Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2011

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 01:24

X-posting from the Pak ops dhaaga:

I personally think "Strategic Depth" in A'stan as defense against India is a BS sold by their armed forces to paper over the *actual* problem. Basing nukes on Afghan territory is all nice and dandy plan, but what happens if Unkil/Russia/India flies in a covert team to take a look see? Can their logistic trail sustain the security of the nukes? What will be Pakis' justification to suddenly move a brigade inside Afghan territory?

The *actual* problem is Pashtun and Baloch nationalism. If the Pakis can cause trouble in India on JK imagine the trouble Afghans can cause the Pakis by sheltering Baloch and Pashtun groups! Afghans already dispute the durrand line, think they are TFTA against the SDRE Pakis and have an axe to grind based on years of Pakistaniyat dished out to them from across the border. They too want unimpeded access to sea (preferably through Balochistan) and remember the glorious days of yore when Paki territory used to be ruled from Afghanistan. They will be backed up against the Pakis by China and the CAR in their attempt to wag the Pakis.

The way I see it is either Afghanistan is Pakistan's poodle or Pakistan is Afghanistan's poodle. To prevent from GUBO-ing to the Afghans, Pakis need a forward policy against the Afghans to keep them pliable. Already Ashphuck is getting brown pants about the size of the Afghan army proposed by Unkil (and reducing it to 30% of the proposed size is one of Pakistan's main demands). The strategic depth that the Pakis want is not depth against India, it is depth against Afghanistan.

Since such intense hostility against a ummah birather cannot be openly stated, it is being passed off as Strategic depth against "CIA-RAW-Mossad-Jew-Hindu-Christian conspiracy against Pakistan"

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8279
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby anupmisra » 02 May 2011 01:39

Putting actual practice to paper, Visa-free travel between Pakistan, Afghanistan sought. Some gems:

... make travelling between the two countries convenient by ending visa condition and setting up only four registration points on the border (till today, travel was very inconvenient as the tellibunnies had to go over rocky mountains with no rest stops or caravanserais for the weary)
... demanded that instead of visa, only the names of travellers should be registered (Q: Bhat ij jour name? A: Abdul. Q: Hokay, Go! God speed!)
also asked the neighbouring countries to immediately stop interference in Afghanistan (I guess this means you evil Indians and Persians)
Earlier, gloomy silence prevailed in the hall when Noora Jan, a young poet from Afghanistan, presented his poem about devastation of war and its impact on the lives of people.(Everyone was moved to tears!)
Dr Nasir Jamal said that under a conspiracy, traditional games of Pakhtuns had been diminished to pave the way for imposition of Arab culture.(Pakistaniyat and kirkit are Arabic?)
according to history Pakhtuns were peace loving nation (and then what happened?)
“Gone are the days when a country used to be captured by force” (now, its only love between brotherly nations that captures the heart)
“Pakistan has done nothing to improve its image in Afghanistan rather it safeguarded its interest through people having guns,” he added. On the other side, he said, Iran and India launched many development schemes to gain sympathies of Afghans. (Ouch! That hurts! Why did you have to bring that episode up?)
The Pakistani establishment should reframe its policy and stop supporting some fictions of militants, he said, adding most of Taliban had got their training in Mansehra. (its all make believe)

Pox on you, Manshera!

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8279
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby anupmisra » 02 May 2011 01:44

Anujan wrote:I personally think "Strategic Depth" in A'stan as defense against India is a BS sold by their armed forces to paper over the *actual* problem. Basing nukes on Afghan territory is all nice and dandy plan, but what happens if Unkil/Russia/India flies in a covert team to take a look see? Can their logistic trail sustain the security of the nukes?


The basic premise of that elusive strategic depth is that Indian army will walk all over pakjabi lands which will force the paki army to "retreat" or "strategically advance" into Afghanistan unmolested. That is akin to admitting defeat before the war has even started. The Afghans (being their "strategic depth" brothers, and hence pliable) will welcome them, allow them to regroup, and the paki army will live to fight another day (probably continue a hit/run type of warfare). I don't think basing their nukes in another country will pass the muster with anyone including the Central Asian Republics, the Russians or the Eyeranians.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 01:46

The Yahoos just shot down a Paki helicopter near Pak training base in Abottabad. Hopefully they got some star batsmen.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 01:58

anupmisra wrote:The basic premise of that elusive strategic depth is that Indian army will walk all over pakjabi lands which will force the paki army to "retreat" or "strategically advance" into Afghanistan unmolested. That is akin to admitting defeat before the war has even started. The Afghans (being their "strategic depth" brothers, and hence pliable) will welcome them, allow them to regroup, and the paki army will live to fight another day (probably continue a hit/run type of warfare). I don't think basing their nukes in another country will pass the muster with anyone including the Central Asian Republics, the Russians or the Eyeranians.


This too is BS. The reason being that:

(1) The Indians will pursue the retreating troops and break their backs.
(2) Indians wont occupy PakJab, simply flatten army bases/cantonments/arms factories
(3) Assuming Indians occupy PakJab, where is the industrial base in Afghanistan to mount counter attacks? Do afghans grow enough food to feed an army? Where will guns/bullets/tanks/artillery come from?
(4) Will men and officers live away from their families in the mountains? Or will they surrender?

The whole strategic depth was BS. Pakis want Afghanistan to (a) Train terrorists to send to India with plausible deniability -- to locate the terror infrastructure there without affecting their society (b) To make Afghanistan their poodle so that they dont have to GUBO to TFTA afghans.

Brad Goodman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2368
Joined: 01 Apr 2010 17:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Brad Goodman » 02 May 2011 01:58

Made In Pakistan

Growing up in Afghanistan in the late seventies and early eighties, my grandfather admonished me to never purchase any product made in Pakistan. Like many Afghans, I sincerely appreciated my grandfather’s wisdom, but I never had the courage to question it, why? So one day at school, I asked a friend, who was also told by his family to stay away from any Pakistani products, what was the logical reasoning his family had provided him to justify a boycott? He obliged that Pakistani products were considered “fake”. :rotfl:

From its manufactured products to its friendship, Pakistan continuously struggles with the notion of honesty. Today, many decades later, my grandfather & other Afghan elders’ wisdom silently resonates in the halls of the National Security Council in Washington, DC. Almost ten years into the Afghan war, the United States finally admits through its top soldier, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, that Pakistan’s military, especially its Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) is allied with America’s enemies, Taliban & al-Qaeda, and a “fake” and dishonest partner, with American blood on its hands.

For the Obama administration expecting a sudden and genuine transformation in Pakistan’s behavior is like pushing a boulder up a hill. However, never-ending political instability and Islamabad’s lack of military efforts against the Taliban and al-Qaeda and its nuclear proliferation raise the stakes too high for any administration to neglect Pakistan’s behavior.

No one can question Pakistan’s sovereignty, with its own set of challenges including economic difficulties, ethnic, sectarian and religious challenges and a country headed toward a gloomy Talibanization. Perhaps, not all Pakistanis are supporter of extremism and could very well see their future in a more secular, democratic and progressive state rather than one always labeled as the top producer of terrorism. But when Pakistan’s military leaders fundamentally believe in occupying their neighbor, as the occasion was presented to them in the mid-nineties through a proxy Taliban cult, the atrocities committed by Pakistan in five years of proxy occupation had made the Soviets look like an amature tyrant. This fundamental hatred toward Afghanistan should not be taking lightly when pondering a long term strategic partnership with Afghanistan.

What is even more galling is the avalanche of papers, articles and opinions suffocating think tank atmospheres in Washington, DC on what to do next in the Afghan war without ever addressing a major and real fact: Pakistan is Afghanistan’s fundamental enemy.

It is imperative for the Obama administration and the Afghan government to understand that Pakistan can never be trusted and will never be Afghanistan’s friend, if Pakistan is left to the devices of its military generals, especially those running the ISI.

Diplomatically, Washington’s approach to convince Pakistan to do more in the war against terror has miserably failed. It had failed during the Bush administration and it continuous to yield no results during the Obama administration. Pakistani generals are clever; they demonstrate military operations in South Waziristan to fight the Pakistani Taliban, while leaving the North Waziristan untouched. And if there is ever a disagreement between Washington and Islamabad, Pakistan knows how to blackmail NATO/ISAF by halting the supply convoys, which is vital to NATO’s daily operation.

Politically, Pakistan has uncompromising position on the Taliban. The Pakistani civilian government not only has no sway on the military but constitutionally, the civilian government has no say in Pakistan’s nuclear and Taliban programs. While numerous revelations point that Pakistan supports Taliban terrorist network to fight Americans and Afghan security forces in Afghanistan, we do not have an updated report that Pakistan’s procurement network run by former Pakistani nuclear dealer A.Q. Khan is no longer in business. Thus, assessing Pakistan’s honesty continues to be a huge national security interest of the United States.

In Kabul, the Afghan government must be extremely vigilant of Pakistan’s friendly mask. Kabul’s government must process that the Afghan people have been the subject of Pakistan’s blackmail ever since the bloody Communist Saur coup d’état. Today, Pakistan’s investment in the Taliban has a fundamental strategic approach to neutralize Afghan Pashtun nationalist, especially those who oppose a demarcation by colonial British India, also known as the Durand Line. Pakistan has long realized that a unified Pashtun nationalist on both side of the Durand Line is as deadly threat as a thousand nuclear missiles from India. Therefore, the Afghan government must explore converging points with regional actors that diverge with Pakistan, hence exploit & capitalize on those points.

Finally, back to my grandfather’s wisdom, this entire conflict in Afghanistan is “Made in Pakistan.” Taliban and al Qaeda were both born and raised in Pakistan and god willing will eventually die in Pakistan. Without Pakistan’s help the Taliban terrorist will not last a week. While wars eventually end, it should not come at the expense of the Afghan people. The latest Pentagon report shows that 75 percent of Afghans have an extreme unpopular view of the Taliban. Twisting Afghans arm, whether through eloquent speeches at prestigious American universities or think tanks, to negotiate with Taliban cult is like forcing families of 9/11 victims to reconcile with Osama bin Laden.


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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Dipanker » 02 May 2011 03:15

Anujan wrote:X-posting from the Pak ops dhaaga:

I personally think "Strategic Depth" in A'stan as defense against India is a BS sold by their armed forces to paper over the *actual* problem. Basing nukes on Afghan territory is all nice and dandy plan, but what happens if Unkil/Russia/India flies in a covert team to take a look see? Can their logistic trail sustain the security of the nukes? What will be Pakis' justification to suddenly move a brigade inside Afghan territory?

The *actual* problem is Pashtun and Baloch nationalism. If the Pakis can cause trouble in India on JK imagine the trouble Afghans can cause the Pakis by sheltering Baloch and Pashtun groups! Afghans already dispute the durrand line, think they are TFTA against the SDRE Pakis and have an axe to grind based on years of Pakistaniyat dished out to them from across the border. They too want unimpeded access to sea (preferably through Balochistan) and remember the glorious days of yore when Paki territory used to be ruled from Afghanistan. They will be backed up against the Pakis by China and the CAR in their attempt to wag the Pakis.

The way I see it is either Afghanistan is Pakistan's poodle or Pakistan is Afghanistan's poodle. To prevent from GUBO-ing to the Afghans, Pakis need a forward policy against the Afghans to keep them pliable. Already Ashphuck is getting brown pants about the size of the Afghan army proposed by Unkil (and reducing it to 30% of the proposed size is one of Pakistan's main demands). The strategic depth that the Pakis want is not depth against India, it is depth against Afghanistan.

Since such intense hostility against a ummah birather cannot be openly stated, it is being passed off as Strategic depth against "CIA-RAW-Mossad-Jew-Hindu-Christian conspiracy against Pakistan"


Yes, the "Strategic depth" is more about keeping FATA and NWFP within Pakistan than anything else. Theoretically these areas should have reverted back to Afghanistan after then lapse of British - Afghan Agreement in 1993.

A peaceful Afghanistan will definitely raise this issue. Pakistan strategic depth strategy is to keep Afghanistan under constant turmoil or under ISI sponsored Taliban rule.

Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Airavat » 02 May 2011 05:22

Organ Trafficking Prevalent in Pakistan

Dr Rizvi, who appeared to be highly disturbed over the resurgence of the organ trade in the country, went on to say that if the government and assemblies could not implement the law, they had no right to exist. “If the assemblies cannot ensure implementation of law, they should be wound up as it would only be a waste of resources. The government should cease to function if it cannot implement the law,” he said, adding that every authority in the country knew what was happening in the country.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby svinayak » 02 May 2011 05:25

http://www.issi.org.pk/publication-file ... 043643.pdf
Pakistan’s strategic interaction
Policy maximization


As such, the year 1958 set in a new crucial phase of policy-fixation in Pakistan's foreign affairs. To quote Arif Hussain, in 1956, Foreign Minister Firoz Khan Noon presented a novel perception of fixing priorities in this regard. He conceptualized foreign policy foci by distinguishing between the ideological and strategic interests of Pakistan. His unique proposal contained three conceptual parameters - Pak-Islamism, Two-Nation Theory, and Pan¬-Islamism - identified respectively on priority bases as explained below:


Priority: I Pak-Islamism: more strategic than ideological, as it portrayed Pakistan's Islamic self-image and laid a special emphasis on achieving its vital strategic interests by relying upon any potential power abroad (not necessarily the Western powers); a concept of making Pakistan a model progressive Islamic State, pursuing an independent foreign policy befitting its prestige and potential.

Priority: II Two-Nation Theory: both ideological and strategic, as it pertained to counter adequately hegemonic and aggressive designs of India against the vital national interests of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan.

Priority: III Pan-Islamism: primarily ideological, as it was meant for nurturing Muslim brotherhood and cooperation in the world of Islam.

To illustrate these three fundamentals, we should recall that Martial Law was imposed in Pakistan in October 1958. General Ayub Khan initially held office as the Chief Martial Law Administrator, and then was installed as the President of Pakistan till 1969. A brief profile of President Ayub is in place here to identify him as an outstanding strategist possessing leadership qualities and administrative skills needed to introduce rationality in Pakistan's domestic and foreign policies.

First and foremost, Ayub Khan was a Sandhurst-trained soldier of pro-Western traits, who conveniently shared the Westernized outlook of many intellectuals of Pakistan. Secondly, he held the post of Commander-in-Chief for seven long years (1951-58). In this capacity, he worked in close liaison with the prime ministers of the past and also held the defence portfolio. Thirdly, his being in command of the armed forces, as well as a close associate of the civil and military bureaucracies, enabled him to assert his personal viewpoint in policy-making more effectively than anyone else in Pakistan. Fourthly, he was the chief architect of Pakistan's policy of alliance with the West, and had the authority to approve

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21111
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Prem » 02 May 2011 05:55

http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/02/army-hel ... tabad.html
According to TV reports, security personnel cordoned off the area after the incident and launched relief work,
(Some one from the Top Dog house must be ridding in da Chopper)
Last edited by Prem on 02 May 2011 21:24, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby shiv » 02 May 2011 06:42

Anujan wrote:X-posting from the Pak ops dhaaga:

I personally think "Strategic Depth" in A'stan as defense against India is a BS sold by their armed forces to paper over the *actual* problem. Basing nukes on Afghan territory is all nice and dandy plan, but what happens if Unkil/Russia/India flies in a covert team to take a look see? Can their logistic trail sustain the security of the nukes? What will be Pakis' justification to suddenly move a brigade inside Afghan territory?

The *actual* problem is Pashtun and Baloch nationalism. If the Pakis can cause trouble in India on JK imagine the trouble Afghans can cause the Pakis by sheltering Baloch and Pashtun groups! Afghans already dispute the durrand line, think they are TFTA against the SDRE Pakis and have an axe to grind based on years of Pakistaniyat dished out to them from across the border. They too want unimpeded access to sea (preferably through Balochistan) and remember the glorious days of yore when Paki territory used to be ruled from Afghanistan. They will be backed up against the Pakis by China and the CAR in their attempt to wag the Pakis.

The way I see it is either Afghanistan is Pakistan's poodle or Pakistan is Afghanistan's poodle. To prevent from GUBO-ing to the Afghans, Pakis need a forward policy against the Afghans to keep them pliable. Already Ashphuck is getting brown pants about the size of the Afghan army proposed by Unkil (and reducing it to 30% of the proposed size is one of Pakistan's main demands). The strategic depth that the Pakis want is not depth against India, it is depth against Afghanistan.

Since such intense hostility against a ummah birather cannot be openly stated, it is being passed off as Strategic depth against "CIA-RAW-Mossad-Jew-Hindu-Christian conspiracy against Pakistan"



In this context - kicking the US out of Pakistan into Afghanistan (Reaper/Predator base) is a bad move. Now that "strategic depth" will have to deal with an even more entrenched America. But Pakistan actually faces lousy choices all round. Hitting a supine India that is afraid to make war because of nuclear weapons was the easiest alternative - but even that choice was botched as the Islamic brotherhood welcomed those who were being butt kicked in Afghanuistan after 9-11 and started sympathizing with them.

As I see it - if India declares war on Pakistan - it will reward Pakistan with the best excuse it has had in decades to unite its Islamist people against the kafir nation. To that extent Pakistan has checkmated India effectively. I wrote a reply to someone - may have been you or anup as a joke, but it later came back to me as a question

1) Pakistan tests Raad to counter India's cold start
2) Pakistan tests Hatf to counter India's warm start
3) Pakistan tests Ghauri to counter India's hot start.

But what does Pakistan phyrr to counter India's doctrine of no start?

The answer is terrorism. Pakistan's terrorism was designed around India's "No start" doctrine. Let me recap. Pakistan - in the "traditional mould" attempted guerilla campaigns and formal military campaigns on several occasions from 1947 to 199. They had mixed results. They got no outright victory but paid costs particularly in 1971. Theer were mainly diplomatic costs in 1999.

But in 2002 under Operation Parakram India tested and proved its doctrine of no start. Pakistan then realised that terrorism was a good way of m,aking India continue with its no start military doctrine. So from 2002 to 2008 we had a steadily increasing number of terror attacks within India. Here is a graph:
Image

Something clicked after 26/11. Note that even in 26/11 India implemented its doctrine of no start (NSD). No start is good for terrorism. It is good for Pakistan. But Pakistan is ready to counter Cold start, warm start and hot start. IOW Pakistan has all the answers.

Despite having all the answers Pakistan inspired terrorism has reduced. This cannot be entirely because of what India has done. It could be because something is going wrong in Pakistan. As far as India is concerned - Pakistan is ready to tackle India in cold, warm, hot and no start.

What is India to do?

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Rangudu » 02 May 2011 07:32

I'm hearing some rumors that Osama has been killed in TSP. Let's see...

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 07:34

Yup, hearing that chatter too. Announcement here at 10:45

http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/president-obama-delivers-statement

Did the Pakis finally GUBO?

pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4081
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby pgbhat » 02 May 2011 07:36

Rangudu wrote:I'm hearing some rumors that Osama has been killed in TSP. Let's see...

Ombaba announcement? :eek:

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 07:37

^^^

Not yet. Ombaba to make an announcement regarding a foreign CIA op. The whitehouse link to telecast it at 10:45. The op is not about libya. So says MSNBC.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Rangudu » 02 May 2011 07:37

Obama is about to make a "national security" related statement in 4 minutes. CNN is carrying it live and reporters saying "it is going to be an extremely dramatic" statement and it is NOT Libya related.

Rangudu
BRFite
Posts: 1751
Joined: 03 Mar 2002 12:31
Location: USA

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Rangudu » 02 May 2011 07:38

Obama statement is being delayed because "key world leaders" are being informed first.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby RamaY » 02 May 2011 07:39

^ The Foxnews says Usama Bin Laden died. Not sure how. SHQ wants to watch House Wifes :((

pgbhat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4081
Joined: 16 Dec 2008 21:47
Location: Hayden's Ferry

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby pgbhat » 02 May 2011 07:42

If it is Osama, Ombaba is winning re-election onlee.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby ArmenT » 02 May 2011 07:42

Breaking news. Pres. Obama going on air to announce Bin Laden meeting his 72.

Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21111
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Prem » 02 May 2011 07:43

OBL got his 72!!!

partha
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4001
Joined: 02 Jul 2010 15:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby partha » 02 May 2011 07:46

Good riddance. Live feed of any news channel?

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby RamaY » 02 May 2011 07:48

Not yet. I really hope he met his 72 during a CIA raid in Pakistan. I want to see how many mango-abduls he will take with him in the coming days :twisted:
Last edited by RamaY on 02 May 2011 07:49, edited 1 time in total.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anindya » 02 May 2011 07:49

Pakistan would not have given up a prize of this magnitude, without getting its pound of flesh.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby ArmenT » 02 May 2011 07:51

News is talking about an American op. MSNBC reporters are talking about the non-cooperating paki angle.

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 07:52


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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby ArmenT » 02 May 2011 08:00

CNN reporting that they have his body. Official announcement to be made in 15 mins. by Pres. Obama.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby ArmenT » 02 May 2011 08:01


Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 08:03

Rumors are that he was killed in a mansion outside Isloo.

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

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby ArmenT » 02 May 2011 08:04

CNN is saying he was killed in a mansion outside Islamabad!!!

Pakis = screwed! :mrgreen:

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8279
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby anupmisra » 02 May 2011 08:04

Anujan wrote:This too is BS.


What is BS? The paki strategy on using Afghanistan as its strategic depth or my take on it?

Ananya
BRFite
Posts: 282
Joined: 27 Dec 2008 23:21

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Ananya » 02 May 2011 08:05

It is in isalmabad CNN is now revealing this :))))))

Ananya
BRFite
Posts: 282
Joined: 27 Dec 2008 23:21

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Ananya » 02 May 2011 08:05

a mission in Inlamabad. ......

Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 6948
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Anujan » 02 May 2011 08:07

anupmisra wrote:
Anujan wrote:This too is BS.


What is BS? The paki strategy on using Afghanistan as its strategic depth or my take on it?


The Paki's explanation of "Strat-e-gic" depth. But they have been known to be tactially brilliant. 8)

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11202
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Gagan » 02 May 2011 08:07

Great News!
Osama Bin Laden was killed in a helicopter / Drone strike in ISLAMABAD.

ramana
Forum Moderator
Posts: 53990
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby ramana » 02 May 2011 08:08

Rangudu Hats off for the breaking news.


Osama was predatorized in a mansion in Islamabad!!!!

Is this fallout of India rejecting the teens as US mollycoddles the TSP?

Khan wants to show they are serious about GOAT!!!

And the whole Republicans will stand down for the 2012 elections!!!!

Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11202
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Gagan » 02 May 2011 08:10

ISI is going to claim due credit.

But the abduls on the streets are going to revolt if they do so. Already the image of the Pak army is very shaky these days.
PM Geelani tried to stand by the ISI day before yesterday by loudly claiming that whatever the ISI does is sanctioned by government.

All netas and faujis are going to be in a bit of bother.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8279
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby anupmisra » 02 May 2011 08:10

Anujan wrote:Rumors are that he was killed in a mansion outside Isloo.


CNN (W. Blitzer) is saying that OBL was living in almost "plain sight".

Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7084
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby Muppalla » 02 May 2011 08:11

I was always telling to my friends when we discuss this, Osama is for sure somewhere in Pindi garrison. Now all our predictions came real true. Again US will do nothing to Pakis. They will always be condom onlee.

anupmisra
BRF Oldie
Posts: 8279
Joined: 12 Nov 2006 04:16
Location: New York

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): Mar. 29, 2

Postby anupmisra » 02 May 2011 08:13

Muppalla wrote:I was always telling to my friends when we discuss this, Osama is for sure somewhere in Pindi garrison. Now all our predictions came real true. Again US will do nothing to Pakis. They will always be condom onlee.


Not any more. OBL is gonzo! PA's strategic need is depleting by a power of (-)2 every minute now.


Return to “Trash Can Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests