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

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 09 Feb 2012 08:14

South Asia Tere Paki Hum, Jaise Pakhane Mei Hotte Germ
Locating South Asia( New Poaqdentity)

number of British commentators were giving us a lesson in geography. Cricket commentators on television and subsequently in the print media, kept referring to the UAE as part of the subcontinent, or even South Asia.Most academics and scholars limit the notion of South Asia to the five countries of Pakistan, India, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka, however, more expanded notions also include the ‘countries’ of Bhutan and the Maldives. Complications of definition and limiting the boundaries of a South Asia arise, when Afghanistan is added as one of the countries belonging to an official concept of South Asia in the guise of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (Saarc). If the history of British colonialism is to play a role in defining contemporary notions of South Asia in the form of Saarc, one should not be surprised to see Myanmar become the next member of a forum in which there is next to no regional cooperation.Cosmopolitan, polyglot, representative of a new, crass, artificial and plastic South Asian culture, Dubai perhaps best represents what South Asia is today, with cricket, food and Bollywood defining ‘South Asianism’ better than regional trade.
Dubai also allows political and underworld exiles to continue to live their South Asian lives outside of South Asia, but only better. The same applies to unskilled and highly skilled professionals from all over the countries which constitute South Asia.For South Asians, Dubai must be the most utopian of South Asian cities.
In some ways, Dubai has been taken over by a South Asian sense of identity and is home or playground for many who live in South Asia.The nature of what constitutes South Asia — Dubai, Afghanistan, Myanmar — is just as arbitrary and contested as is what constitutes nation states — Balochistan, the Chittagong Hill Tracts, India’s northeast, Kashmir.Nations too, like regions, are imagined and constructed. Clearly, while one can add or exclude countries from belonging to arbitrary notions such as ‘South Asia’, the same considerations would need to apply to constituents within the nation state as well.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Feb 2012 08:16

Pranav wrote:So to the extent that the US presence has provided the jihadis with a diversion, it is useful.

This is not strictly true. An inability to send fidayeen groups to India across a heavily guarded, fenced and sensored LoC meant frustration was building up within the LeT cadres. So, the LeT management decided to use them in the western borders. Of course, Professor saheb and OBL had been close for a long time. The LeT cadres did try to get embedded within the TTP or the Punjabi Taliban but they were always looked at with suspicion because they were part of the PA. So,there were issues and blue-on-blue fights on this front. The LeT lost its cadres because they deserted in droves and joined with the Punjabi Taliban. The LeT tried to win back the cadres through some daring fidayeen attacks on India. I would therefore say the reverse is true.

Besides better border management, I would attribute two more reasons for blunting the infiltration. One was the saturation shelling across the Neelum Valley by the IA as a retaliation for any shelling by the PA to provide 'cover' for infiltration. This drove a wedge between the hapless villagers on the one hand and the PA & terrorists on the other. Even last year, when some terrorist activity was detected in these villages, the villagers en masse protested and forced the PA to shut shop there because the villagers were so scared of the IA shelling. The other was the increasing build-up and sophistication of the Rashtriya Rifles.

The theory that American presence has brought down infiltration or terrorism or helped India in managing the Kashmir issue is balderdash, to say the least.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 09 Feb 2012 08:28

The 80 Percent Solution: The Strategic Defeat of bin Laden's al-Qaeda and Implications for South Asian Security

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2012 08:39

Ajatshatru wrote:
If the US splits Pakistan and creates Baluchistan, India will never have access to Iran overland or via the sea
Dr. S, why do you think so?

The splitting of Baluchistan is a plan that is not being mooted because the US feels sorry for Baluchis. Pakis have been killing Baluchis merrily even while the US continued to pay the Pakistan army 1.5 billion $ plus a year. Bugti was killed under Musharraf's watch. Musharraf is a favorite of the USA.

The US is talking of splitting Pakistan as a sour grapes alternative to controlling all of Pakistan. With all of Pakistan in the US pocket, the problem of access to Afghanistan and surrounding Iran were being met. But with Pakistan slipping out of the US grasp, the twin aims of sitting in Afghanistan and surrounding Iran are being threatened. Hence this new love for Baluchis.

A few rhetorical questions come to mind:
1. Which is better for India? An independent Pakistan or US ally Pakistan?
2. Which is better for India? An independent Baluchistan or US ally Baluchistan

Let me make a prediction here - but you guys may not be able to call me out in my lifetime or yours. The US is now fighting a last ditch battle that was set in motion by the fading British empire. Pakistan was key to controlling sea access to the resources and peoples of central Asia and the east west land trade routes between India, China and Africa and Europe. if Pakistan slips out of the US orbit - teh US will have to do something drastic. Talk of an independent Baluchistan falls in that category.

Also, if India and Pakistan become friendly, US primacy in the region is toast.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 09 Feb 2012 08:40

http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/a ... 872759.ece

Lashkar's renewed threats cause unease in Kashmir

there are signs of trouble. Lashkar operatives have been making attempts to recruit new operatives and the organisation's language is becoming ever-more aggressive.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 09 Feb 2012 08:48

General: ‘Use drones to kill’ the Taliban in Pakistan

Until now, the U.S. has not targeted senior Taliban leaders for fear of alienating Pakistan, whose intelligence service helped put the Taliban in power in Afghanistan in the 1990s. Pakistan will not target them because of tribal loyalties and fears that such action could destabilize the country via a militant uprising.

What Gen. Keane is recommending is a war campaign in which the intelligence community, principally the CIA and the National Security Agency, focus spies, communications intercepts and satellites on Taliban commanders inside Pakistan. Once a commander is located, a Predator drone would be sent to kill him with a Hellfire missile.

“If we don’t start targeting the Taliban leadership now … the risk is much too high in terms of our ability to sustain the successes that we’ve had. We cannot let that Afghan Taliban leadership that lives in Pakistan continue to preside over this war and recruit and provide resources,” Gen. Keane said.

“We’ve got to get involved in disrupting those functions. We have to target them like we have done al Qaeda. We would not have to conduct on-ground operations, but we have to change their behavior by targeting them.”

Show stopper’

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta last week squeezed the timeline by saying U.S. troops would shift to an advisory role in mid-2013 instead of fighting alongside the Afghan army as planned.

Gen. Keane has criticized that schedule as premature. He called it a “show stopper” if U.S. troops exit in 2014 but leave the Taliban leadership untouched in Pakistan.{But any kid in Afghanistan knows this}
A former Army vice chief, Gen. Keane is one of the nation’s most influential retired four-star generals. He worked in 2006 to persuade the George W. Bush administration to change strategy in Iraq and shift to a troop surge

We can’t pull our forces out and at the same time degrade the support for the Afghan National Security Forces,” he said. “If we do that, that would be a slipshod exercise. It would be detrimental.”

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 09 Feb 2012 09:00

chaar run!
U.S. drone strike kills four in NW Pakistan: officials

A U.S. drone attack in Pakistan's North Waziristan tribal region near the Afghanistan border killed four suspected militants Thursday, intelligence officials said, the second such attack in two days.

Wednesday, a drone strike on another alleged hideout in a village near Miranshah killed 10 suspected militants.

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 09 Feb 2012 09:01

Jack Keane is the mentor of Gen Petreaus (now the head of CIA).

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 09 Feb 2012 09:13

Satya_anveshi wrote:General: ‘Use drones to kill’ the Taliban in Pakistan

abhishek_sharma wrote:The 80 Percent Solution: The Strategic Defeat of bin Laden's al-Qaeda and Implications for South Asian Security

I hope Gen. Petraeus listens to his mentor and not to Lynch who has written the 80% Solution article.The 80% article peddles the fake theory of a serious proxy war between India & ANA on the one hand and Pakistan on the other. It also peddles the Pakistani propaganda of India using ANA as a dagger at the Pakistani back. It advises therefore not to go after the intransigent and terrorist Talibani leaders residing Pakistan, an advise diametrically opposite to that of Keane.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 09 Feb 2012 09:15

Top US envoy 'met Taliban leaders in Qatar'

The delegation includes Tayeb Agha, former secretary to Taliban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar, who has acted as go-between with American and German diplomats for more than a year.

Mr Grossman’s meeting, if confirmed, would be the first known contact made between the Taliban and a senior, named member of the Obama administration since the start of the Afghanistan war over ten years ago.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 09 Feb 2012 09:33

SSridhar wrote:I hope Gen. Petraeus listens to his mentor and not to Lynch who has written the 80% Solution article.The 80% article peddles the fake theory of a serious proxy war between India & ANA on the one hand and Pakistan on the other. It also peddles the Pakistani propaganda of India using ANA as a dagger at the Pakistani back. It advises therefore not to go after the intransigent and terrorist Talibani leaders residing Pakistan, an advise diametrically opposite to that of Keane.

Lunch's article should be titled as "100 percent non-solution or crap, if you will". This stuff should be a career suicide for him as he displays his loyalty to terrorist pakistan.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 09 Feb 2012 09:49

daughter and grand daughter of late nawab bugti shot in clifton at midnight Jan31 by bike and car borne team. sources say it was to "send a message" to his rebellious relatives.

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 09 Feb 2012 09:50

Satya_anveshi wrote:
SSridhar wrote:I hope Gen. Petraeus listens to his mentor and not to Lynch who has written the 80% Solution article.The 80% article peddles the fake theory of a serious proxy war between India & ANA on the one hand and Pakistan on the other. It also peddles the Pakistani propaganda of India using ANA as a dagger at the Pakistani back. It advises therefore not to go after the intransigent and terrorist Talibani leaders residing Pakistan, an advise diametrically opposite to that of Keane.
Lunch's article should be titled as "100 percent non-solution or crap, if you will". This stuff should be a career suicide for him as he displays his loyalty to terrorist pakistan.

I think we could get more crap from them. Now that Pakistan has agreed to GUBO but asking for a higher price, americans have also started to change tack. The spate of articles will make Unkils choice a "default" one

http://tribune.com.pk/story/333551/reop ... ly-routes/

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 09 Feb 2012 10:37

Also, if India and Pakistan become friendly, US primacy in the region is toast

Does this mean that US will try to create ongoing problems for India / Pakistan in future either thru Kashmir or Baluchisthan?

In a way its good since Kashmir is almost a closed chapter

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 09 Feb 2012 10:50

krisna wrote:
Pranav wrote:There are numerous reports of LeT cadres actually fighting in Afghanistan, because Pakjabis can no longer rely on Pashtuns. So to the extent that the US presence has provided the jihadis with a diversion, it is useful. IMHO the fencing, radars etc have played the more significant role.
different take on it.
check this out- western targets after 9/11
111 deaths and 391 injured.
included in it are some churches which are as pakistani as any can be as western targets.

Jihadis want to go to fight the souper power superior armed forces instead of weaker targets - does not sound right .
They luv certain death with a glint in their eyes and meet ayeshas in jannat. when there are easier targets inside pakhanasthan.

is this a myth.

It need not be a myth, it could be based on the funding they receive. The rewards (money / weapons) for an organization would be more if they hit most difficult targets with greatest impact. Seems India is a lowly target and US is difficult one

Pure captialism only..

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 09 Feb 2012 10:56

Pyrimethamine Poisoning in Pakistan
Poaqers Win Super Bowel Trophy

The number of dead in the wake of the substandard medicines disaster in Pakistan continues to rise with approximately 140 patients killed. Another 50 are not expected to survive. The product involved was isosorbide mononitrate tablets, commonly used in heart failure and angina, which was provided free by the Punjab Institute for Cardiology to patients too poor to obtain their own drugs. Drug samples were analysed by the London School of Pharmacy, who discovered heavy contamination with pyrimethamine, an anti-malarial. There was no institution within Pakistan capable of performing the analysis, startling considering they manage to run a nuclear weapons programme.Pyrimethamine is associated with blood dyscrasias such as leucopaenia, agranulocytosis, and thrombocytopenia even when used correctly due to its interference with folic acid metabolism. Acute overdosage also causes convulsions, tachycardia, respiratory depression, and circulatory collapse. In a cohort of ill cardiac patients it is unsurprising that deaths have occurred. Pyrimethamine’s half life of 4 days isn’t particularly helpful either, especially considering the patients would have been likely to be dosing themselves with 1 tablet twice a day.On the regulatory front, there is some good news. The current lack of a regulator in Pakistan is no longer politically acceptable. There have been calls for a centralised regulatory authority, regional monitoring centres, as well as the development of clinical pharmacy services within hospitals. Sadly, the Pro-Vice Chancellor of the Dow University of Health Sciences couldn’t stop himself from saying “the element of conspiracy to damage the reputation and exports of Pakistani medicines could not be ruled out”, continuing the proud tradition of blaming foreign interests for Pakistan’s self-inflicted wounds.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 09 Feb 2012 11:17

shiv wrote: The splitting of Baluchistan is a plan that is not being mooted because the US feels sorry for Baluchis.

So? The US presence in Afghanistan does not make the Afghans unfriendly to India, does it?

Also, if India and Pakistan become friendly, US primacy in the region is toast.

TSP, being an unnatural nation, needs hatred of India to exist as a unified political entity.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 09 Feb 2012 11:47

SSridhar wrote:The theory that American presence has brought down infiltration or terrorism or helped India in managing the Kashmir issue is balderdash, to say the least.

Agree.

However, the American presence in Afghanistan and the drone attacks had two clear impact.
1. US become the enemy no 1 for pukis in general and locals in FATA/KP in particular.
2. This indirectly contributed to the rise of TTP in opposition to TSPA for the TSPA was seen as American ally in this campaign.

rajanb · Post by **rajanb** » 09 Feb 2012 11:50

Singha wrote:daughter and grand daughter of late nawab bugti shot in clifton at midnight Jan31 by bike and car borne team. sources say it was to "send a message" to his rebellious relatives.

Wouldn't the retaliation, by killing this two women, be in the realm of avenging honour by and for the Baluchis?

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 09 Feb 2012 12:09

shiv wrote:The splitting of Baluchistan is a plan that is not being mooted because the US feels sorry for Baluchis.

Agree

The US is now fighting a last ditch battle that was set in motion by the fading British empire.

I have come to the same conclusion. Further, if you look at region controlled by the British at one time or another, they have deliberately defined borders in such as way as to leave a zone of conflict behind.

Perhaps they hoped to retain some say in these regions based on these unresolved border question and eventually make a comeback. They then passed on the very same ideas to the US. In the AfPak region it is the British thinking that is guiding the US I think.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 09 Feb 2012 12:27

Pranav wrote:
Shiv wrote: Also, if India and Pakistan become friendly, US primacy in the region is toast.
TSP, being an unnatural nation, needs hatred of India to exist as a unified political entity.

This does mean that if India can project a non-hostile image, it will weaken the glue that holds TSP together. Also, any US support for TSP's natural unraveling, and the US displacing India as the Paks' prime enemy, would both be positive factors.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 09 Feb 2012 12:47

I am looking for a video I once saw, about some Madrassa in UK or somewhere run by Pakistanis (or Bangladeshis) where they were inculcating anti-Hindu feelings among the children based on cow-urine, and what not!

I'll be grateful if somebody could refer me to that video!

Many thanks!

Added Later: Found it

Lessons in Hate and Violence - Channel 4 Dispatches (Feb 14, 2011)

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2012 14:09

Here is a tactic used time and again by colonials and others.

Suppose A hates B and B hates A. There is also a C who wants to be leader. If A beats B, or B beats A, then C will be left with the winner, who might pose a challenge, having no other adversary. So what does C do?

If C supports A and A wins. then A might start fighting C. So also with B.

The best situation for C is for A and B to keep on fighting forever. C will support A, but will not allow him to win. C will support B, but will stop him from prevailing over A. He will support A's cause against B, and he will support B's right to resist A.

This is what the US has done with Pakistan and India. A continuous state of animosity between India and Pakistan will forever keep India out of balance and prevent historic links that India had with Afghanistan and west and central Asia. If we can put Pakistan in our pocket, India can reach out o those areas, including Baluchis via Pakistan. Baluchis are too small in number over too vast an area to be a nation state. If India can force good behavior from Pakistan, then Baluchi, Afghan and Pakistani interests can be served and India stands to gain. But we have to behave like a big power that is being unfairly choked by America, not as a power that fights lower downs while America plays us off against Pakistan.

We have to think like a regional power, not as a local IndiaPakistan power. It is the US that needs to go.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2012 14:14

Pranav wrote:
shiv wrote: The splitting of Baluchistan is a plan that is not being mooted because the US feels sorry for Baluchis.
So? The US presence in Afghanistan does not make the Afghans unfriendly to India, does it?

Sorry I don't understand what you are talking about. I am talking about Baluchistan. Who said anything about Afghanistan?

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 09 Feb 2012 14:23

shiv wrote: The best situation for C is for A and B to keep on fighting forever.

Why not India be C for a while.

It is the US that needs to go.

When the time is ripe.

Sorry I don't understand what you are talking about. I am talking about Baluchistan. Who said anything about Afghanistan?

An independent Balochistan, even if created by the US for its selfish ends, can only make things easier.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2012 14:29

If you read Rajiv Malhotra's book "Breaking India" you will see that he has researched it exhaustively. He whows how Europe of the 19th century looked at India as the epitome of the superior Aryan race which the Europeans wanted to represent. This was done via various contortions to fit Vedas and Sanskrit culture with the bible - and eventually led to Naziizm. But after WW2 these arcist theories died down in Europe - but the same theories were kept alive with regard to India - where a racist Aryan race was screwing a Dravdian race. India was already discarded as a form of degeneration of something good.

It is not difficult to see how the Brits pushed exactly this theory with the Islamists and Muslim league. That is how you find a uniform consensus from Pakistan to Europe that India is fundamentally bigoted and faulty. This enables the US and Britain to hold on to Pakistan a a country that need support against bigots. The words Hindu and bigot occurs often in literature including words used by Stephen Cohen, apart from Martha Nussbaum.

It is essential as a first step to break past Pakistani propaganda on their own people and demonstrate that Indian is not anti-Islam or anti-Muslim. Pakistan needs to be in the Indian camp. Until recently Pakistan was sitting in the US camp and we Indians were behaving like we were jealous and wanted to be in the US camp ourselves. That is so wrong. It is Pakistan that needs to be in our camp. We will have those people here forever - it is the US that is playing games and encouraging the idea of Indian hegemony.

Have you guys noticed how the US never denies an Indian role in Afghanistan although we have virtually no power there (other than soft power). It suits the US if Pakistanis are afraid and suspicious of India. They will do everything to promote that.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2012 14:31

Pranav wrote: An independent Balochistan, even if created by the US for its selfish ends, can only make things easier.

Archive my words:

The US will never ever create an independent Baluchistan. Don't hold your breath. All that talk is hot air aimed at continuing to get the Pakistan army to drop its pants for US buggery.

That is a good thing, because a Baluchistan in US control would be bad news for India.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2012 14:36

Pranav wrote: Why not India be C for a while.

And be equally friendly and supportive to the US and Pakistan as I described C's action to be? That is how a big power behaves. But on BRF we think like India is a small power led by monkeys. We wouldn't recognize it even if India behaved that way. We are obsessed with being friendly with the US, admiring the US and opposing Pakistan and kicking Pakistan. We are willing India to behave like A or B. Our ability to think big is stymied by minds that do not think beyond Pakistan.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 09 Feb 2012 16:01

Rights violations shame Pakistanis at Congress hearing - Dawn

WASHINGTON: Guilt and shame were the two dominant feelings that overwhelmed many Pakistanis at a US congressional hearing room on Wednesday as witnesses detailed human rights abuses in Balochistan. Some were also troubled – while some felt elated – as all five US lawmakers who attended this unusual hearing of the House Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations stressed the Baloch right to self-determination.

But this emotive session – which often drew warm applause from Baloch nationalists – offered little insight into how to resolve this difficult issue. Perhaps, that’s not even the intention of those who had organised the meeting. They wanted to highlight Balochistan as a possibly explosive spot close to a US war-theatre and they succeeded in doing so.

There was some score-settling as well, particularly from US lawmakers upset with Pakistan over Osama bin Laden’s discovery in Abbottabad and with Islamabad’s decision to close Nato’s supply lines to Afghanistan.

“They sheltered the man who master-minded the slaughter of 3,000 Americans. Those who still believe Pakistan is a friend, they need to wake up,” said Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican, who organised and chaired the hearing.

Dr. M. Hosseinbor, a Baloch nationalist scholar, assured the Americans that the Balochs were natural US allies and would like to share the Gwadar port with the United States, would not allow the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline through their lands and will fight the Taliban as well.

Ralph Peters, a retired US military officer, urged the US administration to break up its ties with Pakistan and support the Baloch struggle for freedom.

C. Christine Fair, an assistant Professor at Georgetown University, in her written statement, disagreed with the suggestion, saying that given the ethnic diversity of the province, its complicated history, and the existing geographic constraints, an independent Balochistan was untenable.

But such comments on Baloch politics were not what shamed the Pakistanis, and others, in the room. It was rampant human rights violations by both sides that shamed them.

According to the statistics submitted at the hearing, around 6,000 people were displaced and scores killed in 2005 around Dera Bugti district alone.

Estimates of total number of people displaced from all districts range from tens to hundreds of thousands.

After Gen. Pervez Musharraf’s ouster, Pakistan’s Interior Ministry estimated that 1,100 Baloch had disappeared during his rule. So far, the government has only uncovered the fate of a handful of these people.

Armed Baloch groups are also responsible for targeted killings and destroying private property. In the past several years, they have increasingly targeted non-Baloch civilians and their businesses, as well as major gas installations and infrastructure. They have also killed teachers, physicians and lawyers and struck police and security forces and military bases throughout the province.

Militant religious groups also have carried out targeted killings of those Muslims who belong to sects different from there.

It was Prof. Fair, who was the first to point out, that while she understood emotions ran high, targeted killings were also being carried out by the Baloch.

Amnesty International’s Advocacy Director T. Kumar called on the US to “apply the Leahy Amendment without waivers to all Pakistani military units in Balochistan” to prevent the Pakistani military from using US-made weapons against the Baloch.

Ali Dayan Hasan, the Pakistan director for Human Rights Watch, said that Pakistan’s security forces and its intelligence agencies were involved in the enforced disappearance of Baloch nationalists.

He asked the US government to “communicate directly to the agencies responsible for disappearances and other abuses including the army, ISI, IB, Frontier Corps, police, to demand an end to abuses and facilitate criminal inquiries to hold perpetrators accountable.”

Congressman Rohrabacher declared that the hearing was no stunt, and that they wanted to start a national dialogue on what US policy should be in that part of the world.

Pranav · Post by **Pranav** » 09 Feb 2012 18:14

shiv wrote:But on BRF we think like India is a small power led by monkeys.

There's no denying that we are led by Mainos who confide in Amreeki officials that the greatest threat is from "Hindoo terrorists".

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 09 Feb 2012 18:18

I would like to ask some questions to Shiv.

1. Should we live in peace with Pakistan?

2. Can we live in peace with Pakistan?

3. Can Pakistan exist without its hate for India and Hindus?

4. Is a united Pakistan or broken up former Pakistan better for India? Why?

5. What should we do and what conditions must exist to live in peace with a united Pakistan?

or

6. What should we do and what conditions must exist to break up Pakistan?

I would really appreciate it if you would answer me. Thanks in advance.

PS: Is it possible to de-brainwash the Islamic fanatics that make up the people (majority) of Pakistan?

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 09 Feb 2012 19:01

Sen Dana Rohrabacher is a different kind of person than the normal American Congressman psyche. He wept when Masood was killed, and had a hunch. He frantically called the white house saying a major attack was imminent and he needs an appointment. His appointment was given. The date was Sept 11, 2001. I feel he knew the ISI was behind Masood's killing..and that's at the back of his mind when he's talking about Baluchistan.

subodh · Post by **subodh** » 09 Feb 2012 19:09

harbans wrote:Sen Dana Rohrabacher is a different kind of person than the normal American Congressman psyche. He wept when Masood was killed, and had a hunch. He frantically called the white house saying a major attack was imminent and he needs an appointment. His appointment was given. The date was Sept 11, 2001. I feel he knew the ISI was behind Masood's killing..and that's at the back of his mind when he's talking about Baluchistan.

Wasnt he one of the biggest supporter of the paki swine through the 80s? I seem to remember him constantly trying to get $$s for them (in partnership with Dan Burton), messing around during the khalistan issues and also tugging at the Cashmere shawl.

His recent behaviour smells like that of a lover scorned.

harbans · Post by **harbans** » 09 Feb 2012 19:48

Yes, he was virulently anti-India, but in his reaction at Masood's death there is something odd. Possibly somewhere down the line a mid course correction. But one thing he has been at the forefront of trying to break up nations. Serbs hate the man. Now Paki's do. From an old SAAG artlicle by Raman dated 2003:

12. The opening remarks of the Chairman and all the other members except Mr.Dan Burton and Mr.Dana Rohrabacher showed understanding and sympathy for the Indian position and indicated continuing concerns over the policies of President Pervez Musharraf of Pakistan.

13. However, Mr.Burton totally and Mr.Rohrabacher to some extent made no secret of their sympathies for Pakistan. Mr. Burton started his remarks by expressing his apprehensions over the possibility of the joint hearing turning into a Pakistan bashing exercise. He then criticised the Government of India for avoiding the implementation of the UN Resolution calling for a plebiscite in Jammu & Kashmir and accused the Indian Army of serious human rights violations, including gang rape of Kashmiri women. Mr.Rohrabacher also spoke of alleged human rights violations and of the Kashmiris' right to self-determination.

http://www.southasiaanalysis.org/papers9/paper827.html

Anyways as far as India is concerned we should keep him at arms distance.

RajeshA · Post by **RajeshA** » 09 Feb 2012 20:27

What the US wants in the region is a Muslim Army at America's beckon and call, using which America can influence the dynamics of Central Asia and the Asian Periphery (Russia, China, India, Iran), and which allows America some plausible deniability.

It is not necessary for America that that Muslim Army should be TSPA. It can be ANA. It can be Taliban even. What America wants is complete control. TSPA is not amenable for complete control especially as its strategic interests and those of USA differ, especially viz-a-viz War on Terror, India, China, and Nukes.

Through American proxies in the Gulf, USA can control the Muslim Army of any virulence. Virulence is not the issue. Control is the issue. Now the Americans are busy trying to bring Taliban under US control. It could be an interesting situation for India were USA to change their allegiance and dependence from TSPA to the ANA/Taliban!

Ralph Peters Map for Western and Central Asia is the Blueprint. Much thinking has gone into making it! How the USA acts may seem sometimes being contrary to the creation of that map, but the USA is preparing the field in complicated ways with enough smoke and mirrors to claim that not they, but history itself had ordained the creation of that map!

For India of relevance is that Western Pakistan would move away from Indian claims, and not just that but also Gilgit-Baltistan would become part of a Greater Afghanistan. I presume, one reason why USA is interested in Gilgit-Baltistan is because it gives them access to needle China in Xinjiang as and when they please using Taliban-allied assets - ETIM. That may be one of the reasons that China has moved in into Gilgit-Baltistan. Not to mention, that USA would also get to control the temperature in the Kashmir Valley through Afghanistan.

So in many ways, Ralph Peters Map is advantageous for India. We get rid of TSPA and the nuclear threat. On the other hand we lose our civilizational rights to much geography if Pakistan loses its claim to that geography as well. I personally believe that the benefits in the short term are greater for India if the Ralph Peters Map becomes a reality! If India continues to grow at that speed we may still get control over PoK and Afghanistan at some later date when India would be able to challenge American and Saudi hold over the area!

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 09 Feb 2012 20:57

Arun Menon wrote:I would like to ask some questions to Shiv.

1. Should we live in peace with Pakistan?

2. Can we live in peace with Pakistan?

3. Can Pakistan exist without its hate for India and Hindus?

4. Is a united Pakistan or broken up former Pakistan better for India? Why?

5. What should we do and what conditions must exist to live in peace with a united Pakistan?

or

6. What should we do and what conditions must exist to break up Pakistan?

I would really appreciate it if you would answer me. Thanks in advance.

PS: Is it possible to de-brainwash the Islamic fanatics that make up the people (majority) of Pakistan?

1. Should we live in peace with Pakistan?

Indian policy has always been to live in peace with Pakistan. Pakistani policy has been to wage war. What is extremely odd is that after a series of defeats and setbacks, Pakistan has become dysfunctional enough to continue of a path that will get its people nothing other than more punishment - which has been stated by some Pakistani leaders as "acceptable" a long as India gets punished in the process. What is equally odd is that India recognized these signs decades ago but not one single so called "world power" (other than the USSR) gave a damn which shows where their priorities lie. The US of course has actively aided Pakistan as it slipped into dysfunctionality. But if we can make peace with Pakistan, we must. Others powers (USA/China) gain by playing us off against Pakistan.

2. Can we live in peace with Pakistan?

Whoa! I think we can. I am gradually beginning to see Pakistan as a mass psychiatric case brought up to believe that India is out to take Pakistan/islam down. This paranoia will need to be addressed. It would be easier to address if we could help install a cooperative government in Pakistan. Cooperative==not army, unless a Paki general has more balls that Paki generals generally show. And the army needs to be kept out and de fanged. The US does not desire that.

3. Can Pakistan exist without its hate for India and Hindus?

Yes. It will be like Bangladesh. A piece of former India ruled by someone or other, but trading with India and working for the good of the people. That is paramount. India is doing that. So is Bangladesh. Pakistan is not doing that. And no one is really bothered - certainly not the USA

4. Is a united Pakistan or broken up former Pakistan better for India? Why?

My personal feeling is currently going in the following direction. Words like "United" and "Divided" are emotionally charged expressions and we must stop using them. It is important for educated Indians to raise themselves a little higher and understand what is happening to Pakistan. In brief we have a nation of 180 million people that is suddenly beginning to wake up and smell the coffee and is finding that all the Proud Paki bullshit that they have been fed for decades is worth less than a pool of pig's piss. They are not the power that they were told they were. There are not respected by anyone,. Their economy is in a shambles. The "enemy" India is doing better and the enemy India is not attacking. The US is attacking instead. As are fellow Muslims. And the enemy India is not suppressing its Muslims and preventing them from doing azan. Indian Muslims are not being forced to run scared - which is the reason why Pakistanis were making sacrifices all these years - to save Indian Muslims.

It is very important to foresee what this sort of realization will do to a population. In cognitive dissonance (which is happening to millions of Pakis) there will be a tendency to try and go into denial and clutch onto old beliefs about India. It is difficult to change beliefs that have been driven in. This is the time when India should not threaten Pakistan with break up. India is the only country that has openly demonstrated an ability to break Pakistan. If Pakistan breaks up on its own that is not our doing, but we should say "We want an intact Pakistan". We should not appear to be trying to break them up.

But apart from that - I believe that if we can bring sanity to Pakjab, we can then use that to put pressure on Pakistan to give Baluchis and Pushtuns their rights and ensure that we trade with those people as well and help them with development. if those people break free - Pakjab and Sindh will continue to be in turmoil as they are now - with enemies everywhere and war all around. This situation has given me great pleasure (which is why I made this video) and makes me want to tell Pakis "**** you. You can eat shit now", But in the long term, that is not such a good thing - for my children.

Ultimately we should be able to have land links via Pakjab to Baluchistan, Iran and Afghanistan. That is the way forward.

5. What should we do and what conditions must exist to live in peace with a united Pakistan?

or

6. What should we do and what conditions must exist to break up Pakistan?

I think we should do what any power does - and that is to retain the capability to punish any other power militarily, but that power should be held in check if we can avoid it. The conditions to live in peace with Pakistan are not difficult. The first step is to make the Pakistan army weaker and realise that Pakistan's interests are the interests of its 180 million people and not the interests of its its 10,000 strong army brass. Islamists can be held at bay if the Pakistan army is first shown its place and brought down to play a positive role in Pakistan rather than pretending to protect Pakistan while working as a US proxytute. Pakistan can do with a good police force that protects its citizens and the army should do that IMO. Not that they will listen to me. Islamists who attack India will be killed/arrested as and when we get them. They know that and that is what is happening.

Is it possible to de-brainwash the Islamic fanatics that make up the people (majority) of Pakistan?

There are two sides of me. One is slimy and scheming. The other is honest and attempts to be unbiased and scientific.

We have no data to say that the majority of Pakis are going around hating India. Pakistanis are not seriously being polled about anything let alone India. But if we believe the few polls conducted by the usual biased ba$tards in western media outlets - there are a lot of Pakis for whom India is not the biggest threat. That feeling is a pastime of the new rich middle class who also contribute to the LeT/JuD. The worry expressed on here is that if India makes peace and the Pakistan economy gets better, the larger numbers of new middle class will then have more money to support anti-India activities. Pakistanis will do a taqiya till they get better and then Islam will kick in.

What all this means is simple. One set of Indians are afraid of dealing with Pakistan for stated reasons. Another set of Indians wants to have a go.

The problem with letting Pakistan stew in its juice is that it allows fearful Pakistani leaders to invite foreign powers to take over former Indian lands (Pakistan) because they do not want India to get it. These Paki leaders are certain that they will lose to India. Letting foreign powers sit in former Indian lands - many of which are sacred to Hindus and Sikhs of India is wrong. It is happening because of Pakistani fear of India. We need to change the way Pakistanis see India. Pakistanis need to see India as a win win for them. That does not mean we give away our lands. We get access to what was ours. We are not capturing anything. Pakistan will remain a sovereign nation and will not need to keep foreigners in their country because they fear India. Pakistanis in turn will get better access to those parts of India from which their ancestors came. Pakistani need to understand that modern nations become great only by developing their people, not by whoring for other powers. The most painful thing for Pakstanis to face is that their "respected army" is no more than a cheap whore. One side of me makes me want to rub it in and laugh. But we must resist the temptation. We have more to gain by telling Pakis that their army is great but needs to achieve greater heights by changing tack to help Pakistanis develop without foreign interference and that India will help. not attack.

UBanerjee · Post by **UBanerjee** » 09 Feb 2012 22:26

Of course it would be better if the US was kicked out of the area along with any other wannabe replacement. Without offshore balancing Pakistan is nothing.

The problem is doing it.

This is especially a problem because Pakistanis as a people intentionally and desperately court any and all potential suitors. They have no link to the land that they are allowed to acknowledge, so they must have a link elsewhere.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 09 Feb 2012 22:28

Looks like pukis are controlling who to kill and who not to

Pakistan’s Al Qaeda Chief Killed
Ilyas Kashmiri’s successor, Badr Mansoor, believed to have been killed in early morning drone strike.

Badr Mansoor, who reputedly sent fighters to Afghanistan and ran a training camp in North Waziristan, was killed in a pre-dawn drone strike near the Afghan border along with three other militants, as confirmed by Pakistani officials and a member of Mansoor’s group.

“Mansoor died in the missile attacks overnight in Miranshah. His death is a major blow to Al Qaeda’s abilities to strike in Pakistan,” said a senior Pakistani official on condition of anonymity. His death was confirmed by one of his loyalists. “Badr Mansoor was killed in the missile attack,” the militant confirmed by telephone.

Intelligence officials in Miranshah, the main town of North Waziristan, said Mansoor had been killed, but other Pakistani officials were divided. “We’re not sure. We cannot give confirmation just like that,” one of them said

member_22539 · Post by **member_22539** » 09 Feb 2012 23:07

Thanks Shiv for taking the time to give your answers. They were quite informative and thought provoking. I really do wish they become like the Bangladesh under Sheikh Hasina (ie moderate and cooperative) and I really hope that things don't slide into a negative situation on that front if the opposition comes to power. Considering the size of the problem Pakistan poses it is going to take a herculean effort to bring things to normalcy between us. I really don't know if this can be done. I am not an expert in that regard anyway, so I leave that to the judgement of my betters. But, considering how things are going I don't see any hope (except if you take the current civilian "mutiny" as something of a change and a positive for us). I fear that something similar to the Taliban are going to take over large swathes of Pakistan, just like in Afghanistan. Now all of these are my fears and like I said before, I am not an expert and they need not be "valid" fears. Even if things are changing for the better, I wonder if we can return to normalcy within the generation of 6-year-old nephew. To tell the truth, though it would give me great pleasure to see these vermin suffer like the famine and disease stricken Somalis, but I wonder if it is good to have a population 180 million or more living in misery and breeding like pigs at you doorstep, no matter how strong your doors are. So, I do see the attraction of having a "normal" (if that is even possible) Pakistan. I really hope things happen in a way that would best benefit us and our future generations. In the end, I believe most of the Islamic disease will be cured once the Arab scum runs out of oil. So, lets hope for a brighter future.

Also, I would like to say as someone who in the last 10 years or so have read your posts practically every day, I have noticed lately that you have mellowed in your outlook towards Pakistan. What brought this on? (Any chance we will see the fire and brimstone Shiv any time soon

?)

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 09 Feb 2012 23:18

@shiv I disagree on the need for US to leave the region. By the US physically being in the region, the contradictions of US Paki relationship have become exposed. For India's benefit, the US needs to remain in the region to make the US -paki breach total and irreversible.