Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 15 Jan 201

AbhiJ · Post by **AbhiJ** » 01 Jul 2012 13:30

^^^^

That will never happen. That is itself against the existence of Pakistan.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 01 Jul 2012 13:41

D Roy wrote: Embracing our Indus past will enable us to reject Arab cultural imperialism in the name of religion, and will help us discard the Two-Nation Theory. We will be focused not on fighting wars with India, but in making the greatest cities in the world. Cities like those of the past, which valued trade and commerce and became the hub of Indo-Persian-Chinese commerce. Let our market places be flooded by people from all over the world and be a blend of cultures. We will be a country that celebrates diversity; ethnic diversity of the many languages and cultures around the ecosystem of the great river, and religious diversity, for it will be a country for (all types of) Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs who can respect this ecosystem. It will be a country that empowers its minorities. And once religion is prevented from being abused we can truly reconcile it with modernity and our legacy of British constitutionalism.

Once our conscious awakens to this idea, we will be a renewed nation. On the crumbling edifices of Moenjadaro and Harappa we will once more build great cities, and build a great country.

Pakistanis have already embraced the past. The Aryans came from Turkey and Central Asia on horses and built the Indus Valley civilization. Later the same Turks and Central Asian brought in Islam (PBUH). Pakistan rejected the polytheistic black heathendom of India with its caste system built a new naion. A nekaler armed nation. Magnificent new cities like Islamabad have arisen today.

There is nothing that Pakistan needs to do other than stay the course.

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 01 Jul 2012 14:55

shiv wrote:There is nothing that Pakistan needs to do other than stay the course.

So true. But, that is where the problem also lies. Some feel that Pakistan is not doing enough to stay the course and has veered off. So, they have decided that only a violent mid-course correction will make Pakistan stay the course and there is considerable backing for that process too.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 Jul 2012 19:09

ShauryaT wrote:The highlighted part is where I have difficulty accepting.

Why is it so difficult to understand.

Bharatiyas fought Islam only when it showed Talibanic instincts. When the Islamic rulers like Akbar etc moved slightly away from that path, they were accepted as legitimate leaders, even when they were hurting Hindu interests in other realms.

Look at your own perspectives. Even after knowing all paki perfidy, you thought India should give peace a chance in Siachen. Without going in to the details that is the Bharatiya attitude w.r.t Islam in general. You must note the point that while we are discussing Siachen peace moves in one thread, we are observing Talibanization of Pakistan on the ground and are discussing it another thread. Yet, you and others felt it is ok to do peace with Pakistan. That is exactly what happened in Bharat before. On one side Muslims were permanently destroying Afghan Hindu society, while our Jayachands were making peace deals further south-west.

For Bharat to wake up, it needs the Taliban nonsense in front of their own eyes in their bed rooms.

That is sad, but the truth.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 01 Jul 2012 23:32

shiv wrote:
D Roy wrote: Embracing our Indus past will enable us to reject Arab cultural imperialism in the name of religion, and will help us discard the Two-Nation Theory. We will be focused not on fighting wars with India, but in making the greatest cities in the world. Cities like those of the past, which valued trade and commerce and became the hub of Indo-Persian-Chinese commerce. Let our market places be flooded by people from all over the world and be a blend of cultures. We will be a country that celebrates diversity; ethnic diversity of the many languages and cultures around the ecosystem of the great river, and religious diversity, for it will be a country for (all types of) Muslims, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs who can respect this ecosystem. It will be a country that empowers its minorities. And once religion is prevented from being abused we can truly reconcile it with modernity and our legacy of British constitutionalism.

Once our conscious awakens to this idea, we will be a renewed nation. On the crumbling edifices of Moenjadaro and Harappa we will once more build great cities, and build a great country.
Pakistanis have already embraced the past. The Aryans came from Turkey and Central Asia on horses and built the Indus Valley civilization. Later the same Turks and Central Asian brought in Islam (PBUH). Pakistan rejected the polytheistic black heathendom of India with its caste system built a new naion. A nekaler armed nation. Magnificent new cities like Islamabad have arisen today.

There is nothing that Pakistan needs to do other than stay the course.

Local cultures and local politics in Pakistan - Punjabi, Pashto, Sindhi, etc are the only viable alternative to Islamism for Pakistan's middle and working classes.

That is why for example Bangladesh is nowhere as Islamist as Pakistan, even though there is a serious problem with Islamism and extremism.

Pakistan is going to remain on its disastrous course as long as its ruling and governing classes clings to an abstract unitary structure and identity, instead of accepting what it is, a federation of Muslim-majority South Asian societies.

The only people who believe in a unitary Pakistan besides the Army and civil service are mullahs and Islamists. That is the *fundamental* reason their alliance has lasted, despite periods of enormous mutual antagonism such as the Jinnah, Liaqat and Ayub years.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 01 Jul 2012 23:48

^ Hmmm

the concept of Islam's universality with no regards for local traditions is its Achilles heal?

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 02 Jul 2012 00:15

RamaY wrote:^ Hmmm

the concept of Islam's universality with no regards for local traditions is its Achilles heal?

I think its the Achilles Heel of any Pan-Islamist approach, whether armed like the Salafi Jihadis or more political like Hizb ut Tahrir or cultural like the Tabligh Jamaat that flower and then fail.

In the long run, even in the Middle East its the Islamists who embrace local identity, like the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, or the AKP in Turkey, or the nationalist Iranian mullahs that show staying power.

These kind of groups grassroots involvement mean that they cant just claim legitimacy on the basis of enforcing Islamic morality - they have to provide social services and development as well. The moment they get involved in those kind of everyday mundane tasks, the more pragmatic they have to become. At the end of the day the MB and AKP have maintained support because theyre waving qurans and wavy flowing beards about, but because theyre building clinics, schools, hospitals and universities with decent services at affordable prices for people who didnt have access to any of that.

The ruling mullahs in Iran were like that at first and reaped the rewards during the revolution. They have been losing support because they've been acting like a monopoly, squeezing the public which has to run faster and faster not to lose ground, while the regime families keep getting richer. They got into these sorts of habits during the war with Iraq and just kept going even after they spent their capital of good will.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 Jul 2012 06:04

shiv wrote:Shaurya, we are not going to see eye to eye here

Probably not Shiv ji. However, I am not looking to argue my points - have done enough of it already, at this time simply looking to understand, how alternative templates can serve Indian interests, even if I disagree.

So what did you mean when you said:
unless there are forces arrayed to defeat this tide, it would be unable to do so on its own.

It is with a view to marginalize the PA either through force or through peace and diplomacy and get sufficient reform (not to our complete satisfaction maybe) within TSP, that the ball moves towards a peaceful co-existence template.

Our blood, sweat and money will have to be put on the line in sufficient measure to ensure that Islamism's wildest ideas do not succeed even more than they already have in this part of Bharat, that has seceded. The employment of Sama, Dana, Bheda and Danda will have to be employed to stem this tide. The number of things to do in this template to achieve the above objective are numerous, no one magic button.

If it is a compromise on J&K, Siachen, additional military CBM's, economic integration, social movement in exchange for geo-political access, influence in TSP polity, including social, educational and political reform is something worth considering. Basic things such as a controlled and peaceful border are pre-conditions. Not envisioning a magic grand deal, but lots of steps, baby steps, missteps, promises kept/unkept to move the ball decisively away from Islamization of TSP polity, instead to a point of no return to at least a half way house. Anyways, i have elaborated enough on these previously, so for now please forgive me.

Could you explain to me how the past 40 years of Indian relations with Pakistan constitute "partial madness" in contrast to a "total madness" that you feel my viewpoint encourages? What would be the difference between the total madness of the future and the partial madness of the past?

If you do not find a difference between an Afghanistan of the late 90's under Taleban rule and the TSP, there is not much I can say on the matter. Why just Taleban, I would argue for action even for a template that looks like Iran or KSA for TSP. Now for the past 40 years, you can take any one of the destabilizing events and gauge how it may have been different for say, Op: Meghdoot, Jihadi inspired violence, Kargil, IC 814, Parakram, nuclear threats or the CFA of 2003. I just fail to see, how does increased islamism in the sub continent serves Indian interests.

I think it is time to call this bluff of TSP of a pure Islamic state, no such thing exists.

PS: I think you have an over emphasis on the role of the US and an under emphasis on the "slumbering" nature of GoI in these matters. There is a cause-effect relationship here.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 Jul 2012 06:16

RamaY wrote: For Bharat to wake up, it needs the Taliban nonsense in front of their own eyes in their bed rooms.

That is sad, but the truth.

Thank you for your views, but I will continue to believe we are not this stupid. There are other ways than courting with mutual destruction, IMHO. So we will have to disagree on this score. You may not like the pace or the intensity at which you would like to see changes in Bharat but I for one, have not given up hope.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Jul 2012 06:48

ShauryaT wrote: If you do not find a difference between an Afghanistan of the late 90's under Taleban rule and the TSP, there is not much I can say on the matter. Why just Taleban, I would argue for action even for a template that looks like Iran or KSA for TSP.

Let me put it this way just as a thought experiment. I will try to be brief.

Imagine that Afghanistan had been a proud and independent if poor country with functioning governance and a resilient powerful armed forces.

Imagine that Pakistan had sent in armed raiders to loot and kill and capture territory from Afghanistan (with some assistance from a superpower) - but Afghanistan had managed to beat it back. Imagine that over the next few decades Pakistan made repeated attempts at taking over Afghanistan by using regular armed forces, non uniformed forces, terrorists, bombings, assassinations but every time Afghanistan managed to beat that back and survive.

This of course never happened. The Taliban just took over Afghanistan and imposed Islamist rule. But if the story I have described earlier had happened, Afghanistan's story would have been exactly like India's history from 1947. If Pakistan had walked into India and taken over parts of India - those parts would pretty much have Islamist rule as bad as anything faced by the Afghans under the Taliban. See how PoK is now and recall the Gilgit massacres.

I pointed out in my e book that no one - especially Americans really gave a damn about India's side of the story and India's constant complaints that Afghanistan was becoming a hothouse of terrorism. It took 9-11 to do that. And sadly Shaurya you too have forgotten, or never knew India's history with Pakistan and your views too start with 9-11 and from the viewpoint of Americans in Afghanistan. India has fought wars long before Afghanistan was ever a problem for America (and therefore the world).

But that is not all that you have forgotten or chosen to ignore. More importantly you seem to forget that there are two aspects to India's handling of Pakistan over the last 60 years. One aspect is that India has been unable to solve the Pakistan problem. The second aspect is the possibility that India has been too stupid and incompetent to solve the Pakistan problem for 60 years. This latter viewpoint is a common viewpoint among Indians. This viewpoint reached its peak and became a triumphant frenzy after 2002 when a whole lot of Indians who subscribed to the "Indian incompetence" theory pointed out with joy that the USA, a superpower, would soon put Pakistan in its place. Not funny.

Clearly, after 11 years we have to consider the possibility that
1. Americans are as incompetent and as badly led as Indians
or
2. Pakistan is tough nut to crack.

Shaurya, you take your pick. You are welcome to think that the Pakistan problem "can be solved" by Indian blood and sweat even when you are aware that Indian efforts of 60 years and US efforts of over 10 years have failed.

If you look at Pakistan's pre-9-11 history, you find that American support and arms kept the Paki Army and terrorism alive. India howled and cried but America did not give a rat's ass until India's warnings were proven true by 9-11. The Americans were stupid enough to believe the Pakistanis who said that things were going out of control only because the US stopped supporting Pakistan after the cold war ended. The US restarted support for Pakistan after 9-11. And guess what? Today the Pakistan army and the Taliban as powerful as they were back in 1990.

After 1990 only India complained about Pakistan because India bore the brunt of terrorism. The US left Afghanistan to Pakistan. But in 2012, Pakistan has become the US's problem as well. If Pakistan has become a bigger problem after 11 years of US aid are you_seriously_trying to tell me that India is responsible and not the USA?

I personally am supremely happy to see the US's balls being squeezed by Pakistan while the US reacts with frustration and pinpricks. The US needs to suffer before people understand what Pakistan really is.

PS: I think you have an over emphasis on the role of the US and an under emphasis on the "slumbering" nature of GoI in these matters. There is a cause-effect relationship here.

Really? Tell me another one

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jul 2012 09:14

This thread is about TSP and not about Indian response. I want the mind to be free to envison what a Taliban takeover of TSP will look like and its likely impact.

BTW this is a serious issue being debated in think tanks as we quibble.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Jul 2012 09:37

Ramanji

Perhaps we seek the posters to present their PoV in a more structured form - like a strategy game.

Provide one strategy and how the players respond and the counter responses and so on..

That way it will help everyone to learn.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 02 Jul 2012 17:42

If you ask me to hazard a guess about what's happening, I would say that the Pakistani army is significantly jihadized or sympathetic to jihadis to prevent them from taking any significant action against jihadis. The people of Pakistan support the Pakistani army in this, but they also want governance, electricity, lowering of prices, security etc.

If the Pakistani army were to conduct a coup they would have no choice other than to ask the US to get out and that would be like shooting themselves in the foot because that would not only put them in open confrontation with the US, it would also choke off funds that are currently being given. The US for its part is playing a subtle game where it uses its relations with India to coerce Pakistan.

I think the Pakistani army is in a very tight situation. They do not have much wiggle room. Open defiance of the US would put the US and India on the same side against the Paki army. The US has never been wholly with India in the past but has always openly or secretly promised and given "survival" support to the Pakistani army.

I believe that what is being attempted is an attempt to force a slow internal clean-up of the Pakistani army where it is being demanded that jihadi elements and sympathizers are sidelined. Such a plan may not succeed. If a breakaway faction of the army decide that they will not bend to US pressure they could conduct a coup, and think about "facing the music" later.

In the meantime it is possible that elements of sarkari Taliban and "bad" Taliban are coalescing. Both Talibans want the US out, but only bad Taliban was against Paki army. If Sarkari Taliban ally with them the Paki army get sidelined and declared as "US ally". Even if this happens I doubt if the Paki army will be able to fight the Taliban given that 1/4 (or more?) of its soldiers were Pashtuns.

In short the outcome is really unpredictable. Pakistan really is up shit creek. It would be easier if the Taliban were to take control of bigger areas of Pakistan because that would begin to polarize more Pakis for or against that Taliban. Right now they are "far away".

I have stated for months now that India is not making it easier for the US and there is not a lot the US can do. India is not committing forces to Afghanistan, but India is also not retaliating against Pakistan. An aggressive India helps the US coerce Pakistan. An India that acts like a pushover gives Pakis a breather. They know that nothing will happen on the Indian front and that they can act tough with the US while "talking" with india. An open Indian threat would find Pakistan cooperating very nicely with the US. They would move sarkari Taliban and LeT towards camps near the Indian border, tell their people to stop complaining about prices and power because of India threat, and smash any Taliban opponents and get US aid against India. they would allow NATO convoys in exchange for material, monetary and Intel aid and force the US to "balance" the scales in their favour.

If people ask me whether I think that there is "chankianism" being shown by GoI here, I don't know. It is possible. I have not changed any of my views on the issue in the last 6 months - I have just stopped posting in Pakistan related threads because what I say or what BRF says will make no difference. What will happen will happen. It makes no difference whether we are ahead or behind the curve. The curve does not wait or care for our inputs.

The single point I want to make is what people keep questioning me about - that is the role of the USA. The US has a very deep role, but so does India. Neither is going to go away and each will play the other two off against each other. Only the tough will survive this game with the least damage.

If India does not play the US off against Pakistan, Indian interests will be damaged.
If the US does not play Pakistan off against india, US interests are damaged
If Pakis don't play the US off against India, Paki interests are damaged.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 Jul 2012 19:22

Response to Shiv in Indian Interests.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jul 2012 20:41

Since we all know its OT here why are we pursuing that line?

Thanks, ramana

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 02 Jul 2012 20:46

ramana wrote:Since we all know its OT here why are we pursuing that line?

Thanks, ramana

Sorry Ramana, thought I will clarify something, I will move the post to some other thread.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Jul 2012 21:00

ShauryaT ji -

In an appropriate thread can you please present few steps towards Indo-Pak reconciliation that you think will work and how it will pan out in a pre-Taliban and post-Taliban take over Pakistan? Also try to present how different internal and external actors would respond to such initiatives.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 02 Jul 2012 21:16

^^^ Shivji.

Thanks for that insight. If I understand your post correctly, TSPA has the following optiosn

1. Go overt with Talibans.
>> What this means: Ask US to get out. Declare itself to be a Talibani state. Implement Sharia. Pick the next enemy.
>> Threats: Who will replace US w.r.t Money and Arms supplies
>> Opportunities: Will afghanistan fall in the lap? Can they divert the jihadi forces towards India? Can they get additional funding/support/say in GCC?

2. Stay the course
>> What this means: Continue the perfidy thru bad/good Taliban. Keep civilian face, Army control and non-state actor execution.
>> Threats: Further hurting and alienation of mango-jihadis because they need to be spent as cannon fodder in this game of perfidy. Confused islamization of the society
>> Opportunity:Continued support (selective of course) from 3.5 friends, the unknown unknows

3. Self-realization
>> What this means: Accept that Talibanization is bad for everyone's interests. Conduct a resolved fight against Talibani elements within and without
>> Threats: Revolt of mango-TSPAs. Possible Civil war. Possible defeat
>> Opportunities: US Arms, WKK orgasms and associated support from India. Possible control over Afghanistan fortunes.

The next question is:
What are the key players in TSPA, their strengths, salience, and influence over other players
For example:
TSPA-Blue Team: have loyalty 30% of army, are honest about their goal 80%, have 60% influence over other players, have access to 50% of TSPA resources
TSPA-Green Team: have loyalty of 70% army, honest about their goal 100%, have 20% influence over other players, have access to 50% of TSPA resources
...

so on...

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 02 Jul 2012 22:14

Fundamentally what Talibanization of Pakistan mean to India?How is it different than the current situatiion again wrt India? i think i will go along with the POV of Shiv posted in the thread...but in more fundamental term are we clear about the term Talibanization means to us? or are we going along with the defination of the West in this respect? Was Zia a Taliban?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 02 Jul 2012 22:20

I asked for post Taliban takeover of TSP? I did not debate what is Taliban!

SBajwa · Post by **SBajwa** » 03 Jul 2012 04:22

Post Taliban take over will be fight between

Shias(LEJ) vs Sunnis (LET)
Ahmadias vs Rest
Bohra/ismaili/memon/etc vs Rest

so!! Post taliban take over of naPakistan means all out civil war between different sects of Islam and 1% remaining "non-muslims" (Christians, Zorastrians, Hindus, Sikhs) will be caught in cross fire irrespective of which ever group they choose to go along.

and India has to get involved when Sindhis, Balochis, Kashmiris and Punjabis start crossing the border just like Bangladesh.

Samudragupta · Post by **Samudragupta** » 03 Jul 2012 09:18

The recurring memes in the strategic orientation of the Pakistani strategists from 1947 is the Pustunization of Pakistan and Depustunization of the Pustuns starting first with the Pustuns staying in Pakistan and then extending it to the Pustuns in Afghanistan. In a way they were trying to create the Punjabis as the neo Gaznavis and to usurp the Afghan history as its own. In this respect the Talibanization (if we can call it Gazwa based Pustunification) was alaways the stated aim of the generals..the removal of Mohajirs from the strategic scene of Pakistan was also the result of this aim.

Talibanization..roughly if we term it as Salafist-Deobandi Islamic doctrine combined with Pustunized Pakjabis/Sindhis/Balochis/Kashmiris will create the the ideal islamic state as was dreamt by the Jihadi complex. This jihadi compplex will inevtably extend to the East and South of Hindukush and to the Kashmir valley. The presence of the "Black gold" in the form of metals and other natural resources in the Hindukush will allow them to pursue the murderous ideology irrespective of any cost they have to pay to accomplish this goal including waging a bloody civil war across the Hindukush and Indus basin.
Mohjirs will be ruthlessly eliminated and the last trace of Indic link will be cut and all other forms Islamic meme other that Salafi-Wahabi combine viz...Shia/Ahmadi/Sufi/Barelvi(?)..will be destroyed and to prepare the populace for the next stage of expansion in the Punjab,rajasthan and Gujrat. For the first time in Two millenium Hindukush will be able to sustain itself economically and also expand in the East across the Indus,the islmaists know this calculation very well.

it is in Indian national interest to fight this mess in the Hindukush itself and not in the borders of Punjab

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Jul 2012 10:41

While the point may not be to define the Taliban, I think that the Taliban represent certain tendencies in society that call for imposition of sharia, discourage female literacy, discourage music, dance and the fine arts, and discourage anything that is described as unIslamic behavior.

If you accept these as the parameters of Talibanization, Pakistan has been partially Talibanized long long ago and it is spreading to areas that were considered "secular". The reason why few outside BRF are willing to believe that Pakistan is already partially Talibanized is the a US/western delusion about Pakistan being secular and moderate based on the overt behavior of the ruling elite and the facial hair status of the Pakistan army.

The ruling elite of Pakistan and the English media provide Pakistan with a veneer of "moderastion and secularism" that is not borne out by any other parameter in Pakistan. Pakistan is already largely Talibanized. But an overt appearance of Talibanization will scare off American-donor-suckers. Hence the concerted effort to appear modern by activities such as holding fashion show in New York.

Talibanization of Pakistan is no more scary for India than Pakistan itself. For Indians it's the same thing. It is the US that is struggling to come to grip with the idea and and is basically in denial. In my earlier discussion with Shaurya, I realized that the Taliban evoke mental pictures like shooting women, forcing dress code and illiteracy on them, setting non Muslims apart, meting out summary Islamic justice etc. Can anyone tell me if all this is not already in progress in Pakistan?
If it is, why does anyone believe that the Taliban are "still to come" in Pakistan?

I ask every individual who reads this to think for himself and answer the following question for yourself, using your own thought process rather than depending on others. What sort of behavior do you expect to see in Pakistan before you say "Pakistan is Talibanized"?

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Jul 2012 12:27

If you take a fundamentally "normal", secular society and forcbly introduce sharia against the will of many, and against the existing culture in
that society, forcibly introduce veils for women, close down girls schools, commence previously non existent discrimination against non muslims,
frown upon the fine arts then you can claim that a society has been "talibanized".

But what about a society that already displays many or all the features described above as "talibanization"? What exactly would constitute Talibanization of such a society?

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 03 Jul 2012 13:35

Apart from Social change, Taliban will bring militristic society. Shiv will argue that its already there, I agree, but I believe it will be more vicious than the present. But again, I think as Shiv pointed out a problem for western countries than India

For example, think ISI's range and now add if the policies are dictiated by Taliban. ISI will become a gift for Taliban from Pak Army

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 03 Jul 2012 16:14

symontk wrote: For example, think ISI's range and now add if the policies are dictiated by Taliban. ISI will become a gift for Taliban from Pak Army

The assumption here is that the ISI, not being under "Taliban control" has been somehow restricted; it has somehow felt that it must not do its worst against India but neeeds to hold back from the brink. In other words if the ISI were to come under the control of the Taliban, it would be much worse.

I do not believe that. The ISI and the Pakistan army have never held anything back. It is only imagination that consders that the Taliban are worse.

Look at the list:

1947-48 - infiltration of commandos and jihadis followed by open war
1965 Infiltration of commandos and open war
1971 open war
1980s - support to Khalistani terrorists, hijackings. nuclear threat
1990s: Terrorism, bomb blast on soft targets, Kargil war, nuclear threat, fake currency, refuge for criminals
2000 onwards: Terrorism, hijacking, bomb blasts/shootings on soft targets, nuclear threat, fake currency, refuge for criminals

Nothing, bar nothing has been left out. It is only because the Taliban have been given a reputation for brutality that people think the Taliban is worse.

As an small thought experiment if I write the words "Recent beheading of soldiers" what are you reminded of? What mental picture do you get in mind. What news reports do you recall?

symontk · Post by **symontk** » 04 Jul 2012 00:04

The beheading of soldiers was done by "Jihadi" units meaning not regular units, just like Non-state actors. Yes, "jihadi" units, thats a nice one, I agree. But again it also points to things in future. But did we had this earlier, say in 1980 with Pakistan?

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 04 Jul 2012 00:21

symontk wrote:The beheading of soldiers was done by "Jihadi" units meaning not regular units, just like Non-state actors. Yes, "jihadi" units, thats a nice one, I agree. But again it also points to things in future. But did we had this earlier, say in 1980 with Pakistan?

So, what you are saying is that, we should fear a taliban takeover because that will turn the otherwise gentlemanly soldiers of TSP into brutes who behead?

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 04 Jul 2012 01:04

symontk wrote:Apart from Social change, Taliban will bring militristic society. Shiv will argue that its already there, I agree, but I believe it will be more vicious than the present. But again, I think as Shiv pointed out a problem for western countries than India

For example, think ISI's range and now add if the policies are dictiated by Taliban. ISI will become a gift for Taliban from Pak Army

So, it makes no difference to India and makes things worse for the West--i.e makes it harder for the West to deny the problem.

Adds up to: talibanization, defined as the state of affairs obtaining when West believes TSP is talibanized, is to India's benefit since TSP will get less Western help.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 04 Jul 2012 01:24

shiv wrote: Nothing, bar nothing has been left out. It is only because the Taliban have been given a reputation for brutality that people think the Taliban is worse.

As an small thought experiment if I write the words "Recent beheading of soldiers" what are you reminded of? What mental picture do you get in mind. What news reports do you recall?

Sure an outright purist Islamic regime can do much worse.

There are about 6 million hindus in Pakistan and some more minorities. Be ready to accept them. An outright pronounced Islamic leadership, on the lines of the Taleban, would provide thought leadership to the muslims of the entire subcontinent on steroids, the same way the muslim league did in the 40's. Expect higher violence inside India. Expect BD islamist parties to derive more inspiration. Today, PA backs down when threatened with a conventional escalation, in a Taliban setup, do not expect them to. Taliban hands on nuclear devices and materials? What if an Islamic party takes over in BD in due course and TSP provides them with nuclear weapons? Most likely, TSP itself would be in a civil war type situation with regional, feudal and other gentry fighting the new regime and the elite it shall create. Expect the PA itself to be split. Regional stability for India is toast.

Certainly, we would not be talking economic integration or CBM's? Our geo-political ambitions are toast for sure, being a virtual island.

How many attacks from the Taleban will we bear, before we retaliate? Can safely expect the number and intensity of attacks to go up. Indian retaliation is assured and so goes our own economic prosperity agenda.

You can blow out any one of the above out the water for they are all in the speculative category. However, the potential for more damage exists. But, do think the original question by ramana is speculative and do not see Taleban takeover of TSP to be a likely reality in the near term. TSP is hurting now and hence we can goad, but they have enough assets and cards on the table to get out of the current difficulties and be back in shape to continue their perfidies.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 04 Jul 2012 01:35

How many civilized people will feel sorry or empathy with Talibanized animals if they are legitimately Nuked by the victim of their terrorism?

Virupaksha · Post by **Virupaksha** » 04 Jul 2012 01:36

I dont see any difference from what we are facing today - i.e. our problem.

But what you say will mean it is everyone's problem

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 04 Jul 2012 01:38

ShauryaT, As long time TSP watcher, from before this forum was created, only a few changes (less than a dozen) will make the transformation from enlightened moderate (En-MO) TSP to Salafist Taliban led TSP. So its not a specualtion. This is serious current topic in think tanks. Expect a spate of literature in near future.
And please don't worry about Indian response in this thread.
Need to keep the problem and solution separate.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 04 Jul 2012 04:03

ramana wrote:ShauryaT, As long time TSP watcher, from before this forum was created, only a few changes (less than a dozen) will make the transformation from enlightened moderate (En-MO) TSP to Salafist Taliban led TSP. So its not a specualtion. This is serious current topic in think tanks. Expect a spate of literature in near future.
And please don't worry about Indian response in this thread.
Need to keep the problem and solution separate.

Can you elaborate on these few changes. I will be eager to learn what you and others can shed light on. Tying to stay clear on Indian response.

For the record though, do not view TSP elites to be enlightened moderates. See them as confused Indics and wannabe Islamists, scoring one self goal after another.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Jul 2012 06:20

symontk wrote:The beheading of soldiers was done by "Jihadi" units meaning not regular units, just like Non-state actors. Yes, "jihadi" units, thats a nice one, I agree. But again it also points to things in future. But did we had this earlier, say in 1980 with Pakistan?

With deep respect symontk - are you really interested in history or are you discussing this for kicks? Even back then soldiers would have their genitals cut off ans stuffed in their mouths. Since there was no internet then the news would be seen by people like me in the newspaper and then stored away in a corner of the mind.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Jul 2012 06:27

ShauryaT wrote:
shiv wrote: Nothing, bar nothing has been left out. It is only because the Taliban have been given a reputation for brutality that people think the Taliban is worse.

As an small thought experiment if I write the words "Recent beheading of soldiers" what are you reminded of? What mental picture do you get in mind. What news reports do you recall?
Sure an outright purist Islamic regime can do much worse.

There are about 6 million hindus in Pakistan and some more minorities. Be ready to accept them.

You're joking aren't you Shaurya? Pakistan had a 15% non Muslim population in 1947. That has been whittled down to 2%. You are saying that the removal and ill treatment of that 2% is going to be worse than the elimination of the 13% that went before them? How did you figure that out?

I am astounded that people now seen to think that Pakistan is going to get worse for India. The only thing worse is an nuclear attack. But even that threat is not new. Why do you think we are looking at missile defence, due to be in place fairly soon? People take these threats seriously. The missile defence plans started 20 years ago. Where was the Taliban threat then? The Pakistan threat has been seriously serious for 25 years now and I think it naive to imagine that something new and bad is happening. New and bad for America,yes. But same ol' for India.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Jul 2012 07:03

A lot of people, including I have taken the trouble to write out and put online what Pakistan has been doing to India. Pardon my irritation but 150 pages is not a long book. My own e book lists what Pakistan has been doing/ All it needs is to read the relevant chapter on terrorism and wars. No need to read the pisko stuff or the eco stuff.

If people are not even aware of what is known it is pointless talking about Pakistan

From my ebook
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/EBOOKS/pfs.pdf

Pakistan's record with reference to Indian airliners
hijacked to Pakistan has been condemnable. After a 1971
hijack the hijackers were granted asylum in Pakistan, and
the aircraft blown up on the ground. After a 1976 hijack,
the hijackers were imprisoned for a token one month in
Pakistan for entering Pakistan without due documents. In
two instances of hijacking in 1981 and 1984, the
hijackers were given refuge in Pakistan. And in an
unbelievable second hijacking event in 1984, the
hijackers received a weapon along with snacks in Lahore

And of course IC 814

The five hijackers actually received their weapons in a
diplomatic bag checked in by Pakistani First Secretary in
Nepal, Mohammad Arshad Cheema (146). The hijacked
aircraft was flown to the UAE, Amritsar and Lahore, and
the newlywed husband of a honeymooning couple was
murdered by slashing his throat, and his body thrown out
of the aircraft while his wife remained on board for the
rest of the duration of the hijack. The plane was then
flown to Kandahar in Afghanistan, where it came under
control of Pakistan's puppet Taliban government. In a
surreal turn of events, the hijackers were provided with
new weapons in Kandahar, as reported by a French tourist
hostage who survived the ordeal

Read this thread to see what Pakistan has been doing to India. Not the Taliban. Pakistan IS the Taliban
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... in+heroism

Here's is a sample:

Army sources said Singh, who headed the army's Quick Reaction Team posted at the station, spotted the two heavily armed Lashkar-e-Tayiba terrorists forcing their way into the station in battle fatigues. Singh and his 'Ghatak Commandos' reached the spot within 10 minutes, cordoned off the station and employed the 'zigzag methodology' to arrive within close range of the terrorists, said a senior railway police officer who was at the scene.

Singh took on the terrorists in a gunfight at close quarters. He faced indiscriminate firing and lobbing of grenades. He succeeded in killing one of them and took charge of the so far 'uncontrollable' situation, the official said. The first terrorist was killed near the bridge between the first and the second platforms, he added.

The second terrorist lobbed a grenade at Singh while trying to escape but the seriously injured officer stood up and killed him before being shot in the head.

"Task accomplished," Singh said and saluted the GOC before breathing his last.

"The commandos, while approaching the terrorists' hideout, drew extremely heavy automatic fire. Sensing grave danger to his comrades Sanjog assaulted the cave, lobbing grenades and firing from the hip and killing one terrorist. In the intense fire he suffered gunshot wound to the right shoulder, but unmindful of his physical condition he pressed on with the assault and killed a second terrorist. He, however, fell at the entrance of the cave. The terrorists had inflicted multiple gunshot wounds to Sanjog," the army said in a statement

But that was not the end.

"Paratrooper Sanjog Chhetri, in one last act of supreme valour, drew his commando knife and charged into the hideout, killing one more terrorist in hand-to-hand combat before finally succumbing to his wounds."

Inspired by his supreme sacrifice, his comrades killed 13 terrorists that night and captured a Pakistan-trained terrorist.

Bangalore: On October 21, he would have turned 28 and probably got married. But, fate willed otherwise. The mortal remains of captain Kevin Kumar of Bangalore were laid to rest at the Hosur Road cemetery under full military honour after a solemn service at the St Mark’s Cathedral on August 1.

A super commando with the elite 9 Para Battalion Special Forces operating in Jammu and Kashmir, Kevin Kumar lost his life battling the militants on July 29. The funeral service and ceremony was attended by a motley crowd of family, friends and the Army officials, but not any from among the common masses.

Even as the brave soul was given a tearful and inconsolable farewell, the common man of Bangalore city seemed to be unaffected or rather unconcerned about a brave heart who had sacrificed his life at the height of militancy so that we could live in peace.

The first thing little Siddhant would have done on Tuesday would have been calling his fatherâ€™s mobile in Kashmir to wish him Happy Birthday. But he will never make that call. An ironic twist of fate has severed forever that connection between the father and son.

Instead, Siddhant will now be lighting his fatherâ€™s pyre at their native village Sarambal in Sindhudurg district of Maharashtra on Tuesday. Siddhant and his mother Captain Smita Kadam, an ex-short service army officer, were enjoying the relaxed pace of Sunday when Lieutenant Colonel M.S. Kadam (37) was in a deadly firefight with Lashkar-e-Tayyeba (LeT) terrorists at a village near Sopore in Baramulla.

Kadam and his men belonging to 22 Rashtriya Rifles were on the trail of LeT's J&K commander Hafiz Hamza alias Hafiz Hayder alias Hafiz Nasir, a prized but elusive target for the Indian Army. After writing a blazing script of gallantry, Kadam got Hafza but Siddhant lost his father.

Terrorists™ bullets also tore Sepoy Pradeep Kumars body in the same operation, aside from critically injuring four security personnel.

Smita received Kadams body, flown to New Delhi in a special air force plane on Monday. Even in her moment of grief, 36-year-old Smita epitomised the strength of a soldier' wife. She told the Hindustan Times: â€œHe is goneâ€¦ but the sense of pride he has left us with will live and grow in our hearts forever. When Siddhant grows up, I will tell him about his father's achievements.

Are we really "ahead of curve" on here? I think we have our eyes tightly closed.

pentaiah · Post by **pentaiah** » 04 Jul 2012 07:33

Shiv
It is a reflection on the leadership, intellectuals (if any exist)
The lack of nationalism to rally people to the reality of the brutality of TSP
Instead we absolute a holes in press and public life who want aman ki asha
Our country as whole degenerated into making money any which way we can
No wonder we are advised by one and all appeasement
Now I have to reach for Olmesartan

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 04 Jul 2012 08:36

pentaiah wrote:Shiv
It is a reflection on the leadership, intellectuals (if any exist)
The lack of nationalism to rally people to the reality of the brutality of TSP
Instead we absolute a holes in press and public life who want aman ki asha
Our country as whole degenerated into making money any which way we can
No wonder we are advised by one and all appeasement
Now I have to reach for Olmesartan

My OT response here
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 2#p1306102

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 04 Jul 2012 09:02

shiv wrote:
You're joking aren't you Shaurya? Pakistan had a 15% non Muslim population in 1947. That has been whittled down to 2%. You are saying that the removal and ill treatment of that 2% is going to be worse than the elimination of the 13% that went before them? How did you figure that out?

Not fair Shiv. I said nor implied anything of the sort to compare with partition time. Just put an impact scenario on the table to consider.
The question was on the impact of a Taleban takeover as opposed to the situation as it exists, not have we ever seen worse days with muslim rule, anywhere or with TSP in particular? If that was the question, I have worse events to recount from history. For the record, consider the partition to be the weakest move by Indian polity, ever.

However, what you seem to be saying is the impact is no biggie, since in percentage terms we have seen worse than this before. Are you serious that a genocide like situation resulting in mass of refugees, on this matter is no escalated security risk amongst others to you for India. If you go with this type of logic then why stop at partition and not go back to muslim rule in central India and ask that no biggie, since we Hindus survived anyways, we can survive anything. The question is not how we may respond or not, but does it have an impact and how, compared to the current setup?

If your point is we can manage as we have seen it all before then no arguments, for the post was not about, how we may absorb, cope, react or not?

I am astounded that people now seen to think that Pakistan is going to get worse for India. The only thing worse is an nuclear attack. But even that threat is not new. Why do you think we are looking at missile defence, due to be in place fairly soon? People take these threats seriously. The missile defence plans started 20 years ago. Where was the Taliban threat then? The Pakistan threat has been seriously serious for 25 years now and I think it naive to imagine that something new and bad is happening. New and bad for America,yes. But same ol' for India.

How many news reports and by how many authorities and for how long, would it take to convince you that Pakistan going the Taleban route is viewed as a worsening of risk levels to India at multiple levels? You are only counting military threats not Economic, Social, Political, Geo-Political & Strategic. It will detoriate risk levels on India in every way. Did not say anything on, how we can cope or how we may fail to cope (to keep reactions out of the picture). The question is not if we have NOT seen any of these before but the question is will the risks be worse than the current polity in TSP and the answer to that question is a resounding yes for me.

My only question is what will it take to prove to you there are many, if not most, who believe this or maybe you are arguing for an entirely different point that it is no worse than what we have seen before. Moghul Akbar's reign was better or Aurangzeb's for the Hindus? From a Hindu perspective, both were not good is one answer, however it is a comparative question, demanding an either or answer. Given that it is an either or choice, I would choose Akbar - even if my real preference is for a muslim to never rule us but that choice does not exist. It is a similar scenario here.