakistani fraud and perfidy ? If anybody appears to think otherwise, they are feigning ignorance. If there is another war that Pakistan thrusts on us and if we continue to look up to a 'good conduct certificate' from somebody else, then even God cannot save our country (to borrow out-of-context from Superstar Rajnikanth). For every attack on us, we must hit x times harder and then strive for peace (or simply appear to strive for peace until we are convinced that the other side has learnt a lesson).
The fact that Vajpayee had done the bus yatra to Pakistan just before Kargil gave an extra punch to India's case against Terroristan. The statement "Pakistan backstabbed India by starting Kargil war when India had taken lot of peace initiatives unilaterally" is so much stronger than say "Pakistan started Kargil war".

I am unsure as to how that helped India. We had already inflicted a heavy punishment on TSP and if anything, the intervention by the US allowed Pakistan to escape a bigger punishment.
Just because MMS has offered to talk doesn't mean there will be a sellout.

I am sure that no Indian leader will intentionally sellout to Pakistan. But, I for one, am unhappy with the misplaced optimism in Pakistan's purported Aman-ki-Asha. The powers that be on the Indian side seem to believe in the Pakistani salesmanship that a much larger India must be more generous. The acceptance of this demand is dangerous. Pakistan must go extra, extra, extra miles to prove that it has changed its approach towards us before India can even think of generosity.

pankajs
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14167
Joined: 13 Aug 2009 20:56

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

Postby pankajs » 13 May 2012 17:30

Nato supply issue
AN invitation to Pakistan to attend the Nato summit in Chicago now seems inextricably linked to the resumption of Nato supplies. This despite yesterday’s meeting between Nato commanders and Gen Kayani at GHQ. As we have been pointing out in these columns, the Nato supply issue is not a bilateral affair between Pakistan and America; it is an issue that in a sense concerns Islamabad’s relations with the world, for Isaf has contingents from 48 other countries that include all Nato nations. The question, thus, needs cool-headed thinking and an early decision because of the international dimensions of its repercussions for Pakistan if the present stalemate continues. The prime minister’s statements in London on Friday coincided with the Nato secretary general’s press conference in Brussels in which he implied that Pakistan could miss an opportunity to attend vital talks on Afghanistan’s future. Russia and some Central Asian states on the Northern Distribution Network, he said, had been invited to the Chicago conference because they were providing transit facilities for Nato operations.

In his talks with British Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, Syed Yousuf Raza Gilani referred to the parliamentary guidelines on foreign policy and said talks with America were continuing and were progressing in the right direction. The same day, the State Department spokeswoman said there was still a possibility Pakistan could attend the Nato summit conference, and that Washington was still working on who was to be invited. Significantly, she referred to Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s statement and said the Nato secretary general “spoke pretty clearly with regard to where Nato is” on this issue. Clearly, the ball is in Pakistan’s court. Evidently, we miscalculated the impact of the supply blockage. The impact is there, for the NDN is costing America an additional $38m a month, but the US and other Isaf nations have not gone down on their knees.

The government has to make a decision, irrespective of domestic emotions. The Bonn boycott did not help advance Pakistan’s security interests. Its absence at Chicago will mean Pakistan will not be there when crucial decisions are made about Afghanistan’s future. No state in the world has such stakes in that country as Pakistan. As Hamid Karzai said in one of his more rational moments, Pakistan and Afghanistan are twin brothers. The parliamentary resolution arms the government with the necessary political and moral authority to act decisively to break the impasse, no matter how much noise non-parliamentary forces make. The issue is normality not just with America but with the world. Pakistan cannot afford to shoot itself in the foot.
But what will happen to the Baki's H&D, the one they explicitly linked to an apology and the stoppage of drone strikes via the PCNS resolution? Will this unilateral step not offend the ghairatmand brigade?

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6805
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

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

Postby CRamS » 13 May 2012 18:24

SSridhar wrote:I am sure that no Indian leader will intentionally sellout to Pakistan. But, I for one, am unhappy with the misplaced optimism in Pakistan's purported Aman-ki-Asha. The powers that be on the Indian side seem to believe in the Pakistani salesmanship that a much larger India must be more generous. The acceptance of this demand is dangerous. Pakistan must go extra, extra, extra miles to prove that it has changed its approach towards us before India can even think of generosity.


Boss, I would put it slightly differently. The reason why TSP won't move even in an inch, let alone miles in satisfying Indian demands, pleas, urgings, begging etc on terror is because TSP generals don't see this current Aman Ki Asha tamasha as reflective of India's generosity. Rather, they see it for what it is: India's decision to surrender its post 26/11 demands is because of the pain inflicted and threat that TSP's pigLeTs and nukes pose to India. In other words, having suffered no consequences for their crimes against India, Kiyani & Co believe that if they stay the course, and play along with their man MMS as also many other WKKS, exploit India's internal divisions, keep up the pigLeT threat on India and key BJP leaders like Modi (in the minds of India's ruling elite today, Modi elicits more contempt and hatred than Hafeez Saeed or Kiyani or Mushrat; why shouldn't TSP exploit such a shameful expression of India's divisions to its benefit?), and work in a "South Asia" framework as is MMS's wont, they are on a winning wicket. And I would dare to say that from TSP's PoV, this strategy makes eminent sense. Generosity from a position of strength is a virtue, not from a position of weakness: India's bhai chara decision despite 26/11 and TSP's cock a snook post 26/11.

Dipanker
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3021
Joined: 14 May 2002 11:31

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

Postby Dipanker » 13 May 2012 19:27

CRamS wrote:
Boss, I would put it slightly differently. The reason why TSP won't move even in an inch, let alone miles in satisfying Indian demands, pleas, urgings, begging etc on terror is because TSP generals don't see this current Aman Ki Asha tamasha as reflective of India's generosity. Rather, they see it for what it is: India's decision to surrender its post 26/11 demands is because of the pain inflicted and threat that TSP's pigLeTs and nukes pose to India. In other words, having suffered no consequences for their crimes against India, Kiyani & Co believe that if they stay the course, and play along with their man MMS as also many other WKKS, exploit India's internal divisions, keep up the pigLeT threat on India and key BJP leaders like Modi (in the minds of India's ruling elite today, Modi elicits more contempt and hatred than Hafeez Saeed or Kiyani or Mushrat; why shouldn't TSP exploit such a shameful expression of India's divisions to its benefit?), and work in a "South Asia" framework as is MMS's wont, they are on a winning wicket. And I would dare to say that from TSP's PoV, this strategy makes eminent sense. Generosity from a position of strength is a virtue, not from a position of weakness: India's bhai chara decision despite 26/11 and TSP's cock a snook post 26/11.


You haven't put it differently at all, yet again you have made the same post for the umpteenth time.

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

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

Postby anupmisra » 13 May 2012 19:35

harbans wrote:I really don't see anything extraordinary in that VM pic.

Gus wrote:misery loves company. nothing annoys a miserable person more than seeing somebody happy.


That anguished kolaveri di situation for the pakis is less about a muslimah drinking in public and more about her drinking in public in India and, that too, with an SDRE-looking pot-bellied Indian. The thing that I dont get is the reaction from a back-water qazi getting riled up about the incident. At most, this is a standard MO in an Indian night club. Is the honorable qazi actually suggesting that the paki dame should be sent back to her land of birth where she would be appropriately fatwa'd and punished? Or else what? Is he offering her sanctuary in Lucknow?

CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6805
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54
Contact:

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

Postby CRamS » 13 May 2012 19:40

Dipanker wrote:
You haven't put it differently at all, yet again you have made the same post for the umpteenth time.


Are you my gatekeeper or what? Like me, you are a sporadic poster, but you just pounce on anything I have to say. I put it differently from what SSJi was speculating. TSP generals don't see generosity in India's actions, they see a cave in, and hence no chance of locking up pigLeTs. Do you see it any other way?

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

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

Postby anupmisra » 13 May 2012 19:41

ArmenT wrote:Speaking of Paki textiles, I just happened to buy some shop rags in the local hardware store for approx. $10 for a 50 pack. When I got home, I found out that these towels (if you can call them that) are made in Pakistan. So maybe they still have a market in rag manufacturing :).


I use rags to wipe food spills of the wood floor or when my nine year old throws up. Just make sure that they are 100% cotton as that improves their absorption rate. In any event, if paki rags are now being sold in hardware stores, that means there is only one end use for such product.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24004
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 13 May 2012 19:56

anupmisra wrote: Is the honorable qazi actually suggesting that the paki dame should be sent back to her land of birth where she would be appropriately fatwa'd and punished? Or else what? Is he offering her sanctuary in Lucknow?

He is saying that Paki wimmens are held to a higher standard as a result of their coming from the Land of the Purest. His heart bleeds when a specimen from that country behaves so atrociously like a kafir in kafiristan.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24004
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

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

Postby SSridhar » 13 May 2012 20:20


Shahbaz says, in forceful arguments to support his fantastic claim
He said that scheduled cast {sic} community under the leadership of Jogindar Nath Mandal fully supported the All India Muslim League during the struggle of creation of Pakistan.

He is very economical with truth because he didn't say what happened subsequently. Let me say that.

Maulana Usmani famously demanded ‘jiziya’ from non-Muslims in the Constituent Assembly and told Pakistan’s first Minister for Law and Labour, Jogendra Nath Mandal, a Hindu, that non-Muslims should not hold such key posts. Mandal ultimately resigned from the cabinet of Liaquat Ali Khan in disgust. And, who is Maulana Usmani ? Among his many credits, his student, Maulana Yusuf Banuri, founded the famous Banuri seminary in Karachi that has been in the forefront of jihad & purity.

The Ahmedi leader Zafrullah Khan assured the Hindu members of the Constituent Assembly in 1949 that the Objectives Resolution was not meant to hurt them. Who assures whom ? What happened to Zafarullah Khan himself and the Ahmedis ?

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

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

Postby anupmisra » 13 May 2012 20:44

Rajdeep wrote:Insufficient evidence to arrest Hafiz Saeed: Gilani


In other words, paki police is incompetent or blind or both.

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 » 13 May 2012 20:44

Good to see you back Sridhar Ji. Your post on Shahbaz's extraordinary claim is just perfect. Wish some of our TV anchors/ expert commentators had that perspective..and said it as it is. Plus are Dalits really a minority in India? If one looks at communities in India, i think in some manner everyone belongs to a minority group in someway.

Anindya
BRFite
Posts: 1539
Joined: 02 Feb 2003 12:31
Location: USA

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

Postby Anindya » 13 May 2012 20:59

Crams: And I would dare to say that from TSP's PoV, this strategy makes eminent sense. Generosity from a position of strength is a virtue, not from a position of weakness: India's bhai chara decision despite 26/11 and TSP's cock a snook post 26/11.


One key issue that keeps troubling me is that no one from the Indian media, has brought up the simple issue of "what will Pakistan put on the table to earn this?"

The Pakistani strategy has always been "pakistan keeps whatever it has - let's negotiate over what India gets to keep". This whole MFN tamasha only gives access to Indian markets to Pakistanis, who will steadily get shut out of other markets, due to incidents like Rochdale. Sir Creek, business visas leniency, IPL admission, educational access, Siachen are all done without any significant concessions on the Pakistani side.

Peace in itself is not a goal of Pakistan, since it still maintains 42 India specific terrorist training camps within pakistan.

So, what does pakistan give up to deserve all this - this question never seems to come up...

Gerard
Forum Moderator
Posts: 8012
Joined: 15 Nov 1999 12:31

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

Postby Gerard » 13 May 2012 22:04

Stadiums stand empty in isolated Pakistan
For former Pakistani Test fast bowler Jalal-ud-Din, the key to Pakistan coming in from the cold is wooing the old enemy next door: India.

"Cricket revival, I believe, is related to India because they are the super powers," he said. "PCB must form a team of players and diplomats and send it to various countries in order to convince them to tour."

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4004
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

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

Postby partha » 13 May 2012 23:50

SSridhar wrote:Partha, such a thinking has never helped India, IMO. Where will it make India's case stronger ? In the UN or the ICJ or among the comity of nations ? That was the premise that Nehru started with in J&K and what happened ? Is there any nation today that does not understand Pakistani fraud and perfidy ? If anybody appears to think otherwise, they are feigning ignorance. If there is another war that Pakistan thrusts on us and if we continue to look up to a 'good conduct certificate' from somebody else, then even God cannot save our country (to borrow out-of-context from Superstar Rajnikanth). For every attack on us, we must hit x times harder and then strive for peace (or simply appear to strive for peace until we are convinced that the other side has learnt a lesson).
I am unsure as to how that helped India. We had already inflicted a heavy punishment on TSP and if anything, the intervention by the US allowed Pakistan to escape a bigger punishment.
I am sure that no Indian leader will intentionally sellout to Pakistan. But, I for one, am unhappy with the misplaced optimism in Pakistan's purported Aman-ki-Asha. The powers that be on the Indian side seem to believe in the Pakistani salesmanship that a much larger India must be more generous. The acceptance of this demand is dangerous. Pakistan must go extra, extra, extra miles to prove that it has changed its approach towards us before India can even think of generosity.

SSji, sorry if I was not very clear in my post. What I meant is India should appear (as you have mentioned) to strive for peace. It will come in handy for propaganda. Let us assume Vajpayee had not made that peace offer before Kargil. I can easily imagine WKKs on our side and terrorists on the other side hijacking the narrative by saying "India responsible for Kashmir conflict.. Hindu nationalist government is adding fuel to the conflict blah blah blah". I consider that bus yatra to be a master stroke whether it was designed to be a master stroke or not. Talk is cheap and it can used for propaganda when required. Please note I am not saying GoI should stop pressing Pakistan on 26/11. If it plans to do that then I will condemn it harshly. Every talk should go like this:
Pak: We should talk Kashmir.
India: Sure, but first bring 26/11 perpetrators to justice and work towards eliminating terrorism targeted at India.
And then there is a stalemate. Let it be. We should not talk to "resolve" any of the issues for any resolving of issue will mean Pakistan stopping its terrorist ways which will never happen. But we should keep talking even if it is a waste of time. Even on Siachen I don't see India climbing down w.r.t to its demand of demarcating AGPL. If Pakistan agrees to demarcating then it loses and stands exposed. If it doesn't agree then the stalemate continues and they will continue to suffer. But if India refuses to talk on Siachen then propaganda will start from WKKs and terrorists "India is not a responsible state..not willing for peace in region.. oppressing Kashmiris by continuing the conflict blah blah blah". We should not give a chance for that type of propaganda.

Harish
BRFite
Posts: 140
Joined: 27 Dec 2004 10:30
Location: Bharat

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

Postby Harish » 14 May 2012 00:06

SSridhar wrote:But, many Indian Muslim wimmen actors have done (and continue to do) much worse than what these photos showed. Where has been this Qazi ? Or, is it that only wimmens from the 'Land of the Pure' must behave modestly based on the justifciation of the 'Two Nation Theory' ?

A little piskological clarificashun is in order here. Baki squeamishness in the depiction of sexuality arises ONLY when the woman is Muslim and the mard is yindoo/yehudi etc. The situation does not arise if a TFTA baki mard romances a naked yindoo woman. All the mullas and maulanas in bakistan would be glued to the TV watching the yindoo woman's pindaliyon ka gooda.

Islam allows open sexist bias, despite all protestations to the contrary. (Polygamy was ordained by the poobah but polyandry is an impure import from the cultureless yindoo/yehudi land etc.)


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Feedfetcher, Shakthi and 55 guests