What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

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.
ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 03 Jan 2016 07:44

Jhujar what does he say? One or two sentences.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21177
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Prem » 03 Jan 2016 07:48

ramana wrote:Jhujar what does he say? One or two sentences.


Pakistan came out of dying Mohamad's mouth to finish off Buutt Parasti byGhazawa Hind and Mo's mission remain remote while Pakistan is in rot .

dada
BRFite
Posts: 135
Joined: 12 Jan 2006 16:43

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby dada » 03 Jan 2016 11:59

# Jhujar

Thanks for posting the video link on "Ghazwa-e-hind"

Most of us are indifferent to & gravely underestimate the significance of the role played by philosophers in social life. Philosophers may be physically dead but they live long after , in the form of ideologies embedded in the minds of living people & which continue to influence & shape the destiny of entire nations. When we study the collective minds of islamic groups in pk/india & elsewhere we have to remember this point.

In case of muslims, their belief in the certitude/finality of islamic ideology is an objective truth. We cannot close our eyes to this fact any longer. We have to deal with it , even militarily in the near future. Before 1947, it was a matter of managing their fears & victim complex . After 1971 , it is a matter of dealing with their hatred-intense dislike & revenge. An ideological mind is an irrational mind.

The speaker in the video has cleverly interpreted "Ghazwa-e-hind" as "Prophet's war on India" . This interpretation may be considered as nonsense by indians, but it holds a special place in the mind of pakis.The vision of pk army along with millions of pakis swarming India like bees really appeals to the common populace especially in pakjab. He calls it as islamic mission waiting to be completed.

We cannot reason (using concepts drawn from economics) with pakis. Maybe Modi is giving a try for the last time. The Nexus of Pak army-Mullah thrives on growing irrationalism in the Pk society. In their worldview, an irrational mind is a human capital to be nurtured,exploited for its political end with a veneer of holy war !

In an interview , Late Hamid Gul admitted that they created a living system they cannot control anymore. Now the system will dictate terms to its managers in subsequent generations. Pk has invested its entire two generations into this grand project. It is foolish to expect it to disband the system. Even the frustations of the Afghan govt stems from this fact.

Let us be clear about 1 lesson from history. It took a worldwar to bring an end to the imperialist systems in Germany, Japan & other Western powers. The logical thing to do is to prepare for that decisive war & keep develop-redeveloping our war machine for both covert & overt wars in future.

Paul
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3610
Joined: 25 Jun 1999 11:31
Contact:

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Paul » 03 Jan 2016 19:42

IMO Kandahar loss during Mughal times, Afghanistan formation during post Mughal era and then Pakistan is all correlated from a geographical viewpoint. This was a trend when India was at its weakest and was stopped in 1965.

This trend intersected with the yearning of Ashrafs for a lebenstraum and led to formation of Pakistan. The Ashrafs provided the ideological basis for Pakistan but the prize was taken away from them by Ayub Khan who is a Pakhtunized Punjabi.

Afghan marauders Ghori, Mahmud, and Abdali are the role models for Pakis.

So IMO, if we frame Pakistan's formation on religious, ethnic, and geographical basis.

My opinion is from Geographical standpoint which I tend to focus on mostly, it is Afghanistan that makes Pakistan tick.

member_28990
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby member_28990 » 03 Jan 2016 20:36

This is a trick question. What we civilized people mean by "ticking" along is very different in the context of Pakistan. For you see, there is little point in analyzing Pakistan as a modern nation state. Pakistan must be looked at as a confederacy of interest groups with a stringent hierarchy of subservience.

I have created a small table to illustrate my point.

Image

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 03 Jan 2016 22:35

max, You are ignoring the biggest motivator of all: Hatred of Hindus. Its not the method.

Nehruji created secularism to address this motivator by shackling Hindus only.

member_28990
BRFite
Posts: 171
Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby member_28990 » 03 Jan 2016 23:13

Ramana,

The bogey of Hindu domination (fed by the Iqbals and the Syed Ahmeds) was casus belli for the Muslim League to launch their political movement of Pakistan. This was a movement whose main soldiers were low class Bihari/UP/Bengali muslims. However, once the objective of Pakistan was achieved, the prime objective for all players (esp. in Pakjab, the power center) became much more self centered - notice how they started their urdu cultural imperialism etc. However, do they do urdu imperialism now? No, they are all wannabe arabis, their current paymasters.

Hindu hatred is their best tool to bind together the diverse interest groups that I mentioned above - Hindu as enemy, Hindu as competitor etcetera. But does that mean that it is Hindu hatred that makes these selfish SOBs tick? no sir. These clowns are driven by pure and simple self interest, they will sleep with whoever needed, will do whatever haramigiri required - islam be damned - in order to maintain their fiefdoms and power bases. They dont have any lofty ideas of religious war or clash of civilizations that they inherently believe in - no muslim country, regardless of their rhetoric, really believe in that hogwash. These are all hard nosed, pragmatic cockroaches, who are continuously trying to figure out how much they can get away with before one throws a rubber sandal at them.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 04 Jan 2016 00:30

Keep going. The idea of the thread was to make people think instead.

1) Hindu hatred got them Pakistan
2) In Pakistan its Pakjab, IOW regionalism or sub-nationhood. Good point. It took Ottomans a century and half after Vienna defeat to get to sub-nationalism. Pak got there after one decade after 1971.

3) Other sub-nationalisms; Sindh, K-P and Baloch are kept under check by Army dominance, co-opting in civil power, and Western aid. KSA aid is drop in the bucket wrt deterring India.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 04 Jan 2016 00:54

Satya_anveshi wrote:Pakis requests for talks; Puki sponsors keep lecturing India about talks;

India gets defensive and says talks and terror cannot go on;

After predictable terror incidents, there is always pressure on India to stop talks and pressure on Puki civvies to keep the talks going;

Then there are expectations for talks to be uninterrupted / uninterrupt-able;

All this makes one wonder, what are talks really about?

The perception this definitely leaves is there is something India to lose/give and Pakis (at least a section of pukis) to gain from talks?


If that is so, what are the reasons behind such an expected outcome? How does talks lead to India giving/losing and Pukis gaining?
- Is it the J&K settlement?
- Is it some financial aid that must go thru India?
- Is it pukistan's international isolation (which is definitely not strong)?
- Is it release of military pressure that is too much for Pak to bear?
- or something else?

Now, only fools expect India to engage in one sided giving and not expecting in return - not even a total messed up resident non-indian will think along this line.

Nor India/Indians will shy away from talks for the talks sake - this is one area even worst critic of Indians will have to hand the championship trophy to Indians hands down.

So, what is to be given by Pukis in return that India wants?
- Is it CRE of Puki Nuclear Infra?
- Is it total elimination of non-state infra?
- Is it drastic reduction of Paki military industrial complex?
- Is it access to afghanistan and neutralization of the so called strategic depth?
- Is it MFN which has not much real value for Indian companies?


The stark reality is, if Pakistan isn't able to contain terror at its home, how will it guarantee the same to India and even more so how good is expecting any of the major items listed above in the give/take in talks?

With this background, what good are talks about and why even play that game?

However, we have to get out of the perception battle that talks are unfavorable to India and hence we object to it. We have nothing to lose or gain because Pakistan lacks credibility and even capability to honor the negotiated settlement.

We must open talks at all levels and say we are ready for it provided pukistan pays for all the expense at our designated place in our capital, follow our strict restrictions for people involved in it as with any international engagement, and continue this repeatedly week after week. While at it, increase the covert ops until the time pukistan starts feeling the pain and starts saying it does not want talks with India anymore.


So, what do we really gain out of this approach?

This approach will leave our H&D intact but at an elevated level of offensive engagements and may invite higher rate of reaction. In my view this will eventually lead to war and therefore settlement on our terms.

Question is whether we are ready to bear the increased costs and even be able to handle the settlement that will come with its own problems.

IMO, we can deal with the outcomes and they open up new possibilities.
If I were PM, I will take this new path and issue a "khabardaar"/"saawadhaan" to pukistan.



From experience, talking to a bad guy when you are in the right empowers the bad guy. You will end up giving something valuable.

Wastern powers want India to talk for that legitimizes the terrorist actions of Pakistan. In other words the thief is given equality with the victim.
They do this for their own reasons.

Normally the victim will ensure the thief wont succeed.
But for various reasons India, the victim, always leaves the door open for the thief to rob and kill Indians.

Example if the Police(Gill etc) or Military(Sunderji) take stern action to lock the door and cut off the thief's arms, the next government elected by peaceful folks will demonize them.
Worse they will turn on attack jackals like Coupta to demonize the military.
And come up with scams to prevent re-armament(AK Anthony).

So I suggest India should clean up inside first and then think of external action. Or else they will fight on multiple fronts with termites second guessing and undermining armed forces morale.

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

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Satya_anveshi » 04 Jan 2016 02:22

ramana wrote:From experience, talking to a bad guy when you are in the right empowers the bad guy. You will end up giving something valuable.

Wastern powers want India to talk for that legitimizes the terrorist actions of Pakistan. In other words the thief is given equality with the victim.

They do this for their own reasons.

Normally the victim will ensure the thief wont succeed.
But for various reasons India, the victim, always leaves the door open for the thief to rob and kill Indians.

Example if the Police(Gill etc) or Military(Sunderji) take stern action to lock the door and cut off the thief's arms, the next government elected by peaceful folks will demonize them.
Worse they will turn on attack jackals like Coupta to demonize the military.
And come up with scams to prevent re-armament(AK Anthony).

So I suggest India should clean up inside first and then think of external action. Or else they will fight on multiple fronts with termites second guessing and undermining armed forces morale.


Ramana garu,

Agree with you when we look at the current dynamic.

my suggestion was to switch the roles...keep the talks initiatives firmly with us while increasing the covert ops. $ for $, we will be able to inflict far greater pain on pakistan than they can on us. In essence, we can be bad guys too for a change. So, that battle is lost by pukes before it begins.

Internal cleanup is toughest...it is better to deflect it even as we try to reduce it.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24189
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby SSridhar » 04 Jan 2016 08:28

Just look at the confusion and indecision over talks.

Pakistan is a serious enemy. Even though, we do not want knee-jerk reactions, once the determination is made that there is prima facie evidence of Pakistani involvement (it hardly matters whether they are non-state actors because all non-state Pakistani actors are equally state actors too), it must be announced that talks are suspended until Pakistan takes action and India reserves the right to hit back. India must fire salvos at camps along the border (again, it hardly matters whether they are LeT or JeM or anybody else) and if we suspect that the terrorists came through a particular area aided by the Pakistani Rangers/Army, then we fire at their camps too. We are always worried about escalation, lack of a smoking gun etc. We cannot get shackled down by too many things. We will never get a 100% right and propitious time to retaliate. Besides, punishment must be swift, disproportionate, must be seen to have been inflicted both by Indians and Pakistanis.

As I said before, it is India which makes Pakistan tick.

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

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby shiv » 04 Jan 2016 08:56

From milforum

Karan M wrote:Sushma told them the government had intelligence suggesting the terrorists may have come from Bahawalpur in Pakistan's Punjab and may have links with the Jaish-e-Mohammed terror group, known to have had support from sections within the Pakistani army.

"The mistake we have sometimes made in the past is to equate these sections within the Pakistani establishment with the Pakistan government," Pal had told this newspaper on Saturday.

"Yes, there was a time when these sections represented the mainstream in Pakistan. Not any more.".

Yes yes yes yes yes yes yes. OK OK OK OK OK OK OK

But here is stuff we discussed on BR a decade ago:"Are the terrorists under control of the Pakistani establishment?"

What Sushma Swaraj is saying here is that the terrorists may not be under total control of the Pakistan establishment. This idea was never believed by anyone. Neither BRF or GoI. The stance has been that Musharraf was honest when he said "We control the Mujahideen". So putting pressure on the Pakistan establishment would be expected to cause the terrorists to be reined in.

So what has changed? Why is the government, via Sushma Swaraj doing hint hint nudge nudge and saying that the people we talk to are not the people supporting terrorism? Is it believed that saying this out loud will make the hand of the "anti-terror/peace and friendship lobby" in Pakistan weaker?

Assuming that there is an army faction that can wipe away the civilians (like Bhuttos were killed and Nawaz was exiled) - the idea of supporting civilians can come only if we know that they mean peace and really have no control over terror. Secondly supporting such people in Pakistan can only be effective if that support makes it difficult for the Jihadi factions of the army to conduct a coup.

Now here's the rub. On the face of it the US supports democracy, but it gets all its work done by the Paki army and mollycoddles the Paki army. The Chinese are openly pro-Pak Army who are the people they deal with and get protection for their projects. Neither the US nor China will bat an eyelid if the civilian government goes., and both will howl and protest if the Pakistan army is hurt. What this means is that if Modi hurts the army and supports civilians, the army will (most probably) automatically remove the civilian government and continue to enjoy full support of the US and China.

JMT.

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

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Satya_anveshi » 04 Jan 2016 09:04

Logical consequence of the above is for the Pakistani civilian govt invite India to help Pakistan rid of terrorism and publicly issue statement that it will be OK for India to bomb across not just LOC but across IB also.

That will be a defining moment and makes the civilian govt credible. It will put its Army and their sponsors in a fix.

As it happens, India should on a daily basis, make the possibility of coup in Pakistan a 24x7 news item to deter reaction from paki army and its sponsors.

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

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby shiv » 04 Jan 2016 09:10

Satya_anveshi wrote:Logical consequence of the above is for the Pakistani civilian govt invite India to help Pakistan rid of terrorism and publicly issue statement that it will be OK for India to bomb across not just LOC but across IB also.

They can't do that IMO. Question in my mind is whether
a. They have indicated something like that in private
b. Could they be lying

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

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Satya_anveshi » 04 Jan 2016 09:27

Shiv ji,

1 is/(has to be) the statement of fact. Civvies are way above the pay grade to know why all the jihadi networks *must* exist in pukistan. Many among civvies aid and abet some of the jihadi network but their understanding and contract is limited to tactical engagement.

What they quickly realize is that the same jihadi network limits the govt power and make them appear as temporary travelers.

Limited few will know the need for perpetually maintaining the jihadi network. Most of it is India focused but there exists the need for other parts as well (External Shia-Sunni, Af-Pak; China; Internal only etc).

Due to severe beating in Af-Pak and exodus into middle-east theater, iron is now hot to create a big fissure among the govt- jihadi force (both formal and informal) . But there is enough jihadi manpower that can venture into pathankot like events.

I still think they should come out overtly seeking Indian help. This will put paid to many doubts and create environment for the govt-govt to work. More importantly, it will put the western sponsors in a very hard fix.

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

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Satya_anveshi » 04 Jan 2016 09:40

Funny thing is that we are admitting that most powerful people in India are talking to people who don't have power....but the same powerless people in Pak call for talks as if they are in position to honor anything they agree to.

That means, it is truly a drama. If that is so, why are we objecting to it. We too can find a bunch of folks who won't be authorized to agree to anything but pakistan will incur hosting costs.

India-Pakistan - Comprehensive and Composite Chai pe Charcha Season I thru 100. It can start with Vedic Past of Pakistan/Afghanistan.

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

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby svinayak » 04 Jan 2016 10:35

Satya_anveshi wrote:Funny thing is that we are admitting that most powerful people in India are talking to people who don't have power....but the same powerless people in Pak call for talks as if they are in position to honor anything they agree to.

That means, it is truly a drama. If that is so, why are we objecting to it. We too can find a bunch of folks who won't be authorized to agree to anything but pakistan will incur hosting costs.

India-Pakistan - Comprehensive and Composite Chai pe Charcha Season I thru 100. It can start with Vedic Past of Pakistan/Afghanistan.

The Pak situation is due to condition of the western aid money and govt recognition only on the condition that a civilian govt is heading the state.

So they have created a civilian govt facade and the PA is running the show. This is the fake state

So for India to talk there is only one state but multiple actors who are trying to control the state.

India needs to keep the state to state relationship with whoever is representing the state. - The civilian govt

Pak want a one traffic into India and think that India is another state the size of Pak.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 08 Jan 2016 02:22

X-Post...
Anujan wrote:So much energies spent on debating
1. If calling NSG is a good idea
2. Was there coordination
3. Is DSC capable
4. What's the use of Garuds anyway
5. How could the terrorists breach perimeter
6. Was Shri Doval micromanaging
7. Why did it take so long

If I were running a disinformation campaign, I would ask all these questions first to set the tone for the debates so all energies are expended debating this rather than

1. Why did Pakis do this so soon after Modiji's visit which indicated talks were about to be started
2. Does Badmash know and is playing a double game or is he just Mayor of Isloo and has no control over whatever TFTAs want
3. Badmash's brother is CM of Pakjab. How can huge terror training camps exist in his state without him knowing
4. What's up with the drug trade. Who are the fronts and behinds of it?

If you look at Paki twitter and even articles by so called moderates like the Pak tea house guy, I can sum it up with a story.

Imagine you live in a house, you visit the neighbours house for dinner and the fellow comes over and burns your place. Then the Paki (and our own DDM) gather around and ask.

1. Why didn't you see him setting fire
2. What took you so long to put out the fire
3. Why did the house catch fire? Why did you use wooden doors?
4. Why weren't fire extinguishers stored in easy reach? Why didn't you use Abdul brand extinguisher instead of Ayesha brand which is less effective?
5. Why are there so many trees around the house which limits visibility?
6. Hey by the way, you need to have good relations with your neighbors so do invite the guy over for dinner sometime and don't be upset about this incident too much.


Clouds us from asking the real question

"WHY DID THE NEIGHBOUR MOFO SET THE HOUSE ON FIRE AND WHAT CAN WE DO TO MAKE SURE HE DOESNT DO IT AGAIN"



and

deejay wrote:Anujan ji great post. All other discussions (including my posts) are wasting time. Now that you have pointed out very clearly I don't see why we should persist on the old scheme of things unless it is deliberate.

Just a suggestion :

May require moderation but can we start digging into what you have listed instead of self depreciation and calling everything India bad.

1. Why did Pakis do this so soon after Modiji's visit which indicated talks were about to be started
2. Does Badmash know and is playing a double game or is he just Mayor of Isloo and has no control over whatever TFTAs want
3. Badmash's brother is CM of Pakjab. How can huge terror training camps exist in his state without him knowing
4. What's up with the drug trade. Who are the fronts and behinds of it?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 10 Jan 2016 08:09

Majority of the Muslim invaders are from turco-afghan-persian (tap) background. Arabs were all defeaVed and confined to small areas of now Pakistan.
Of them majority are turkic.
Pakjab, Sindh. Baloch, Khyber Pashtunwa all have their own language.
However Pakistan has adopted Urdu which doesn't belong to them.
Its called Haindivi written in Persian which is really Arabic script.

Haindivi is Hindi with Turkic and some Persian.

So its alien to the regions.

IOW its like France and Germania (a German tribe founded region) adopting Latin.

How long before Urdu glues them or rips them?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 20 Jan 2016 04:01

X-post....
rohitvats wrote:
pragnya wrote:<SNIP>He notes pakistan at best is a 'nuisance' than anything. while we make our dislike of the american view of equal equal with pakistan, we do the equal equal ourselves by focussing too much on it and in the bargain play into the hands of pakistan's policy of parity with us - a success of its foreign policy, he notes. he compares pak's size in terms of physical, economical, military, position in the world order etc. to make his points.


pragnya - the argument which BK makes are absurd at many levels. And they seem to not be born out of a detailed thought process. For example - this argument about Pakistan being a nuisance and we doing an '==' ourselves by giving too much focus on them.

My counter-question is this - what role does India play in Pakistan's consciousness, policy and military planning? You know the answer to this one as much as I do. And so do others. If not 100%, 99.9% at least!


The size of Pakistan Army, other Services and nuclear program, not to forget use of religion and jihad, are all because obsession which Pakistan has with India. As a country, Pakistan has one of the highest population to men-under-arms ratio. Now, if Pakistan places half a million troops, some 300-400 combat aircraft, 6-7 most advanced submarines, 1500+ tanks against India, what are we supposed to do?


I will be forced to develop armed forces which not only match my adversary but allow me to win a war - which again means more favorable ratio than simply going toe to toe. But as against BK's assertion, look at numbers from either side will tell you that India does not enjoy clear superiority in numbers. Favorable ratios are to be had and aimed for through intelligent deployment and in geographical/theater sense. So, in Southern Pakistani Punjab and Sindh, India may have 2:1 ratio in battle tanks. And when applying this armored force, we may try and achieve still better ratios.

I'm leaving out the technology as force multiplier bit here for the moment.

But truth be told, India has not actually used its economic muscle to build outright dominating ratios. People would recall that Sundarji's Army Plan 2000 called for 4 x Armored Divisions and 7 x Mechanized Divisions!


Long story short - when my adversary points a gun towards me, I'll have to do one better and point a bloody RL against him. Remember, there are no runner ups in war.


1. reduction/rationalisation of armoured formations - this as per BK, takes 26% of IA budget which is waste of resources and also ATGM proliferating makes their use unviable. he cites IA armour lobby is stuck in world war 2 mentality and unwilling to do this.

how best this can be done without losing the edge? how many of these can be transferred to the Mountain corp where they can be deployed in tankable areas?


This is one argument I've never been able to understand.

Your enemy has 2 x armored divisions, 2 x mechanized divisions, 7/8 independent armored brigades and BK wants India to not have the number of tanks that it has? Hell, I'm one of those who feels India needs a minimum of 4 armored divisions, though I'd prefer 05. And more mechanization.

It was the might of India's three armored divisions arrayed in the desert/south Indian Punjab which made Pakees shit bricks and deploy their famed 1st Armored Division in defensive role...and which compelled Bandicoot to come on PTV and smoke the peace pipe. Not to forget that Pakistan had aimed both its reserves (Army Reserve North and Army Reserve South), their equivalent of Strike Corps, against Indian Punjab when Sundarji has their undies in twist during Operation Brasstacks.

Question is - if IA gives up or downsizes its armored strength, what safety net do we have against Pakistan armored? And how are we to smash through Pakistan's defenses, fight a short and intense war and downgrade its war-fighting potential?

What is maneuver warfare without armored/mechanized formations?

One of the objectives of Cold Start Doctrine has been to ensure Integrated Battle Groups (IBG) with Pivot Corps should be able to attack and create openings through Pakistan's first line. This will force Pakistan to commit it reserves giving an opportunity to Indian planners to deploy own reserves/strike corps in a more favorable manner.

The whole Pakistani response to India's CSD has been to makes their Pivot Corps more stronger so as to not allow IBGs to break through, so that they don't have to commit their reserves. Instead Pakistan is trying hard to ensure that we're back to square one where each side tries to guess the deployment of other's reserves.

As for ATGM and tanks - tanks have evolved along with ATGM. Sure, our mechanized forces will take casualties from ATGM but that does not negate their usage. And the same argument applies to Pakistan Army as well? Ever heard Pakistanis talking about winding down their armored formations?

MSC - only place MSC can use tanks is eastern Ladakh. That too central and south eastern. IA is in process of placing an independent armored brigade there. Whether we have room for a full fledged armored division supported by a mechanized divisions/RAPID is for army to answer.

But the argument makes sense - IA could dual tasks couple of armored brigades for deployment in Ladakh. And train for the purpose and put in place logistics for the same.

2. the three strke corps be restructured as 'one' with many IBGs - he says the manpower/equipment is too huge and not needed.

again how best the manpower/equipment can be optimally transferred to the Mountain corps without impinging on our edge? can atleast one of the corps be disbanded? is it feasible? if yes, how?


First and foremost, we have this business of Strike and Pivot Corps because we lack resources and hence, place the most powerful assets in few formations. And this is not only about tanks but other things like engineering assets, AD missiles, mobile AD assets etc.

Now that we've more things coming in, along with advent of CSD, that assets like SP SAM Group (Kvadrat) which was earlier with one of the Strike Corps has been transferred to 12 Corps in Jodhpur (source: Sainik Samachar). Akash SAM Groups will most likely replace them in Strike Corps.

Again, someone tell me this - if managing three strike corps is difficult, how big will a single strike corps be and how easy/difficult managing such a force will be? And where ALL will you deploy such a corps?

As I said, BK makes arguments w/o elaborating them and we're left arguing basis whatever he shares. Which makes no head or tail. But let us create a scenario.

Assume we retain only one Strike Corps with powerful IBGs. Assets from balance Strike Corps are transferred to Pivot Corps.

Now, how many IBGs can a single Strike Corps throw up? Four at best, I suppose.

But this Strike Corps can best service requirement or be deployed only in a limited geography. What happens to requirement in other sectors? Today, you've Strike Corps in Bhopal, Mathura and Ambala with assets in larger area. They can respond to requirements in certain sectors. But can the same be said of a single such entity?

OK, we assume that multiple powerful IBGs can be deployed independent of the whole Corps. Then Strike Corps becomes more of a shell formation holding assets than formation which works as a whole.

I'd need to place these IBGs in a manner where they're available to respond to requirements in minimum possible time (remember, one of the lessons from Parakaram was to reduce mobilization time?). Also, given the number of such IBGs, you'll need to prioritize area from Samba to Barmer which will be served by these IBGs when required. You can have a situation where 2 x IBGs go north, 1 x IBG goes to northern Rajasthan and last one goes to Barmer. But then, you'll have to position them accordingly.

This also means that Pivot Corps need to have enough of engineering assets required to support larger mechanized force when IBGs from reserve corps joins it.

But what happens to dictum of concentration of force and firepower when you parcel them as IBGs? Will deployment of these IBGs give IA the superiority required in a particular sector?

Assume further that we parcel 8 other armored brigades (from two other armored divisions+(I) armored brigades with other strike corps) to Pivot Corps. And most Pivot Corps end up with 3 independent armored brigades. Well, shouldn't then I simply go ahead and create an armored division in each of Pivot Corps for better command & control?

What the above does is that it places all your cards on the table from word go. And you've limited reserves in your single strike corps and its 4/5 IBGs, though powerful ones.

But the above is not 'doing away' with strike corps. Or, reducing the armor. It's simply redistributing the same assets. Sure, it will lead to cutting down on 'tail' required to maintain whole Corps. This is because when 'teeth' are redistributed from a Strike Corps to a Pivot Corps, then corresponding tail in the Strike Corps goes is not required. Instead, the 'tail' in the Pivot Corps grows from X to X+delta and not 2X.

The above scenario is opposite to Point 1 mentioned above by you. If BK wants Point 1 and Point 2, well, then might as well hand over the keys to Red Fort to the Pakistan Army. :roll:

In fact, I remember VKS talking about rationalization of reserves and Strike Corps. He also spoke about a single strike corps but no additional details are available. And I'm sure he wasn't going to implement any harebrained ideas like BK.

3. disbanding the Prithvi missiles

this imo can be done with Prahar taking its place.

most of his points will mean better and optimum utilisation of the budget, manpower, equipment without additional burden (or possibly minimal) and focus shifting to china while retaining the edge on Pakistan. what would be your analysis? TIA.


It is my considered opinion that Prithvi Missiles are with SFC and I think Pakistan knows this. But I'm not sure we're going to use Prithvi for taking out tactical or strategic targets in depth. I think the role is nuclear. And we'll retain them till other missile groups are in place in sufficient numbers.

Brahmos on the other hand is with Army and part of Artillery Divisions. I'm willing to be corrected but I've never heard use of Prithvi missiles in any war-games or exercises.

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

Balancing out the eastern sector has started happening. Both III and IV Corps had rationalization and augmentation of AOR + troop strength. Both have 3 divisions each. Plus, the new MSC. Sure, we can do better but changes in the gigantic IA takes time.

Baikul
BRFite
Posts: 1134
Joined: 20 Sep 2010 06:47

Re: Sunni Terrorist Fragments of Unstable Pakistan-Nov 21, 2

Postby Baikul » 22 Jan 2016 00:34

Mods please delete this post or take it elsewhere as appropriate.

I am quoting in full a post made by a Pakistani poster on a cricket forum. It was a comment on a recent controversy around Danish Kaneria the former Pakistani cricketer convicted of cheating. The writer describes the elite school that he and Kaneria, a Hindu, attended. Musharraf was also an alum apparently.

Why am I posting this? Because reading it just brought home as nothing else the the arrant, religious nonsense parents and teachers are inflicting on the vast majority of Pakistanis. I think it should be required reading for anyone trying to understand the inbred, paranoid and utterly inflexible Pakistani culture and educational system and the intolerance they seem to imbibe in their mother's milk.

The writer describes his top rated Pakistani school as 'secular', but a rarity in a landscape of intolerance. I found it ironic that the the tolerance, respect for other cultures and assimilation that are fundamental, even commonplace, characteristics of even the most disadvantaged of educational institutions in India, are considered to be such great virtues claimed for one elite Pakistani school.

Read and weep. Or laugh.

It saddens me to see Kaneria being at such difficult cross roads in his life - After all he is someone I can associate myself with. Danish got his primary and secondary education from St. Patrick's High School which is a long standing school in Karachi for the past 150+ years; it came into being in 1856. I am myself completed my O/A levels from the said mentioned and I am a proud OP (Old Patrician). Apart from Kaneria there are a lot of other notable people that are OPs (Old Patricians) namely Javed Miandad, Parvez Musharraf, Rashid Minhas, Wasim Bari etc etc What I learned in the 13 years I'd spent in that place, and the best of my life by the way, was that there was a lot of emphasis on being tolerant to other cultures and religions.

St. Patrick's is located at the Old Saddar town right in the city center so naturally a lot kids from Christian, Hindu and other Minority communities also attend it. It is the most diversified schooling community in the country I believe, because growing up some of my best friends we're Christians, Hindus and Parsis and even are right now. However, the one thing that is ingrained over there is that no matter who you are and what religion you follow you're first a Paksitani and then someone else. This creates a very binding loyalty to the country and almost 90 percent of Patricians that you will find will be extreme patriots. Danish is no different and you could see that when he wore the star during his career. This statement is more out of frustration rather than anything else. Give this guy a break, he has been fighting a lone battle for almost 6-7 years now without any support so something like this coming out after so many years of struggle is completely natural and justified from my perspective. It is a step in the wrong direction but when a man is desperate he will do anything to make his ends meet and the treatment that Amir, Asif and Butt are getting is quite disheartening for someone like Danish who # 1 isn't accused of fixing or under performing when donning the Green Jersey and #2 he has services to this nation which are 10X the services of Amir, Asif and Butt combined - I might catch a lot of hell fire for saying this by Amir/Butt/Asif ******* but the truth is the truth.

I know where is he coming from when he uses the religion card because quite honestly I have witnessed the very same in my personal life as well. An OP (Old Patrician) is someone who studies from Grade 1 up until A levels or High School graduation. Coming from elementary to almost Junior high the classes and the batch of students remain the same so in the 8-10 years together those same blokes are quite comfortable with each other and the discipline ingrained throughout the course of our educational careers makes OPs extremely tolerant to religion particularly. When I was there, the year of our transfer from O to A levels saw a lot of new admissions from different other schools of Karachi as well. This new batch of people normally are not exposed to a similar diversified community in their up coming years and when they see mixed gathering between practicing Muslims and non Muslims, it is a very hard pill to swallow for them in general. I'll quote something that happened to me and it was the first time I saw a fellow Muslim shun me for sharing a meal with a Parsi student who had been one of my best buddies growing up; Danny Talati - If you're reading this then yup I am talking about you mate . Nobody got offended then due to the actions of my Muslim friend being intolerant back then but that was the first time I saw the grey bias in people when it comes to religion.

I am not claiming that all Muslims are like that in Pakistan nor am I saying that everyone is extremely welcoming what I'am trying to put through is that Danish's appeal and his claim that he isn't considered our own holds a little bit of water. He might have taken it too far by dragging BCCI into this but truth be told we should at least give him a reprieve to earn a living through the thing he does best. I think no one, and yes that includes players like Sreeshant, Salim Malik etc etc deserve a life ban on something that could be there only livelihood. I am a human, I've made mistakes in my life and I have moved on. I've repented and now I consider myself a decent man. Anybody who disagrees that they have sinned or made an error of judgement are fooling nobody but themselves and I consider such to be delusional and extremely pity worthy. The world is round for a reason and everyone deserves a second chance. The guy might have fixed matches in a British domestic game FGS, he didn't kill someone - Let him have a life through something that could feed his family and children. Concluding my argument I find it quite surprising that why would a man be so driven to sacrifice his entire savings and other life earnings on something that he deliberately did. Either he is mad to begin with or it's just that maybe maybe what he says holds an IOTA of weight - if someone in the PCB is reading this then it wouldn't hurt to just look at his case for 1 second and listen to his side of the official story. Rashid Latif, who I consider someone who would never fix or be involved in any type of fixing backs this bloke. For the love of everything that is holy, please look at his case. That's all.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2016 07:47

Afghanistan and Eastern part of Khyber- Paktunwa is what makes Pakistan tick.

Over the weekend I was asked to talk about Pakistan : state models, power structures, regions, provinces, Muslim history. It struck me Jinnah could not claiming the Pashtun region as it already had a state. Unless they include them, they will always be in search of a homeland. Kashmir is a feint.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2016 07:57

Keeping Afghanistan together out if reach keeps Pakistan on road to disintegration.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 25 Jan 2016 08:16

Afghan mess started after Pak lost Bangladesh and Zulfi Bhutto started meddling in Afghanistan with his terrorists who later became Taliban. Precisely in 1976.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Muppalla » 25 Jan 2016 09:31

ramana wrote:Afghanistan and Eastern part of Khyber- Paktunwa is what makes Pakistan tick.

Over the weekend I was asked to talk about Pakistan : state models, power structures, regions, provinces, Muslim history. It struck me Jinnah could not claiming the Pashtun region as it already had a state. Unless they include them, they will always be in search of a homeland. Kashmir is a feint.


That is why US is wary of a disintegrated Afghan state. A pure Phaktun state is possible if there is a will. There is really no cerntrifugal force to stop it from disintegrating. If the world sees Afghanistan alone, it won't really matter.

Keeping Afghanistan united can be to keep Pakis united. Interesting observation.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21177
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Prem » 25 Jan 2016 10:12

I posted a video in Paki multimedia Dhaga. Paki have messed up big in KP and regardless of what Sarkari Pashtuns say on TV, Pashtun belt is frustrated as they realize Pakjabis have used them as cannon fodder to the benefit of Punjab. KP will separate from Pakistan before Balochistan or both simultaneously.

Karan M
Forum Moderator
Posts: 19840
Joined: 19 Mar 2010 00:58

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Karan M » 26 Jan 2016 02:23

maxratul wrote:Ramana,

The bogey of Hindu domination (fed by the Iqbals and the Syed Ahmeds) was casus belli for the Muslim League to launch their political movement of Pakistan. This was a movement whose main soldiers were low class Bihari/UP/Bengali muslims. However, once the objective of Pakistan was achieved, the prime objective for all players (esp. in Pakjab, the power center) became much more self centered - notice how they started their urdu cultural imperialism etc. However, do they do urdu imperialism now? No, they are all wannabe arabis, their current paymasters.

Hindu hatred is their best tool to bind together the diverse interest groups that I mentioned above - Hindu as enemy, Hindu as competitor etcetera. But does that mean that it is Hindu hatred that makes these selfish SOBs tick? no sir. These clowns are driven by pure and simple self interest, they will sleep with whoever needed, will do whatever haramigiri required - islam be damned - in order to maintain their fiefdoms and power bases. They dont have any lofty ideas of religious war or clash of civilizations that they inherently believe in - no muslim country, regardless of their rhetoric, really believe in that hogwash. These are all hard nosed, pragmatic cockroaches, who are continuously trying to figure out how much they can get away with before one throws a rubber sandal at them.


Your theory is fundamentally flawed because it does not take I into account. I being the faith that insists idol worship and pagan idolators must be hated and fought with.

Self interest does not define the Pathankot suicide squad or multiple such groups which exist. And the rest being "hard nosed pragmatic" etc is the typical wishy washy secoolar worldview we were all brainwashed with, which cannot accept the other side is fanatic and fundamentally getting more and more irrational.

I have seen videos from the 60's with pakistanis mocking hindus. If anything they have grown more rabid after that. In Africa, Pakistani officers were roped in to civilize their troops because on joint missions, the scrawny Pakistanis were spitting at the Indians and calling them kaffirs. The Indians approached their Pakistani counterparts to shut their folks up before some IA troops lost their temper and thrashed the Pakistanis. Pakistani ships are crewed by maniacs while the crew, forget training, stands around yelling AoA.

The country and the people are rabid, only the degree to which the indoctrination is there differs.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Muppalla » 26 Jan 2016 04:11

From RamaY:

Image

based on discussion on Kaala Vasiyat's plan:

"Upon returning to the United States, the only item on Blackwill's desk at the National Security Council was a tiny figurine of Ganesh, the Hindu elephant-headed god of wisdom and success while a huge map of "Mother India" adorned the walls of his office.[3]"

Why mother India?



K Subbu garu's article on Kaala Vasiyat's de-facto partition of Afghanistan...

"Indeed, Islamabad might need to be persuaded to concentrate, with the United States, on defeating the Pakistan Taliban and containing the Afghan Taliban to avoid momentum toward a fracturing of the Pakistan state.”

The last sentence is pregnant with dark forebodings for Pakistan. A Taliban-dominated Pashtun Afghanistan and Pakistani Pashtun areas under Pakistani Taliban influence are likely to move towards their long-cherished goal of scrapping the Durand Line and uniting to form the independent Pashtunistan. If that were to happen, Baloch, Sindhi and Balti nationalist assertions cannot be far behind. The Taliban dominated Pashtunistan may conclude a deal with the US to break off with al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. In that event, Pakistan, instead of gaining strategic depth in Afghanistan will be in danger of losing Pashtun areas of Pakistan. In the alternative the Taliban may continue its links with Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations. In that case, their anger at being constantly hit by US airpower may turn on the Pakistan army and state with terrorist attacks on Pakistani Punjab being stepped up. "


ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 27 Jan 2016 01:26

Ahmed Shah Durrani in the wake of Nadir Shah created Afghanistan with Pashtun areas and non-Pashtun areas : Tajik, Uzbek. Hazaras were added later from Iran.


For sake of argument let us say Afghanistan is separated into Pashtun and non Pashtun areas. The capital of the Pashtun areas would be Kandahar and non-Pasthuns areas could be Kabul or they join the adjacent countries if they don't want o be in a Northern Alliance state.
So what would the impact of such states be on Russia, China and US?

As far as I can tell, there is no impact to these three countries.
Then comes the big questions.

What is the impact on India?
Will be able to establish relations with Pashtuns on formal basis. On hold since the Lodis.
India already had good relations with Northern Alliance and will continue.
So no to minimal impact and could venture its positive for it will enable relations with Pashtuns.

What is the impact on Pakistan?

We need to discuss this.

KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4331
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby KLNMurthy » 27 Jan 2016 05:29

Karan M wrote:...
Your theory is fundamentally flawed because it does not take I into account. I being the faith that insists idol worship and pagan idolators must be hated and fought with.

Self interest does not define the Pathankot suicide squad or multiple such groups which exist. And the rest being "hard nosed pragmatic" etc is the typical wishy washy secoolar worldview we were all brainwashed with, which cannot accept the other side is fanatic and fundamentally getting more and more irrational.

I have seen videos from the 60's with pakistanis mocking hindus. If anything they have grown more rabid after that. In Africa, Pakistani officers were roped in to civilize their troops because on joint missions, the scrawny Pakistanis were spitting at the Indians and calling them kaffirs. The Indians approached their Pakistani counterparts to shut their folks up before some IA troops lost their temper and thrashed the Pakistanis. Pakistani ships are crewed by maniacs while the crew, forget training, stands around yelling AoA.

The country and the people are rabid, only the degree to which the indoctrination is there differs.

Urdu word for temple is but (bhoot) khana, for image-worship it is but (bhoot) parasti.

No way these guys can't hate and despise Hinduism.

Luxtor
BRFite
Posts: 200
Joined: 28 Sep 2003 11:31
Location: Earth ... but in a parallel universe

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Luxtor » 27 Jan 2016 06:27

What makes Pukistan tick? ....

Well, Pukistan is like a (not so) fine, hand-wind watch ... made by the retreating British, it has been wound up repeatedly by the Americans and the Chinese over its history to suit their respective purposes.

I also saw the video here on this thread about "Why does Pukistan seek a war with India?" .... That jihadi beard said that India is the only place on Earth where idol worship is done. Ha? excuse me? .... What about that huge statue of Jesus in Rio de Janeiro? Millions of Buddha statues through out asian countries including Japan? Every Christian church everywhere in the world has statues of Jesus, Mary and all the apostles and saints. This has always been the problem with the Pukies....they consistently misunderstand the world around them and themselves.

Shreeman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3762
Joined: 17 Jan 2007 15:31
Location: bositiveneuj.blogspot.com
Contact:

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Shreeman » 27 Jan 2016 09:05

I pelieve that the table of tick counts against raisins dieter (72 per, bakistani bakers dozen) is not adequate. Ticks need water. Where is the kashmeeri water in the taple? I pelieve bakistan only has ticks because they can hibernate in kashmeer. QeD, it is kashmeer that is giving bakistan ticks.

No kashmeer. No ticks. But then also no bakistan. Perhaps QeD?

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 29 Jan 2016 06:32

What is the impact on Pakistan of the formation of new Pashtun state out of Afghanistan?

Durand Line:

The Durand Line is setup by a treaty between Afghanistan and British India and was to lapse in 1993.
So it has lapsed and Afghanistan does not recognize it.
Taliban when they were in power also did not recognize it.

So most likely a new Pashtun state might not recognize the Durand Line. Probability ~80%

However if the only way that a Pashtun state can be formed is by recognizing the Durand Line , the Pashtuns could think about it. And West can provide financial aid to the new Pashtun state to renounce Durand Line. No IMF/WB loans business. This option preserves Pakistan. Probability ~20 % as West is in financial crisis.


What happens to NWFP now known as Khyber-Pashtunwa?


Two options:

They could desire to join their kin folks in the new Pashtun state Probability ~70%


The other option is NWFP Pashtuns might not want to join for other reasons. Probability ~30%

Examples are Greece feared that their own Macedonians would split of and join the new state of Macedonia carved from Serbia. However the Greek Macedonians chose to stay in Greece and not join the new Macedonia state.


The contrary is the new Pashtun state power structures would be Durrani where as the NWFP Pashtuns are majority Ghilzai.

So they may not want to join the new state.

Pakistan also could similarly expect the Pashtuns might choose to stay in Pakistan. They need to make it good for Pashtuns to want to stay. Here West can provide the funds via IMF and WB to Pakistan as they had contributed to the mess for over 40 years in those unfortunate countries.

----
Either way you look at the high potential exists for
a) Durand Line to be erased and
b) K-P province to join the new Pashtun state.

-----
What happens when this new Pashtun state is formed?

Afghanistan:

- Northern Areas could form their own country Probability ~80%
- What is now Northern Areas could revert to adjacent countries undoing Ahmed Shah Durrani's ancient land grab. Probability ~20%

Pakistan:
- K-P is joins Pashtun state and Durand Line problem is not there.
- Don't have to worry about Western border like in old days.
Adverse consequences are
- Baluchistan might also opt out. Probability ~90%
- Sindh could join or stay with Pakjab. ~50-50% as Sindhi leadership is sheep.
- Pakistan Occupied Kashmir would be split into G-B and Kashmir Valley.
Latter could revert to India and undo the dispute. Probability 90%

So net Pakistan would lose the trouble maker provinces and net gain G-B which is crucial for traverse to China.
It would not need such a large military and can spend the funds on development.

So its a win-win for Pakistan.
Just as FSU became CIS and gave up the trouble maker provinces Pakistan too could do this separation constructively before it becomes destructive process.

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

India has been engaging Pakistan futilely for last 60 years. With US and UK as interested parties.

In Afghanistan it has been engaging Northern Alliance elements

To help bring this about India needs to engage Pashtuns- both Durrani and Ghilzai to restore peace to the region.

SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 24189
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby SSridhar » 29 Jan 2016 06:59

Luxtor wrote:What makes Pukistan tick? ....

Well, Pukistan is like a (not so) fine, hand-wind watch ... made by the retreating British, it has been wound up repeatedly by the Americans and the Chinese over its history to suit their respective purposes.

I also saw the video here on this thread about "Why does Pukistan seek a war with India?" .... That jihadi beard said that India is the only place on Earth where idol worship is done. Ha? excuse me? .... What about that huge statue of Jesus in Rio de Janeiro? Millions of Buddha statues through out asian countries including Japan? Every Christian church everywhere in the world has statues of Jesus, Mary and all the apostles and saints. This has always been the problem with the Pukies....they consistently misunderstand the world around them and themselves.

Luxtor, but, the Christians are ahl-e-kitab and the Christian messengers of God are acceptable etc. As for Buddhists, again, Buddhism is an Indian product with a lot of Hindu influence. That is all the more reason that the incubator of such profanities as Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism (all idolatorous), namely Hindustan, must be destroyed. Now, that is why I keep saying that at a very fundamental level, it is India that makes Pakistan tick. Everything else is a convemient tool, excuse or ruse to this most obsessive, passionate objective. People are willing to endure pain to achieve this one day, Insha Allah.

Added later: This is what Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, the real founder of Pakistan, told Viceroy Minto in c. 1909: “No Mohammedan can say that the English are not ‘people of the Book’. No Mohammedan can deny this: that God has said that no people of other religions can be friends of Mohammedans except the Christians. . . . Now God has made them rulers over us. Therefore we should cultivate friendship with them, and should adopt that method by which their rule may remain permanent and firm in India, and may not pass into the hands of the Bengalis. This is our true friendship with our Christian rulers . . . for we do not want to become subjects of the Hindus instead of the subjects of the people of the Book."

ShauryaT
BRF Oldie
Posts: 5246
Joined: 31 Oct 2005 06:06

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ShauryaT » 30 Jan 2016 16:44

^Islamism being a "cause" for the creation of Pakistan is not in question and widely acknowledged. Most Indian Nationalists did and continue to reject that premise as a justifiable cause for division from the Indian nation, yet the division with the Indian union happened and has been sustained, often with foreign help. The then nationalists were right about Islam not being a sufficient glue to sustain the totality of nationhood in the subcontinent. The subsequent partition of Pakistan itself, the number of muslims in India and the subsequent ethnic and sectarian violence within current Pakistan also proves the same point. Pakistan's inability to sustain as a "stable" state without coming to terms with India is also a reflection of inability of Islam alone to sustain the veneer of being a nation-state. Its claims of Dar-ul-Islam dreams all over India will remain a dream, until the Indian union stays united and strong.

The fundamental rejection of the then Indian nationalists of Islam and hence Pakistan as a separate and distinct nation from India has been well proven and this is the defeat of the separate nation theory of Jinnah/Iqbal/Syed Ahmed, etc. What Pakistan is and may at best continue to be is a "state" not a stable nation-state.

The question of what makes this state tick or sustain is something to be explored. Islam as its foundational causes are a matter of history with much known and written about it. By focusing on Islam, we are conceding to the Islamists and IMO miss a huge part of the realities of Pakistan as a state ONLY and NEVER a nation-state and why it continues to sustain/tick, in its own faltering way.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 30 Jan 2016 21:29

"Jhujar"


Debunking the ‘founders’ of Two-Nation Theory
Naa Raped Ammi Ki Talash hai: Asli Abbu Ki Talash Hai: Paki Na Jaane Kiss Harami Ki Awlad hai
-------------

From Muhammad Bin Qasim to Mahmud Ghaznavi, we have named the foreign invaders as the founders of this theory.One such ‘historian’, Dr Safdar Mahmud, wrote last year that Ghauri was in fact the founder of Pakistan.Debunking this vile claim, Dr Mubarak Ali wrote, “It is customary to be proud of our invaders such as Muhammad Bin Qasim, Mahmoud of Ghazna and Muhammad Ghori and to denounce other invaders who looted our country from time to time. In fact, all these invaders were mass murderers and should be treated as criminals in history.”Many such historians trace the spiritual link of Two-Nation Theory to the likes of Sheikh Ahmed Sirhindi and Shah Wali Ullah. In our textbooks, the foundation of the idea of two different nations has been credited to Sir Syed Ahmed Khan.When reading through the original text from these personalities, one comes to conclusion that their ideologies were as contradictory and paradoxical as the theory itself.Ahmed Sirhindi was the founder of ‘Wahdatul shahood’, which was considered ‘bid’at’ by most of the Muslim theologians. He was against the Mughal’s policy of ‘sulah-e-kul’ and considered it a hurdle in the way of the spread of Islam. Jahangir arrested Sheikh Ahmed Sirhindi after he was informed of Sheikh’s activities.“Jahangir came to know of a man in Sirhind, who had laid the web of deception for the simple and devoted people. He had appointed his khalifas to various areas from where they are misleading people,” Tuzk-e-Jahangiri, page 360.Sibte Hasan writes in ‘Hindustan Mein Tehzeeb Ka Irtiqa’ that Sheikh Sirhindi considered philosophy as heresy and saw philosophers as idiots. Hassan’s claim can be verified from Sheikh’s letters. He wrote to one of his disciples, “When Jesus invited Plato (the chief of these idiots) to accept his prophethood, his reply was that they were enlightened people and they didn’t feel the need of someone who wanted to enlighten them.” Interestingly, Plato died 348 years before Jesus was born.Sheikh Ahmed Sirhindi had sectarian inclinations as well, as he wrote Radd-i-Rawafiz or ‘Refutation of Shia-ism’. The modern fatwas against Shias are derived mostly from his work.If the founder of Two-Nation Theory is Sheikh Ahmed Sirhindi, who has apostatised Shias, where do we stand?Shah Wali Ullah’s character and ideology, again, are inconsistent to say the least. Shah Wali Ullah invited Ahmed Shah Abdali to invade the subcontinent, knowing that the previous foreign invasion by Nader Shah resulted in him looting and plundering the wealth of Mughal Empire.
“God forbid, your act must not be like that of Nader Shah who destroyed Muslims but left Marathas as they were before,” Shah Wali Ullah wrote to Abdali. (Shah Wali Ullah Dehalvi Ke Siyasi Maktoob by )Describing the result of his invasion, Dr Mubarak Ali writes, “Although Abdali defeated the Marathas in 1761, he further weakened the Mughal emperor and the nobility by plundering their wealth. The idea of reviving power and stability using foreign help failed; so no lesson can be learned from this dismal episode.”An estimate tells that 30-120 million rupees were looted by Ahmed Shah Abdali. He married the younger daughter of Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah by force. (Shah Wali Ullah was faced with death threats when he translated Quran into Persian and he had to leave Delhi due to fatwas of apostasy.
His son, Shah Abdul Aziz decreed in favour of working for British and be loyal to them but he advised the Muslims must not have any links to them culturally. He even said that it was advisable to wash the utensils used by British before utilising them. Like Sheikh Ahmed Sirhindi, Shah Wali Ullah also apostatised Shias.“A thorough study of lzatal-Khifa and Qurratal-Ainain and the letters of Wali Ullah in Kalimaat-e-Tayyabaat will reveal that Wali Ullah called the Shias as zindiq, nawabit and mubtadi (heretics and innovators in religion), as did Sheikh Ahmad of Sirhind,” writes Khaled Ahmed in Sectarian Wars. (Page 15)Likewise, Wali Ullah’s son, Shah Abdul Aziz wrote ‘Tuhfa Ithna Ashariya’, a comprehensive anti-Shia book.The founder of Pakistan Muhammad Ali Jinnah is well known to be a Shia himself. If we accept Wali Ullah and Sheikh Ahmed as the founders of Two-Nation Theory, we are bound to ‘otherise’ Jinnah, who, in the eyes of the former, was not a Muslim.Syed Ahmed of Bareli and Shah Ismail are also glorified as the freedom fighters who lost their lives, waging jihad against infidels.These personalities, instead of fighting against British, who were geographically near to them and in fact were invaders, went all the way up north to fight against Sikhs and their fellow Muslims.Shah Ismail, when he started lectures on jihad in Calcutta, describing the ‘oppression’ of Muslims by Sikh rulers, was asked the reason behind not waging jihad against the British rulers.“It’s not obligatory to wage jihad against them because Muslims are subjects of British rulers and they are able to live freely under their rule. In case of a foreign attack, it is the responsibility of Muslims to fight for their government,” Shah Ismail responded.
The freedom struggle which led the creation of Pakistan was directed against the British rule. Can we ask how Shah Ismail is a hero of freedom movement when he decreed that there was no jihad against the British?Ismail was not alone in praising the British government and asking his followers to submit themselves to the ruler. Mian Nazir Hussain Dehalvi, one of the leading Ahle Hadith scholars, was praised by British rulers for his ‘services’.To avoid any hurdles on his way to Hajj, Nazir approached Commissioner Delhi for a letter, who wrote, “Maulvi Nazir Hussain is a leading scholar in Delhi, who in difficult times proved his loyalty to British Empire and on his pilgrimage to Mecca, I hope that any British Officer whose help or protection he may need, will be given to him, as he fully deserves it”. (
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan has been frequently placed next to Jinnah and Iqbal as the founder of Pakistan in our textbooks. Altaf Hussain Hali, in Hayat-e-Javed, a biography of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, writes, “Sir Syed Ahmed Khan prayed fervently for Queen Victoria in one of his manajaat, thanking God for her.)Although Sir Syed Ahmed Khan is said to be the founder of the ideology of Pakistan i.e., Hindus and Muslims are two different nations, but Muslims themselves refused to accept him as one of them. All Muslim scholars from subcontinent and Arab unitedly decreed a fatwa of apostasy against him. Sir Syed Ahmed Khan writes in ‘Asbab-i-Baghawat-e-Hind’ that Shah Ismail Shaheed’s fight against Sikhs was actually a jihad. ( The same Sir Syed Ahmed Khan had ardently condemned the 1857 war of independence against British, terming it a mutiny.His contempt for those who fought in the 1857 war was so great that he called one such fighter a ******** (H)Under such circumstances, when the alleged ‘founders’ of Two-Nation Theory either apostatised other Muslims, waged selective jihads to protect the interests of British rulers, wrote extensively in their favour, one can totally expect the nation to be a confused crowd.It is about time historians debunked more of such characters who have falsely been accredited as the founders of this country and how negatively they influenced their followers.


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

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Muppalla » 30 Jan 2016 21:40

ramana wrote:
India has been engaging Pakistan futilely for last 60 years. With US and UK as interested parties.

In Afghanistan it has been engaging Northern Alliance elements

To help bring this about India needs to engage Pashtuns- both Durrani and Ghilzai to restore peace to the region.


Very difficult. India needs to build a system where it can try to create Pastunistan and separate out others from current dat Afghanistan. This is another way to unravel the Pakistan. However, the same geopolitical elements that spend all their resources to keep Pakis united will try (trying) that hard to keep Afghanistan united.

There is saying in Telugu (atu ninchi narruku raa) that literally means start killing from other side. India thought it can achieve by nurturing more relations with Northern Alliance. Actually it needs to nurture more with all kinds of Pastun groups to create Pastunistan. But this is very difficult and to prempt such a things, US has invested so much in Talibs and Pakis.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 54825
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby ramana » 30 Jan 2016 21:48

What means is everyone except India knows Pashtuns are key. And India after Indira Gandhi are in stability kool aid of USA and nurturing Breaking India forces.

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7096
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Muppalla » 31 Jan 2016 19:31

^^^
There are some opportunities now for India. But has to play it aggressively.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21177
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: What Makes Pakistan tick? Discussion thread

Postby Prem » 01 Feb 2016 02:55

Muppalla wrote:^^^
There are some opportunities now for India. But has to play it aggressively.


Pashtuns are really frustrated with Paki state now. Have been Watching Pakhtun commentators on Paki TV. Majority of them have realized that they got fooled and used by Pakjabi. Little stability & prosperity in Afghanistan will be key to make them know which side of border is their bread buttered. They will take Balochistan along with them.


Return to “Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Pathik and 49 guests