Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 15 Jan 2012

[ramana]

Satya to add to your post,
Also sudden moves can upset stability. Hence the slow pace but definitely moving.

Had India tested in 60s all sorts of problems would have cropped up. The way was to socialize the idea that India can do it and only surprise is why not yet?



Braudel in his book "History of Civilizations" comments on the Not India aspect of TSP. and it was written in the 70s. MSA and others should be aware of his writings.

[shiv]

Punishing Pakistan is not the way to go

American viewpoint.

Indian viewpoint also, as far as I can tell.

But look at this

There are of course real questions about the effectiveness of U.S engagement with the civilian government - with aid and dialogue - given the prevailing suspicion there of U.S. motives, the inherent difficulties of operating in a complex and insecure environment, and the bureaucratic shortcomings of the U.S. aid system itself. But then those are reasons to put relatively more emphasis on other forms of engagement: trade, investment, and encouraging the normalization of relations with India. They do not warrant bullying the weak civilian government that the U.S. wants to strengthen.

The thinking in some US policy circles involves a "normalization" of relations with India. This makes a change from a traditional "hands off" policy where the US did not demand any normalization of relations from Pakistan. Of course the US was also hampered by an India that told the US to bugger off and not interfere in a bilateral issue despite the fact that Pakistan always wanted the US to intervene on its side and worried whenever the US was seen as interfering on India' behalf.

This basically boils down to an old argument rehashed on here many times in the past. The US is powerless to control Pakistan as long as Pakistan is hell bent on destroying itself opposing India. The US can arm and fund Pakistan and protect Pakistan against an attack from an India that has no intention of attacking Pakistan. But the US is equally powerless to make india comply with Pakistan's demands.

India's behavior is important to Pakistan. And by being important to Pakistan it is important to the US. An aggressive India destabilizes Pakistan. But a non aggressive India has led to Pakistan trying to attack India. The US did not mind that latter, but objected to the former. An aggressive India affects US foreign policy on Pakistan. Why is the Indian government , supported by the likes of Bharat Karnad trying to appear non aggressive to Pakistan?

Either India is kowtowing to US interests. Or there is a quid pro quo agreement between India and the US to reward Pakistan for cutting down on terrorism. Only the drying up of terrorism will indicate which one of these two options is correct.

[Prem]

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2012/02/pakis ... nions.html

KARACHI: The police have arrested a young man for allegedly using offensive language against the companions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). The suspect, identified as 20-year-old Mujahid, was associated with a private security company and posted at a biscuit factory in Korangi from where he was arrested.
Korangi Industrial Area SHO Malik Ayub told The Express Tribune that a man named Zubair had approached the police, complaining that Mujahid had sent him the text message.Malik said that Mujahid and Zubair were friends but belonged to different sects. They were working at the same factory but recently Zubair was transferred to another factory.The police have registered a case under Section 298-A of the Pakistan Penal Code and Section 28 of the Telegraph Act. Police have also seized their cell phones.

[Prem]

http://www.celsias.com/article/time-act ... -pakistan/

The world has built 45,000 large dams so far while Pakistan has built only two large dams with 7 per cent of world’s irrigated area which shows our criminal neglect in safeguarding our life giving waters.
According to an estimate the present volume of all storage reservoirs with gross capacity of 5 cu/km and above amounts to some 4900 cu/km. Out of this 1770 cu/km are in Asia with the majority in China. China has some 83,000 reservoirs built for various purposes, of which 330 are major in size. While in Pakistan we have two major and about a dozen smaller reservoirs. ( But Pakistan is part of China )Pakistan has the 21st largest river in the world in terms of annual flow, many small rivers, and one of the largest irrigation systems in the world with abundant canals. There is proven potential to generate more than 40,000 MW by hydroelectric power alone. A large number of small dams can be easily constructed by entrepreneurs under a liberal public-private partnership policy. Hydroelectric power should be given top priority as it is the cleanest and cheapest form of energy.(Paani belongs to india and nowu given as Khairat) M Dam construction in India has seen staggering growth from 300 dams in 1947 to an astounding 4,000 large and small dams at the turn of the last century, half of which were built between 1971 and 1989. India is building 60 large and small dams on our three Western rivers in occupied Kashmir under the plea that Pakistan is wasting its waters into the sea.
For the second time since the Indus Water Treaty, 1960, Pakistan has challenged India over its construction of dams. Alarm and concern has been in the air along with efforts to thwart India’s water plans. The Kishanganga dam project will divert waters from Jhelum into India’s own fields, making 5.6 million acres of Pakistani lands barren. Taking this to international agencies for arbitration has not proved fruitful as India is proceeding with its 330-megawatt hydro-electric project. ( Hai Hai Yeh Mazboori, Panni Se Itni Doori,Pal Pal Abh Tarpaye.2 Takiiya Da pakistan, te Char Tkkiya da Dam Bayae )
Afghanistan also plans to build 12 dams on the Kabul River with a combined storage capacity of 4.7 million acre-feet (MAF). Pakistan worries that these dams will stop crucial water supply from flowing to the Indus River, and that Indian support for these dams will increase India's hydro-influence in the region.

[Prem]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... 40400.html
Pakistan PM to Meet Qataris on Taliban Office BY TOM WRIGHT

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani of Pakistan will travel Monday to Qatar for talks on the Taliban's plans to set up a representative office in the Gulf state, Pakistani officials said.
Taliban leaders said last month the insurgent movement plans to set up an office in Qatar, a U.S. ally, as part of a fragile peace process.The U.S. is continuing to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan but also is tentatively exploring peace talks.

[CRamS]

This basically boils down to an old argument rehashed on here many times in the past. The US is powerless to control Pakistan as long as Pakistan is hell bent on destroying itself opposing India. The US can arm and fund Pakistan and protect Pakistan against an attack from an India that has no intention of attacking Pakistan. But the US is equally powerless to make india comply with Pakistan's demands.

US can exercise its ruthless power should it choose to, both on India & TSP. For e.g, it can cripple TSPA through military/economic sanctions. On India, the mere mention of Kashmir by US makes us SDREs tremble. US can easily get together its white brothers at the UN and make Kashmir-specific demands on India. Why Kashmir, if US chooses to, it can ask its so called "free press" to talk relentlessly about caste system and plight of Daleets. The reason it chooses not to is because basically after some point, US is pretty dis-interested in India & TSP. A policy whereby neither India nor TSP dominates each other suits US just fine. And it has practiced that to the finesse past 60+ years.

[shiv]

US can <blahblah> The reason it chooses not to <blahblah>

So you are apologizing and making excuses for the US rather than adding value. I admire your country. It used to be the greatest country in the world until Pakistan showed it the limits of its power. I hope that makes you feel better and less insecure.

[Vipul]

But the US is equally powerless to make india comply with Pakistan's demands.

with all due respects shivji, you think that all the Indian self-goals vis-a-vis Sharm-al sheikh, Hindu terror, and all the non existent and unnecassary equal equal agreed to/propogated by the Cabal/Goons in Delhi has been SDRE dhoti shivering due to pakistani menace onlee, that it had nothing to do with US prodding?

[CRamS]

[googlevideo]
So you are apologizing and making excuses for the US rather than adding value. I admire your country. It used to be the greatest country in the world until Pakistan showed it the limits of its power. I hope that makes you feel better and less insecure.

I am saying that apart from India TSP equal equal, or shall we say a situation in which TSP can taunt India with its terrorists & nukes while India cannot hit back decisively, is stability from US POV. Beyond that US has no interest in India or TSP. India & TSP can only operate within this box with US gaze from the outside making sure that everything is confined to this box, and will act if there is attempt by India to get out of that box. To me that is manifestation of US power to secure its interests.[/googlevideo]

[shiv]

But the US is equally powerless to make india comply with Pakistan's demands.

with all due respects shivji, you think that all the Indian self-goals vis-a-vis Sharm-al sheikh, Hindu terror, and all the non existent and unnecassary equal equal agreed to/propogated by the Cabal/Goons in Delhi has been SDRE dhoti shivering due to pakistani menace onlee, that it had nothing to do with US prodding?

How does what I think matter here? It may be. It may not be. I have no information. But my theories are no worse than yours. You are free to believe what you want. As I am. Time will tell which is right.

In fact all this business of "India has no policy to deal with Pakistan" itself is bullshit.

India has a policy. And that policy is not to declare war on Pakistan or inflict military punishment beyond holding back any military attack from Pakistan and checking infiltration. This has been India's consistent policy for 60 years.

It is only US policy wrt to Pakistan that has changed. US policy towards its great ally Pakistan turned a blind eye towards Pakistani attacks on India, or even covertly supported that. That policy neither helped Pakis get what they wanted from India, nor did it help implement US policy fully. The US policy of using Pakistan as its favorite subcontinental proxytute is the failed policy. But we "Inferiority is my birthright" Indians admire the US too much and have too much contempt for India to face this fact without gnashing our teeth in angry cognitive dissonance.

To me the US's frustration and the anger of its supporters is ironic when I stop laughing for a minute. The US with all the Kings horses and all the kings men tried to bash the carp out of Al Qaeda, Taliban and even the Paki army and discovered that all this has failed and is set to keep failing. The US is doing the worlds biggest downhill ski and is saying that military action against Pakistan does not work. But just look at the utter hypocrisy of rah rah USA on BRF. It is India that is faulted for a consistent policy on Pakistan - a policy that the US (that great souper power) is now beginning to see as wise. Why this kolaveri di?

[shiv]

TSP can only operate within this box with US gaze from the outside making sure that everything is confined to this box,

This is nonsense. Pakistan is nowhere near staying within a US box. I have seen people say "Allah willed it so xyz happened". You are saying that world events occur because USA willed it. You worship USA. Others worship Allah. It is only blind faith, It is not necessarily rational or factual.

CRamSji I appreciate you feeling of loyalty for your nation, the USA, but it is skiing downhill furiously and joining India in the cesspool of nations who have been screwed. India may not be rising, but the US is certainly sliding. I know it irritates and angers you to see this pathetic slide, but I am beginning to live with this fact. I hope you get comfort from the US's trillion dollar economy or other good things. Like cars and good roads. Orderly queues and all.

[Dipanker]

US can exercise its ruthless power should it choose to, both on India & TSP. For e.g, it can cripple TSPA through military/economic sanctions. On India, the mere mention of Kashmir by US makes us SDREs tremble. US can easily get together its white brothers at the UN and make Kashmir-specific demands on India. Why Kashmir, if US chooses to, it can ask its so called "free press" to talk relentlessly about caste system and plight of Daleets. The reason it chooses not to is because basically after some point, US is pretty dis-interested in India & TSP. A policy whereby neither India nor TSP dominates each other suits US just fine. And it has practiced that to the finesse past 60+ years.

You are all over the park with this one. Let's just talk Kashmir, USA and it's proxytute have been able to do jack about Kashmir for 60+ years now. And that is certainly not because of lack of trying! IF ANYTHING IT IS INDIA WHICH HAS EXPANDED ITS TERRITORY IN KASHMIR post 1949 ceasfire!

Rest of the your post not worth wasting the scarce bandwith.

[anupmisra]

Gilani on Islam

there is no space for terrorism, militancy or extremism in Islam and those involved in such activities cannot even claim to be Muslims.

Those, who spread disorder and chaos, cannot even claim to be Muslims as the scourges of terrorism and extremism are incompatible to the essence of Islamic teachings

He said Islam does not allow anyone to spread violence and strife on the face of earth and forbids people to kill others

The premier said since Islam preaches peace and love, therefore, those, who enter its fold, become the embodiment of the same

[Shaashtanga]

The story of an 81-year old whose wife was raped by Na-PakiArmy soldiers in the 1971 genocide of Bengalis in the then East Pakistan.
This should be forced reading for every Pakistani (as suggested by Mr. Tarek Fateh on his FB page)

http://www.thedailystar.net/newDesign/n ... nid=220891

[RamaY]

Gilani on Islam

there is no space for terrorism, militancy or extremism in Islam and those involved in such activities cannot even claim to be Muslims.

Those, who spread disorder and chaos, cannot even claim to be Muslims as the scourges of terrorism and extremism are incompatible to the essence of Islamic teachings

He said Islam does not allow anyone to spread violence and strife on the face of earth and forbids people to kill others

The premier said since Islam preaches peace and love, therefore, those, who enter its fold, become the embodiment of the same

By this definition, India was never invaded by Islamic hordes making Pakis false Muslims.

[Nandu]

CRamSji I appreciate you feeling of loyalty for your nation, the USA, but it is skiing downhill furiously and joining India in the cesspool of nations who have been screwed. India may not be rising, but the US is certainly sliding. I know it irritates and angers you to see this pathetic slide, but I am beginning to live with this fact. I hope you get comfort from the US's trillion dollar economy or other good things. Like cars and good roads. Orderly queues and all.

[CRamS]

You are all over the park with this one. Let's just talk Kashmir, USA and it's proxytute have been able to do jack about Kashmir for 60+ years now. And that is certainly not because of lack of trying! IF ANYTHING IT IS INDIA WHICH HAS EXPANDED ITS TERRITORY IN KASHMIR post 1949 ceasfire!

My point is that should US decide to expend its power, you think its not within its realm to sponsor UN resolutions demanding India do this, this, and this, or else? And where do you think the separatist scum in Kashmir get their power from? Now, that US has not done that is because it doesn't want to waste its time on Kashmir, and India TSP rival claims beyond a certain point. US is willing to expend its power capital only to the extent of keeping India & TSP equal equal within a "South Asia" box. I posted Jihadi Lodhi's op-ed quoting US foreign policy heavy weight Zbig Brizensky. And this is exactly what he recommends, albeit using diplomatic mumbo jumbo. Please observe US policy, read, reflect, and learn.

BTW: Of course, US would not mind a piece of the Kashmir pie. But this is where your observation sort of comes in. Both India & TSP are fierce in protecting their Kashmir interests. So, US has to exercise enormous power, more than just keeping India TSP equal equal to change the status quo in Kashmir in its favor. At this point in time, US has bigger fish to fry.

DocJi,

Any issue, any event, anywhere in the world, if it has an impact on US interests, and US is determined to mold that event along a certain trajectory to suit its interests, there is no power on earth stopping that. This is a statement of fact, nothing to do with my loyalty. Don't be fooled by all this crap about US's power sliding.

Please read The myth of American decline by Robert Kagan.

[shiv]

Any issue, any event, anywhere in the world, if it has an impact on US interests, and US is determined to mold that event along a certain trajectory to suit its interests, there is no power on earth stopping that. This is a statement of fact, nothing to do with my loyalty. Don't be fooled by all this crap about US's power sliding.

Please read The myth of American decline by Robert Kagan.

Boss spare me for a bit. You want me to read what you read so that i can start thinking like you? Allow me the luxury of saying "Same to you" My reading tells me you are wrong. Only your ego and hurt feelings about your souperpower country, The USA, makes you waste time in trying to convert me from my reality to your disappointed delusion.

Better luck next time. Cuba close by. Maybe Castro will die soon and there is a victory you can celebrate in the land of Freedom and Honey and Milk. Smoke a cigar and drink some rum to help drown Pakistan sponsored sorrows. When cognitive dissonance hits it hits hard. My sympathies.

[CRamS]

Smoke a cigar and drink some rum to help drown Pakistan sponsored sorrows.

I will, but at least I will be honest enough to do so. I would not spin nor come up with elaborate useless piskologies on India's surrender (see http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 3#p1238023) as Chanakyan brilliance or creating a split between TSP military and civilians (as though TSP civilians are willing to live as peaceful neighbors, but thats a different story)

[abhishek_sharma]

The Pakistani Taliban's Coming Divide: How the Death of Its Leader Could Be Bad for the United States

[shiv]

Smoke a cigar and drink some rum to help drown Pakistan sponsored sorrows.

I will, but at least I will be honest enough to do so.

Thanks for admitting your loyalty to America. I would be deeply appreciative of your efforts if your honesty extended to openly admitting that your loyalty lies in defending America and not India. That is so obvious that I cannot understand why you pretend otherwise. Selective honesty is exactly what the US is up to, and you are a worthy representative of that tactic. But that won't help pull a souperpower out of the soup, or make its soup boy supporters any happier. Split loyalties can only be taken so far under the guise of sincerity. Honesty works. Let me tell you that. Satyameva jayate.

[gakakkad]

>>My point is that should US decide to expend its power, you think its not within its realm to sponsor UN resolutions demanding India do this, this, and this, or else? And where do you think the separatist scum in Kashmir get their power from? Now, that US has not done that is because it doesn't want to waste its time on Kashmir, and India TSP rival claims beyond a certain point. US is willing to expend its power capital only to the extent of keeping India & TSP equal equal within a "South Asia" box. I posted Jihadi Lodhi's op-ed quoting US foreign policy heavy weight Zbig Brizensky. And this is exactly what he recommends, albeit using diplomatic mumbo jumbo. Please observe US policy, read, reflect, and learn.

BTW: Of course, US would not mind a piece of the Kashmir pie. But this is where your observation sort of comes in. Both India & TSP are fierce in protecting their Kashmir interests. So, US has to exercise enormous power, more than just keeping India TSP equal equal to change the status quo in Kashmir in its favor. At this point in time, US has bigger fish to fry.

DocJi,

Any issue, any event, anywhere in the world, if it has an impact on US interests, and US is determined to mold that event along a certain trajectory to suit its interests, there is no power on earth stopping that. This is a statement of fact, nothing to do with my loyalty. Don't be fooled by all this crap about US's power sliding.


<<

CRS , this is what I call a veiled threat . Let me paraphrase what you have written above . " US can deliver Cashmere to TSP if it wants to . Accept the supremacy of the US and pis and diss India , or else it may be inclined to deliver Cashmere to TSP . "

You don't need to read crappy foreign policy reports to know that Amreeka is declining . You just need to travel around amreeka and observe the decline . And the recent nasdaq rally or improved unemployment reports are just election time gimmicks .

[shiv]

The Pakistani Taliban's Coming Divide: How the Death of Its Leader Could Be Bad for the United States

Just read this pathetic soup song of the souperpower. The importance of the open display of US weakness and inability to control Pakistan or its proxy the Taliban offers India an opportunity.

On the U.S. side, of course, having to fight or negotiate with an invigorated, expanded Taliban would be no happy development either.(Hey what hapened to rollig thunder, bomb em back to the stone age. All hot fart balloons maybe? That is not to say that the death of Hakimullah Mehsud would not be welcome news. It would be. Mehsud was an uncompromising, dangerous man. He killed Americans, worked to destabilize Pakistan, and attempted to use proxies to attack on U.S. soil. Further, news of another successful drone strike would reaffirm the potency of U.S. intelligence and air power. As with the deaths of Nek Mohammed, a Pashtun military leader, Baitullah Mehsud, and Osama bin Laden, the killing of Hakimullah Mehsud is one step toward denying militants physical and psychological sanctuary in Pakistan. Yet as much of the literature on drones suggests, such killings usually harden militants' determination to fight,(What? Drone attacks not working?? ) stalling any potential negotiations and settlement. Engaging in talks while under attack would make the TPP seem weak, as if negotiating out of fatigue instead of a mutual desire to compromise. Unlike with al Qaeda, the United States might be unable to assassinate its way toward a more pliable Pakistani Taliban leadership.

In other words, Mehsud's elimination would potentially create opportunities for Pakistan to reconcile with TTP militants. But before the teams at Langley pop the champagne, policymakers should consider the possible downsides, as they could be many. If Washington is serious about negotiating an end to the war, bwahahahaha. The US started the war and now the US wants a negotiated settlement? it should suspend the drone assassination campaign and take its chances talking to existing Taliban leaders, instead of trying to kill its way toward more pliable negotiating partners that may not exist.

[shiv]

This is a statement of fact

kakkadji - you and I have had a similar education. There is a thing called a differential diagnosis. The same thing looks like one thing to one person and another to the other person. Honesty demands listing of both as possibilities. Please don't tell me about facts. I can see some facts unfolding before my eyes in Pakistan.

Some people just choose to dhoti shiver more and bow down before the great God of soup. That's all.

[A_Gupta]

DocJi,

Any issue, any event, anywhere in the world, if it has an impact on US interests, and US is determined to mold that event along a certain trajectory to suit its interests, there is no power on earth stopping that. This is a statement of fact, nothing to do with my loyalty.

Came here looking for info. Found this crap. The last ten years of world events proves that. If the US is going downhill, it is because too many citizens like the quoted one have utterly and completely lost touch with reality.

BRF is also going downhill because of such void-of-thought stuff, but remains a good clearinghouse for information.

-Arun
This once, sharing opinion.

[rajpa]

Please jump on me and tell me how wrong I was at some future date. But what is being forgotten here is that India is looking to appear less threatening to a Pakistan that feels more threatened by America. In other words India is looking to replace America as a country that Pakis look at when they feel threatened. Pakistan is not being treated as a peer, but as something that can be moulded/coaxed.

This is my observation/analysis. It is not my plan. It is my reading of the GoI's plan. If you don't like the idea, no need to jump on me. If the idea does not work feel free to come and tell me about it.

I dont think it is India's plan per se to appear less threatening than the USA. Most of the top GoI peepz are really old, they dont want to fight over all sorts of stupid things anymore. There is a real thirst for finding amicable and working relationship with Porkistan. Call it the wisdom of the old.

It so happens that TSP, in its typical way made enemies out of unkil.

[Shaashtanga]

Whenever there is heated debate about US I always think whose side (line of thinking ) I am on and here is the argument that goes on in my head and questions that arise so i just thought i will post it out in the open-

US has been assisting Proxytute - monetarily / providing arms / turning a blind eye to its nuclear proliferation / putting pressure on India whenever it wanted to retaliate after terror attacks emanating from Napak land etcetera so one thing is for sure that US support of proxytute has caused a lot of pain for India so how should India's response be? For sure India can't fight US militarily but aren't all US sins towards India forgivable because much of India’s rise as an economic power attributed towards the IT outsourcing boom? Economic reforms implemented by PVNR's govt were instrumental but no one can deny US IT outsourcing role in getting India's economic growth wheels turning. IT outsourcing may have been in US economy and their MNC's economic interests but hasn't it helped India tremendously as well? US is thinking in its own strategic interests (however flawed they may be), and due to its economic success India can try to get its interests taken care of a lot better?
US was foolish enough that it fed milk to small lizard China and let it become the ferocious T-Rex it is today. In my view US wanted to use China as a counter to USSR and ended up with this big powerful unmanageable T-rex today, so one thing is for sure that US is not so intelligent from a strategic planning perspective (in its own interests). I mean without helping China become the T-rex it is today, US could have still taken down USSR. US always pays a far greater price to achieve smaller strategic interests.
I also think CRams is a patriot (towards India) and a realist as well (thats why he is frustrated with Indian govt's response to paki perfidy) and since he is a US citizen so he took oath of allegiance towards US constitution as well so if he says positive things about US why would I mind that?
Hakeemsaab , Kakkadsaab , Guptaji - don't we need more people of Indian origin in US like CRams spreading BRFesque POV? Even you all can't deny the current khan-gressi govt' is a big let down for India.
Why are the rakshaks then fighting amongst themselves? We have to live with the current situation and have to make the best out of a bad situation. Shivji said something about MSA's book that was his initiation towards Paki psyche, I gotta find that book and read it. So like Shivji told CRams that he (Shivji) has past memory about MSA and his chain of thought so MSA's current POV shouldn't be interpreted in isolation but in past context and opinions as well.
I also don't mind a dhoti-shiver every now and then. There is no problem being a dhoti shiverer if we do something about it i.e. being a realist and trying to come up with counter measures. If China is being a bully and blatantly asking us "how much of AP we are ready to part with" why is it bad if we dhoti-shiver and due to same paranoia make ICBM's that can reach the furthest corners of Pandaland, have more SSBN's etc. If Taliban will ultimately take over Afghanistan and Proxytute will send them for Jihad in Cashmere, what is wrong in again dhoti shivering but having more fences / mines / patrolling on the Cashmere border?
I for one think that dhoti shiver in any situation is not bad as long as we plan to do something about the apparent threat or failure scenario and actually implement those plans. All of us being SDRE's, have we forgotten the ultimate dhoti shiver that our parents programmed into our DNA i.e. if you don't study and do well in school & college you will never lead a good life. So if that dhoti shiver gave us the boost to study hard and have good careers wasn't it a good thing? Similarly if the dhoti shiver due to terrorism threat from porkistan or economic & military bullying from Pandaland causes us to tighten our belts and prepare for the worst isn't it a good thing?
If given a choice I would always prefer to be the dhoti shiverer underdog who is least expected to bark or bite rather then the puffed up bull who gets killed by el-matador. Some may classify this as a sign of weakness but untill such a situation arises where real action is inevitable all of us are equal in bravado or dhoti shivering.

Me being a dhoti shivering SDRE, cowering back into my corner to dhoti-shiver.

[shiv]

Here is a paper that tries to assess how accurate Pakistan's census data has been. One brief reading of the paper failed to make me understand, but since I am looking for something to bash Pakistan with here is the conclusion

Fertility, Population Growth, and Accuracy of Census Enumeration in Pakistan: 1961-1998

It is encouraging that fertility and the population growth rate in Pakistan have finally begun to decline, but it should be pointed out that the fall in the growth rate since the late 1980s has only cancelled out the rise that occurred over the preceding decades. Reckoned purely in terms of the level of the population growth rate, Pakistan in the late 1990s stood exactly where it stood in the early 1960s.

Here is a pdf of the same paper
http://www.gfeeney.com/pubs/2003-pakist ... pter-5.pdf

[shiv]

Here is something that was posted last year too IIRC
http://afpak.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20 ... ic_dilemma

Accurate census data enables governments to make decisions about how to best allocate resources and services. In Pakistan, such decisions are critical. Consider that its current population, estimated at about 175 million, is the world's sixth-largest. It has the highest population growth, birth, and fertility rates in South Asia -- one of the last regions, along with sub-Saharan Africa, still experiencing young and rapidly rising populations. Additionally, with a median age of 21, Pakistan's population is profoundly youthful. Two-thirds are less than 30 years old, and as a percentage of total population, only Yemen has more people under 24.

<snip>

the dreadful state of Pakistan's school system and economy. If Pakistanis are to enter the workforce, they will need to be properly educated -- yet a staggering 40 million out of Pakistan's 70 million 5-to-19-year-olds are not in school. Additionally, if Pakistanis are to be gainfully employed, the economy must be large enough to absorb them, no simple feat in a labor economy that at present creates only a million new jobs a year, yet could face 175 million potential workers by 2030 (current unemployment runs at about 15 percent, and underemployment is substantial as well). Unsurprisingly, Pakistan's Planning Commission deputy chairman estimated last year that in order to employ Pakistan's nearly 100-million-strong under-20 population, GDP growth will need to soar to 9 percent (it is currently mired at 2.4 percent).

The most likely and devastating consequence of Pakistan's demographic dilemma is natural resource scarcity. Pakistan is already desperately short on water and land. Water availability has plummeted from about 5,000 cubic meters per capita in the 1950s to less than 1,500 today -- perilously close to the 1,000 cubic meters per capita level designated as water-scarce. Meanwhile, according to one striking estimate, Pakistan loses nearly three acres of good agricultural land every 20 minutes. Given Pakistan's population density of roughly 230 people per square kilometer, such shortfalls put immense pressure on remaining supply. Finally, as illustrated by Pakistan's constant blackouts, the country's energy grid is already under major pressure, a problem that will only grow worse with demographic pressure if no action is taken.

<snip>

Unless Pakistan's natural resource governance takes a dramatic turn for the more judicious, resource scarcity could soon be more reality than threat. Here, it is instructive to juxtapose Pakistan's future population projections with those of natural resource supply. According to the U.N. Population Division's newest mid-range estimates, Pakistan's population will rise to 275 million by 2050. However, this estimate optimistically assumes an eventual drop in Pakistan's total fertility rate (TFR), which now registers at about 3.6 children per woman. Assuming TFR remains constant -- by no means an unlikely prospect, given that the country's contraceptive prevalence rate hovers at only 30 percent -- the projections soar to nearly 380 million people.

<snip>

To overcome its demographic (and concurrent resource) challenges, Pakistan will need to revamp its educational system, enlarge its economy, and expand access to family planning services. These represent herculean tasks in the best of times, and Pakistan is experiencing one of the more traumatic periods in its history.

Yet this all amounts to putting the cart before the horse. Pakistan cannot expect to make progress on population policy until the nation is willing to accord priority to population issues, which starts with having accurate data about the country's population. "At no point," according to Zeba Sathar, one of Pakistan's most respected demographers, "has serious attention been devoted to studying Pakistan's large population numbers, their distribution, and the implications they hold for the country's development, politics, and ultimate stability."

Pakistan is not a failing state?

[KLNMurthy]

I just don't want repeat of IC-814, Parliament, Lal Qila, Kaluchak, Akshyadharm, 26/11, etc.

These things are acceptable and survivable ex post facto. Decisionmakers who favor status quo will not act to prevent them unless they prove to be neither acceptable nor survivable.

[ArmenT]

Pakistan fails to send team to probe Mumbai attacks

Pakistan has failed to send a team of officials to India to investigate the November 2008 Mumbai (Bombay) attacks, Indian officials said.

Islamabad told Delhi that the judicial commission would not be able to come as planned, a home ministry official said.
...

Did anyone honestly expect the Pakis to send an investigative team over? The only thing Paki investigative teams have done in the past is hose down the evidence.

[Dilbu]

Now Indian babus will again send a request for visit to pakis in triplicate. A reply will come after 6 months. India will send a dossier in protest. Meanwhile Kasab will die from old age.

[gakakkad]

kakkadji - you and I have had a similar education. There is a thing called a differential diagnosis. The same thing looks like one thing to one person and another to the other person. Honesty demands listing of both as possibilities. Please don't tell me about facts. I can see some facts unfolding before my eyes in Pakistan.

Some people just choose to dhoti shiver more and bow down before the great God of soup. That's all.

Saar , you are quoting the wrong person . The statement you are attributing to me was said by CRamS . Tablet browser has some trouble with java script so I used the >> convention while quoting posts.

My opinions about US are much similar to yours . I know that it is a pussy footed suar power that can steal a candy from a baby , at the best .I was never and will never be an American nationalist .

[SSridhar]

I dont think it is India's plan per se to appear less threatening than the USA. . . .
It so happens that TSP, in its typical way made enemies out of unkil.

rajpa, I think you are right about this (un)planned non-threatening posture of India. But, I would say that neither the US nor India has been threatening Pakistan. Let me explain.

The 'threat from India' has been a Pakistani spin story. India would be always looked upon as a threatening state by Pakistan. And, Pakistan would demand extraordinary restrictions be placed on India so that it could exorcise the 'Indian fear' through a sort of reverse Versailles Treaty. Pakistan considers everything about India as threatening including its economic growth or eradication of polio or anything else for that matter.

It is Pakistan's diplomatic victory, I would say, that it could turn around the blatant safekeeping of the most wanted terrorist in Pakistan's top most cantonment and still pretend that it knew nothing about it, and not only ward off the US retaliation but also accuse the US of violating Pakistan's sovereignty. In order to make it all look real, the Pakistani State adds fuel to the already burning anti-US sentiments in Pakistan. In spite of Pakistan's perfidy that killed and maimed hundreds of US servicemen in Afghanistan in the last 10 years, the US has not been threatening Pakistan. It certainly would have spoken very harshly to Pakistan privately, but it has not threatened Pakistan. There was a time when the US promised to bomb Pakistan back to the stone age but that was a long time ago and predictably so. Since then, enormous support by the US in spite of absolute & well-known Pakistani perfidy means that it is the US which is struggling with not knowing how to tackle this evil abomination known as Pakistan. By talking of 'threats' from the uS, Pakistan is trying to gain an advantage by being quick to take-off and thereby gaining the first-mover advantage.

While India might not have become suddenly less threatening, it is Pakistan's new-found and newly created fear of the US that may create such an illusion. There are many in the US who feel that 'Punishing Pakistan' is not the way to go about dealing with that country. In fact, the more it makes the US look like a menacing enemy to Pakistan, the more it feels secure, both against the US and against India. Hence, this carefully orchestrated drama.

[symontk]

Although lot of people replied to the issues raised by CRamS, no one responded for Kashmir question

I would like to respond to that for what is known by me

From my perspective, Kashmir question / option is still not closed by US and Pakistan. Its kept open for a near future. There can other options / scenarios in future which would help Pakistan advance to Kashmir

But that would require few important things to happen on ground. Pakistan has to show few things work with India and Terrorists have to show other things that work on ground

1. Pakistan did try to bring Kashmir under their control from 1948. The reason as now we know is the Indus waters and access to Chinese borders. Few things blocked the progress. One was that Indian soldiers blocked the access to Leh, Jammu and Kashmir valley. This stopped both access to Leh and Chinese borders

i. from here pakistan was interested in waters only. Chinese borders were needed by western countries alone. So Pakistan fought in 1965 for Kashmir without any progress on Chinese borders

ii. Now Chinese were friendly with Pakistan and they were able to broker and deal with Chinese and US. This avoided the need for Chinese borders

2. Just after the US-Sino agreement was concluded, Pakistan started problems in Punjab and Kashmir, of course there is a side story of Afghanistan. During late 1980, almost all countries were opposed to India on Kashmir except may be Russia, Iraq and Palestine. Even after all international attempts, Pakistan could not wrest kashmir

3. After this Pakistan attempted Kargil as terrorists were restless and also most importantly without any business after Afghan war wound up. Even here Indian armed forces prevented the invasion and retook the peaks. So even now, Pakistan could not keep its word of capturing to Terrorists and may be to "western countries"

4. 9/11 changed all equations. Pakistan never thought that US would launch an attack on Afghanistan. The calculation was that since all hijackers were having Saudi passports, US can only lie low. (Why Bin Laden kept silence can be explained by this) But armed with several intelligence inputs from various countries, US planned strategy on Afghanistan. Now Pakistan became a member of WOT against the wishes of its majority

5. After 9/11 & Kargil failure, Pakistan embarked upon a "strategy" planting bombs and other terrorists acts all over India and not restricted to Kashmir. Even after a 8 years of sustained campaign, Pakistan has nothing to show in its books to either terrorists and "western countries"

So now after all these years of bickering, pakistan has nothing to show to its masters (West & terrorists). Even though US wants pin down India, they will not see Pakistan as the key country. This may be the case with terrorists too. So any restart of kashmir issues would require "iron clad securities" which west is not able to offer due to 9/11.

Since no one is able to challenge India on Kashmir, the issue will get a slow death. So that is the bet India is betting on. Really what actually heled was 9/11 since Pakistan became a "focal" country

[darshhan]

Boss spare me for a bit. You want me to read what you read so that i can start thinking like you? Allow me the luxury of saying "Same to you" My reading tells me you are wrong. Only your ego and hurt feelings about your souperpower country, The USA, makes you waste time in trying to convert me from my reality to your disappointed delusion.

Better luck next time. Cuba close by. Maybe Castro will die soon and there is a victory you can celebrate in the land of Freedom and Honey and Milk. Smoke a cigar and drink some rum to help drown Pakistan sponsored sorrows. When cognitive dissonance hits it hits hard. My sympathies.

Shiv ji , Once again you have hit bulls eye when you mentioned that America is declining in the earlier post.Ofcourse CRS ji did not agree to it since he is too much enamored of american power. I will add my own points here. For a long time on BRF and outside of BRF we have been hearing that Pakistan is a failing/failed state and America is a superpower.I would disagree a little bit.As of today America is itself a failing state.And it might well happen that America reaches the failed state stage earlier than Pakistan itself.This would be hard for patriotic Americans to digest but in my opinion there is a fair chance of this happening.And if that happens ,then forget about America meddling in Afghanistan,Pakistan,India,Fiji,chile etc.America would be hard pressed to control its own territory especially in its south west.

[pankajs]

Power is relative. If US grows by 2% and India by 7%, in the long run US is on the decline wrt India. If both countries spend the same x% of their respective GDP on Military, in the long run US is on the decline militarily wrt India.

So while US is still powerful economically and militarily and will be so for some time, it is on the decline. It is no longer in a position to impose its will on India on any matters. A little give and take can certainly be expected and of course India is unable to impose its will on the US.

It is the reason for India wanting status quo on most matters believing rightly that time will nullify our weakness and strengthen our hands.

[gakakkad]

Power is relative. If US grows by 2% and India by 7%, in the long run US is on the decline wrt India. If both countries spend the same x% of their respective GDP on Military, in the long run US is on the decline militarily wrt India.

So while US is still powerful economically and militarily and will be so for some time, it is on the decline. It is no longer in a position to impose its will on India on all matters. A little give and take can certainly be expected and of course India is unable to impose its will on the US.

It is the reason for India wanting status quo on most matters believing rightly that time will nullify our weakness and strengthen our hands.

Saar , most of Amreeka's growth in the last decade is inflationary. In the soviet era their tone was " Work hard or the soviets will overtake us . " Now their tone is

"hey you , Amreeka is still the sooper dooper power. Those who thunk otherwise don't no what they are thunking . " See the difference ? Obamer et al has to constantly remind the world of their sooper powerdom .When does that happen ?

[pankajs]

I am with you on their 'printing press' power. The dollar being the reserve currency has helped US export its troubles to the rest of the world while it was enjoying Low interest\Low inflation\High spending\High growth era for the last 2 decades. That era is over.

Did anyone notice China going about trying to warp-up yuan swap deals and India having similar swap with Japan? I am not suggesting it is going to happen anytime soon but if the dollar is knocked off its perch as the 'reserve' currency of the world it is going to spell lots of trouble for the US.

The thing that helps them is there is no replacement is sight. Look at the condition in Euro zone, Japan and China.

[pankajs]

On Kashmir, there is no power on earth that can wrest it from us now. That goes for TSP as well as US acting independently and both acting jointly. We can let it go but that is a separate issue.

As for the UN, we have the Russian veto and a French veto as backup on this point at least. Why does India support the mic in both Russia and France otherwise? It is one of the 'unstated' strategic goals of the recent MMRCA deal.

Btw, I don't mean to imply that Raffy is unworthy or that the selection was not on technical and financial merit. It just happens that all our interests meet on this point.