Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Jan. 29, 2010

shravan · Post by **shravan** » 23 Feb 2010 19:06

4 terrorists killed in bomb blast in Kurrum Agency
23 Feb 10 06:34 PM

KURRU AGENCY: Four terrorists were killed while five others injured in bomb blast in Dar area of Kurram Agency, official sources confirmed SAMAA on Tuesday.

The official sources added that terrorists were installing the bomb in the empty house when the blast occured.

---===---

7 killed in tribal clash in Hangu

HANGU: At least seven people have been killed in the tribal clash in Doaba, sources told SAMAA Tuesday.

The clash erupted between Bangish and Wazir tribes on the water issue. About seven people were killed including the head of Wazir tribe Moin Wazir and two of his nephews while three others were injured.

The police reached the place of the tribal clash while the tension still prevails in the area. SAMAA

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Feb 2010 19:12

Pakistani Finance Minister resigns on principles

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Feb 2010 19:40

Look like he has not interest in continuing..so takes his principle and runs...

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... alks-ss-04

Meanwhile, India 'forces' change of Pakbarian delegation...interestingly the ones left out are water guys. The way Pakbarians are shouting water along with Kashmir these days (including so called doves like Rashid) you might think there are two chances - one is they are trying to get something on H&D to give up on Kashmir or they are really licking the bucket for water. If latter is the case, India should play hard ball...particularly because digesting grass needs lots of water..

svenkat · Post by **svenkat** » 23 Feb 2010 19:45

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Feb 2010 19:54

I am not too sure if this got reported here.

Generally, Pakistan always keeps good company and it is no exception this time too, Angola, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Iran, North Korea, Sao Tome and Principe

Financial Action Task Force of the G-7 countries blacklists Pakistan for money laundering and terrorism financing

A key global anti-corruption body has blacklisted eight countries for alleged money laundering and terrorism financing and called for sanctions against Iran, the US government said Friday.

The Financial Action Task Force has "identified eight countries that have strategic... deficiencies in alleged money laundering and terrorism financing," the Treasury Department said in a statement.

The FATF, an inter-governmental body aimed at countering illicit financial transactions that could be used to promote terrorism, has named Angola, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Iran, North Korea, Pakistan, Sao Tome and Principe, and Turkmenistan for posing "a risk to the international financial system."

The US Treasury welcomed "the FATF statements this week identifying countries with strategic deficiencies in the area of anti-money laundering and combating the financing of terrorism.

Pakistan, Sao Tome and Principe, and Turkmenistan have not addressed deficiencies "previously publicly identified by the FATF."

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 23 Feb 2010 19:58

SS,

Actually, the grouping of TSP with the other "rogues" is not the real news.

The interesting thing is that the likes of Spain and others in the EU wanted to name TSP as a country that is not cooperating, i.e. the worst of the rogues, but Unkil intervened as usual and got TSP's blacklisting soft pedaled, but even this hurts the H&D...

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 23 Feb 2010 20:06

Rangudu, another interesting aspect is that the Kerry-Lugar Bill requires that the Secretary of State certifies every six months that the Pakistan Government was strengthening counter-terrorism and anti-money laundering laws.

It is time now for that internal report. With the FATF balcklisting, we should see what Ms. Clinton states in her report.

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 23 Feb 2010 20:24

SSridhar wrote:It is time now for that internal report. With the FATF balcklisting, we should see what Ms. Clinton states in her report.

Come on SS, you don't think that there will be any negative certification, do you?

The rating of TSP apparently says that steps have been taken but they are not enough. This should be enough for Obama to say that they are working on it...

Similarly, anyone in his right mind would not certify TSP actions in terror camps in Muridke after all the Youtube videos of pigLeT rallies from Feb 5, but can you bet that the certification is not going to happen?

No matter how hard it tries, Congress cannot legislate a change in TSP policy. It has to be the Executive branch that takes the lead.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Feb 2010 20:33

Good posts Pulikeshi and Philip on page 62. I started writing this after I saw those posts - but got otherwise busy..

I was trying to parse the various issues at hand in a way in which it can be gamed. I have tried to put down the motivations of the 3 most important players (from an Indian standpoint) - i.e the US, Pakistan and India.

1) What is good for Pakistan?

I believe this may be a mixed bag, in that "what is good for the Pakistani people" is different from "what is good for the Pakistani army and leadership."

The army wants control over Afghanistan. They would ideally like to punish India in various ways to avenge their 1971 loss. Getting Kashmir, or keeping violence going in Kashmir or in India would all be "good" for the Pakistan army - but that "good" is secondary to its own survival and funding. Pakistani army survival and funding has come courtesy the US and to an unknown extent from Opium. But the latter is equal to "control of Afghanistan". Education and jobs for the Pakistani people would bleed the Pakistani army if they did not have enough recruits for jihad.

For the Pakistani people what is really needed is birth control, education and jobs. In the absence of education and jobs many are ripe for recruitment as anti-India jihadis. Here again the US is paramount. A "normal" state gets part of its funds from taxes. The Pakistani army/government does not enforce taxes on it people. Last time I checked - tax collections in Pakistan were abysmally low. This is useful for the people, and the Paki army survives on US bailouts. So US aid helps the Pakistani people to continue to be jobless and aimless potential jihad recruits.

2) What is good for the US?

The US has multiple concerns in the region. Having a foothold in the region has been a 50 year old affair for the US. Pakistan has served as a cold war ally and a listening post against both the FSU and China. US involvement in Pakistan was a key factor in the "winning" of the cold war. US involvement in Pakistan aided detente with China. US involvement in Pakistan is the key to US control of Afghanistan and the resources that may later have to flow via Afghanistan. US involvement in Pakistan is key to keeping Damocles sword hanging over Iran.

The US has too many interests in Pakistan to let Pakistan go. But it may use elements within Pakistan as the US has done in the past - both in Pakistan and in other nations (eg Shah of Iran).

Does the US want prosperity and development of the Pakistani people? Yes, but not at the cost of its own interests which are paramount.

Are the Pakistani people falling over themselves to work for the US? Not really. There are too many Pakis to pay off and a pro US population would have to be created by freebies and gifts that Pakis want. The US will not do that when it can buy off the army- the most powerful Paki group for a few billions. That pattern has been replicated in many other nations of the world.

Does the Pakistani army like the US? This is a stupid question. Do you like pork? But if you like pork then you don't like pigs because you have to kill the pig to eat pork no? You have to kill the pig to say you like it. So Pakis have to do dirty jobs for the US to get the US to give them what they want.

What does the Paki army want? Apart from a few millions to each individual, the Paki army wants leverage against India. that means control of Afghanistan is India is in there and control of Kashmir if possible, control of water supply and a suffering, bleeding India is possible. This is the Pakistani whore's price for sleeping with the US.

The US of course obliges the Pakistani army with every requirement in this regard except open verbal support. the US gives the money and the arms and has looks the other way wrt proliferation of nukes and missiles. In exchange the Paki army whore sleeps with the US and tries to leave the US in control of Afghanistan by allowing supplies to go via Pakistan. If the US is to leave Afghanistan, the Paki army wants control.

3) What does India want?

India wants

Peace, prosperity and development
India keeps Kashmir and everything else
Peace with Pakistan
Peace and development in Afghanistan

Now let me check India's needs with what Pakistan and the US feel.
1) Peace, prosperity and development (of India)
a) The US is probably ambivalent about this. I am sure the US does not object to peace prosperity and development in India so long as none of these things affects its two bit whore the Pakistan army. Now the Pakistan army kicks up a ruckus about this so the US does a periodic arming of the Pakistan armed force. In effect peace and prosperity in India is secondary to the US's need for its two bit whore.

b) Pakistan. Pakistan has two constituencies.

One is a set of people of unknown size who probably do not care for constant conflict and are probably so fcued up that all they want to do is just get on with their lives it they could.This group probably have no direct opinion on India's peace development and prosperity. They may be a "usable" constituency for India - but that is a big "if". The second and well known constituency in Pakistan are those who want to bring India down - mainly the army and jihadis, but a whole lot of other supporters as well. It would be interesting to find out of the GoI has any information on the relative proportions of these two constituencies.

All in all it appears that peace in India and peace for India is dictated by Pakistan. The US merely tries to keep its whore happy because that is in the "interests of the US"

2) India keeps Kashmir and everything else:

Here again Pakistan is unhappy and the US will do whatever possible to keep Miss Gonorrhea Pakistani happy. But wresting Kashmir from India is more difficult than merely causing trouble in India. The US might not worry of Pakistan were to wrest Kashmir but would not say it openly The US probably would not worry about status quo either. Everything revolves around the happiness of the whore - but it is unlikely that the US can or will try to wrest Kashmir for its whore.

3) Peace with Pakistan.

I am certain that a reasonable large percentage of Pakistanis want peace. Some may want peace on their terms - ie India hands itself over to Paquis. But I think that many pakis would not object seriously to making peace with India. The Pakistani army does not want it. Peace with India is a threat that will cut off its supply of power, money and arms.

The US probably prefers India nd Pakistan to be at peace. Have you ever tried to make love to a dog that is snarling at someone in a neighbor's house? You may not want to do that but the US is certainly trying that with Pakistan its bitch. But there is more common ground here between the US and India than the other two points above.

4) Peace and development in Afghanistan. India wants this. The US wants this, but the Pakistan army wants control of Afghanistan. I believe that the Afghans do not want Paki control and that o\goes in favor of India, but Pakistan is sitting next door and is seen by the US as a key player so the US would be inclined to follow a Pakistani line as long as its global geopolitical aims are met in Afghanistan, whether it is ruled by Pakistan or anyone else.

Looking at all these points it appears to me that only the idea of peace with Pakistan has the greatest number of entities who will support it. Note that peace with Pakistan is not the same as peace for India (which is point no 1). Peace for India is not a given even if we have peace with Pakistan. Peace with Pakistan is supported by the US in the sense that India should not threaten or make war with Pakistan. If the whore-bitch is threatened the US will protect it. Pakis doing things (terrorism) against India is allowed.

In summary, I believe that the US has such a huge role in hemming in India's actions that India's long term goal can only be defeating US moves. But that is a long way off. In the short term we will have to make peace with Pakistan on terms that will be humiliating for us. But that will not be the end of things. There is a distant but tantalizing possibility that India can use an uneasy peace with Pakistan to wean away segments of the Paki population to become India supporters and opponents of what the US is doing. The US is generally disliked anyway. But that is thinking too far ahead for this post.

Sorry it became so long.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 23 Feb 2010 20:36

Pakistan backs India for a non-permanent UNSC seat

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 23 Feb 2010 21:19

vera_k wrote:Looks like MMS needs to be supported.

We need to avert terror attacks and buy time

"There is the possibility of terrorist attacks on India and we need to prevent it by all means available to us," said Subrahmanyam. "I don't know why the government has proposed the resumption of talks with Pakistan, but all I can say is that I envisage that it could be a tactical move by India. We need to avert terror attacks and buy time."

I have lost a lot of respect for KS and also B Raman. They are clueless and blow mostly hot air masquerading as some kind of expertise.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 23 Feb 2010 21:21

Rangudu wrote:SSS is a tool of the TSPA jihadi establishment to leak stories that support their tactics of the day. He is also used by TSPA/ISI to talk in a language that they cannot do so publicly. Read his pieces after 26/11 or after other major events.

Boss, who is SSS?

arun · Post by **arun** » 23 Feb 2010 21:30

^^^ Syed Saleem Shahzad. Writes for Asia Times.

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 23 Feb 2010 21:34

arun wrote:^^^ Syed Saleem Shahzad. Writes for Asia Times.

Oh yes, thanks. R-man is right. Both SSS and even Ahmed Rashid are in some sense voices of certain elements of TSP establishment. Ahmed Rashid typically refelcts the vocie of TSPA/ISI who have no issue with US. But notice the slime ball's language when it comes to India. What is SSS's latest? This thread fills up fast, and I went back a few posts but couldn't locate anything from SSS.

BijuShet · Post by **BijuShet** » 23 Feb 2010 21:39

^^^^

Malayappan wrote:...Cross-border militants strike back by SSS.
...

Cross-border militants strike back By Syed Saleem Shahzad

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 23 Feb 2010 21:40

Watch for the games - the dragon is very interested

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 607924.cms

Pakistan foreign minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi on Tuesday seemed to jeopardize the peace talks with India just two days before it is scheduled to begin. He countered Indian foreign ministry’s view that the talks should focus on the issue of terrorism.

“If India restricts the agenda or tries to narrow it down to its own immediate needs, then much progress will not be reached,” he said while speaking at a meeting organized by a Chinese government think-tank. He also tried to rope in China in the peace process between the two countries as a mediator although India has all along been against third-party intervention. "It is for the Indians to decide if they would be comfortable to have China talking as a third party to bridge the gap. As far as Pakistan is concerned they (China) have a blank cheque," he said while speaking at the State-run China Institute of International Studies.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Feb 2010 21:43

Malayappan never mind the views about the messenger. Try to summarise the message.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Feb 2010 22:01

Thanks, Suppiah. Very good summary. We need more such paraphrases to be posted here than the raw feed.

Suppiah wrote:Just spent time listening to the audio of this Rashid discussion at CFR...got interested because just read his book 'Descent into Chaos' primarily to kill a 4 hr flight....he made a lot of sense today..

There was an American guy in that but he was mostly talking crap so let us skip that...but he was strongly against any bargain with Taliban until Us gains position of strength..

Key highlights of Rashid's comments FWIW...not exact words 100% but should be fairly representative...

1. President Karzai and even the Taliban are tired of the manipulation faced under Pakistan..want to strike out on their own and want to have their own dialogue..it is a very very complex situation....
US military believes they cannot win this war..
2. Mullah B met with Karzai admin people in KSA. These are feelers, not negotiations..his arrest has tainted him now..
Pakistan should facilitate and help the mediation between Taliban & Afghan govt if it tries to play a role over the top, and IT WILL, it wants India eliminated, I think it will antagonise the whole region. India will NOT accept a central role for Pak, Iran, Russia, CA states will not accept. US may accept but not the REGION. We may then face another HUGE problem in the region...
3. Militiary regards Afghan Taliban as asset, not danger. They have carved out Kashmir and Afghan policy for themselves..in general foreign affairs
4. PPP remains only national party in the country others regional/ethnic even Nawaz Sharif is Punjabi party very little loyalty in other provinces..army cannot finish them off because what is left is far more fragmented...no one else could have stitched together this coalition not NS..no one wants the army back..all parties..America cannot like in past, deal with military just because it is convenient for them..
{Very important fact.}[/i]

5. Pakistan has done no such thing (dismantling terrorist infra), yet Indians have come back..water issue more critical than Kashmir...basically we need new agreement.
{Hope MMS doesnt give up water rights for charade of stopping terrorist acts.}

6. Taliban itself is watering down somewhat even on women's education. AT much different from PT - they are not fighting to put women back in burqa etc., but for patriotic reasons.[/b]{Pashtun civil war. Not a religious war unlike AlQ.} wrong perception in region Americans will leave in 18 months..AT are very tired. For them this is 30 year war...AT they are fed up with war..fed up of militirasation they have to undergo Pakistan..Arab, Iran manipulate them...they are fed up..they cannot take cities..families of top leadership living outside Afghan eminently hostage-able...to these manipulators..

7. What the Afghan Taliban see in Karzai...yes, he is corrupt, stooge etc. but cementation of Pashtun hegemony, non-Pashtun are common enemy.. non Pashtuns are arming, not in favor of dialogue..they will sit and talk as two Pashtuns how do we reestablish Pashtun rule...

8. Civilian military chasm getting wider. TSPA is more concerned about India - civilians are about their life, economy, fed up with India bogey, it does not mobilise people in any number, even in Punjab province, etc., vital US stays engaged with civilian govt..no matter how pathetic or ineffective.
{Actually if US cuts and runs the civilians have a good chance to reassert themselves. US role is to legitimize military rule depsite all the platitudes. The kabila is fed-up with the guards. Will take another 30-40 years (2 generations by baki paki stds) to get rid of military mind set.}

Please post the link so we can download the pod cast.

Thanks, ramana

arun · Post by **arun** » 23 Feb 2010 22:04

Jarita wrote:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 607924.cms

Pakistan foreign minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi ......................

"It is for the Indians to decide if they would be comfortable to have China talking as a third party to bridge the gap. As far as Pakistan is concerned they (China) have a blank cheque," he said while speaking at the State-run China Institute of International Studies.

Our Defence Minister, A.K.Anthony:

“India’s basic policy is that we don’t want any interference from any country in our bilateral relations with Pakistan. We don’t believe in third party mediation,”

India rejects Pakistan’s call for third party mediation

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 23 Feb 2010 22:07

CRamS wrote:
"vera_k"

Looks like MMS needs to be supported.

We need to avert terror attacks and buy time

"There is the possibility of terrorist attacks on India and we need to prevent it by all means available to us," said Subrahmanyam. "I don't know why the government has proposed the resumption of talks with Pakistan, but all I can say is that I envisage that it could be a tactical move by India. We need to avert terror attacks and buy time."
I have lost a lot of respect for KS and also B Raman. They are clueless and blow mostly hot air masquerading as some kind of expertise.

All I can say CRS is they have forgotten more than we have learned. They say a lot in that sentence. Buying time is the need of the hour.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Feb 2010 02:10

And inspite of all the terrorist attacks from TSP there are no calls in India to take the Afzal Guru case to completion.

archan · Post by **archan** » 24 Feb 2010 02:16

That wouldn't be secular now, would it?
why promote such communal feelings?

negi · Post by **negi** » 24 Feb 2010 02:19

Come to think of it the clause relating to Presidential Pardon should be moved to the session court level itself , why waste time and public money and make those worthies in HC and then SC warm benches when their verdict is of little significance ? I wonder if TSP is the only banana republic in the world for ours will give them a run for their money.

Pulikeshi · Post by **Pulikeshi** » 24 Feb 2010 02:24

ramana wrote: All I can say CRS is they have forgotten more than we have learned. They say a lot in that sentence. Buying time is the need of the hour.

Borrowing time is more like it!

If they are buying time, then what does India hope to achieve in that time?
If the answer is economic growth, then what is the cost to pay (interest accrued) down the road?
Even simple logic seems amiss... there is too much normative intent flying around in the guise of policy.
GOI truely seems to be run by legally blonde! Maybe the "hidden nudge"

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 24 Feb 2010 02:42

archan wrote:That wouldn't be secular now, would it?
why promote such communal feelings?

How is it a secular/non-secular issue? Its a case of criminal attack on Indian Parliment with L-E-T operatives in case people forget. Anyways my point was that despite all these there are no calls to provide closure.

Rudradev · Post by **Rudradev** » 24 Feb 2010 03:39

shyamd wrote:^^

Pakistan extradites Jundallah terrorists to Iran
Pakistani security forces have captured several members of the Jundallah terrorist group and handed them over to Iranian authorities.

During a meeting with Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki on Sunday, visiting Pakistani National Assembly Speaker Fahmida Mirza said that a number of Jundallah militants have been arrested and extradited to Iran.

She went on to say that Pakistani security personnel are making serious efforts to apprehend the Jundallah members still at large.

Jundallah is a Pakistan-based terrorist group comprised of members of the Baluchi ethnic group.

It has been reported that Jundallah is closely affiliated with the al-Qaeda network.

Since 2003, Jundallah members have carried out over 50 terrorist operations in Iran.

The government of Iran has accused them of mass murder, armed robbery, kidnapping, carrying out bombings targeting civilians and government officials, and acts of sabotage.

Abdolmalek Rigi is the leader of the terrorist group.

In their latest attack, which occurred on October 18, more than 40 Iranians, among them 15 members of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC), lost their lives when Jundallah terrorists carried out an operation in the border region of Pishin, which is located in Iran's southeastern province of Sistan-Baluchestan.

Shia and Sunni tribal leaders were also among the victims of the attack.

During his meeting with the Pakistani parliament speaker, the Iranian foreign minister said Tehran and Islamabad play significant roles in regional developments.

The two countries should endeavor to expand their strategic cooperation since there is ample potential to this end, he added.
Rigi and Jundallah were the creation of CIA, ISI funded by KSA. Something is happening, have relations with KSA soured for some reason? The taliban guys arrested are KSA GID links for negotiations. Now KSA just lost an asset against Tehran.

Abdolmalek Rigi, who heads Jundallah (Soldiers of God), was taken into custody in eastern Iran while he was en route from the United Arab Emirates to Kyrgyzstan, Press TV reported.

Al Qods forces have been active in Af-Pak region, and wanted to take on Jundallah in Balochistan. Looks like Iran was able to bear enough covert pressure against islamabad imo. Wonder what will happen to Indo-Iranian intel co-operation now. If Jundallah is being ripped apart, then Iran now has no reason to cooperate with Yindu's on counter terror. Iranian-Pak border is re-opening.

TSP wants to be *the* sole arbiter of the Taliban's negotiating position with respect to the US and NATO, so that it can be in charge of dividing the spoils of Taliban victory as well.

To this end, TSP appears reasonably confident of its ability to deliver Quetta Shura and Haqqani Network Talibs to the negotiating table. It has signaled its willingness and capacity to do this by arresting Baradar and other QS members wanted by the West.

However, TSP still needs to bring the Hekmatyar group of Talibs to the table in order to consolidate its position as sole arbiter. Iran has long been engaging Hekmatyar for its own purposes, and possibly exercises more influence over his group than TSP does at the moment.

TSP's selling Rigi down the river to the Iranians may be half of a quid-pro-quo... the other half being that the Iranians refrain from trying to woo Hekmatyar away from TSP, and in fact facilitate TSP's being able to bring Hekmatyar to the US/NATO negotiating table as well.

archan · Post by **archan** » 24 Feb 2010 04:44

ramana wrote:
archan wrote:That wouldn't be secular now, would it?
why promote such communal feelings?
How is it a secular/non-secular issue?

That is something simpletons like you and me will never understand, hence my sarcasm.

ramana wrote: Its a case of criminal attack on Indian Parliment with L-E-T operatives in case people forget.

reminds me of the Batla house encounter in Delhi which created much furore (with none other than the Shahi Imam calling it a fake encounter) and people and some of our esteemed NGOs calling the police 'communal' in targeting Muslims. Later it turned out that the boys were indeed terrorists. I don't think that part of the news was reported with the same enthusiasm as the former.
So you see, killing terrorists who harm the nation can be a communal act in Bharat.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 24 Feb 2010 05:10

archan wrote: reminds me of the Batla house encounter in Delhi which created much furore (with none other than the Shahi Imam calling it a fake encounter) and people and some of our esteemed NGOs calling the police 'communal' in targeting Muslims. Later it turned out that the boys were indeed terrorists. I don't think that part of the news was reported with the same enthusiasm as the former.
So you see, killing terrorists who harm the nation can be a communal act in Bharat.

Bingo.

I worte the following post taking similar considerations:
http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewto ... 54#p817954
I did not expand later because of the fear that this thread will become something else.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 24 Feb 2010 05:11

In reply to Shiv's what US, India, Pakistan all want, here is what Russia wants out of this Afghanistan situation - it is very clear and simple.

http://www.juancole.com/2010/02/bombing ... arzai.html

Key excerpts:

Speaking of Russia's interests in Afghanistan he said that "they are specific. For example, we are not afraid of Taleban, right? They are not threatening us as some kind of a force that will attack Russia. I don't believe this." He went on: "But we are afraid of drugs. That is, the heroin aggression is real. It is on such a scale, it has increased approximately 40 times, well, the volumes of production of opiates on Afghan territory have increased 40 times since 2002, that is - you can practically count from the moment of foreign armies, foreign troops appearing there.

And therefore we believe that because our borders are practically porous in the southern direction, deliveries of hard drugs - and heroin is a hard drug, much harder than cocaine, than synthetic substances, than all sorts of grasses - this heroin is killing us. According to our estimates, approximately 30,000 people annually." Rogozin added that there were at least 2.5 million heroin addicts in Russia.

Rogozin then mentioned "dogs of war" as a second threat to Russia. "That is not Taleban, but fighters drawn in by war from other countries, who are now bogged down in the war with the Americans and their allies, but if the war ends, they will look for a use for themselves. There are about three to four thousand well-trained militants who are such crazy citizens. Naturally, if the war ends, they will most probably go to somewhere in Central Asia."

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Feb 2010 06:53

In the 1960s I would furtively read a column called "Confidentially Yours" run by an agony aunt called Uttara Gupta looking for titbits of titillation. One young woman had asked the following question "I am due to get married in a few weeks, but at a party I drank some coke from the same glass as my fiance. Will I get pregnant?". The lady it seems had not yet found out that it takes a lot more than high level vicarious lip service. What matters is the action at a lower level. The relevance of this story is that talk is cheap. Talk with Pakistan is especially cheap. The history of agreements signed or verbally understood between India and Pakistan is one of a string of broken pledges by Pakistan and a string of accusations of broken pledges against India by Pakistan.

India is under no obligation whatsoever to abide by anything signed with Pakistan. Frankly - I wouldn't care if someone goes ahead a signs away all of India to Pakistan. The agreement will mean absolutely nothing. Dogshit on my dinnerplate is infinitely more valuable than any agreement signed with Pakistan. Talking to Pakistan is just timepass. All that matters is visible action. To me it is a curious and painful reminder of how naive and honest Indians have made themselves to believe that talks and agreements with Pakistan actually mean something.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 24 Feb 2010 06:55

http://www.cfr.org/publication/21505/pa ... 263%2Fasia

Ramana, this link is for the Video. There is also a audio link on that page...

Our media is so silly they focused on his remark about talks...media too trying to score points..

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 24 Feb 2010 06:57

arun wrote:
Jarita wrote:http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/indi ... 607924.cms

Pakistan foreign minister Makhdoom Shah Mahmood Qureshi ......................

"As far as Pakistan is concerned they (China) have a blank cheque," he said
Our Defence Minister, A.K.Anthony:

India rejects Pakistan’s call for third party mediation

I feel that somehow Pakistan is under some great stress for inexplicable reasons. That's why the Foreign Minister has run to China and is making this statement. That is why India has also possibly rushed into talks.

This is not the first time Pakistan has given the 'blank cheque' to PRC. After 26/11, the same Foreign Minister did the same thing.

Foreign minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi has said that Pakistan had given a "blank cheque" to China authorising it to negotiate with India on its behalf to deal with the aftermath of the Mumbai terrorist attacks. Speaking at a reception at the Chinese embassy here on Wednesday night, Qureshi said he had told Chinesespecial envoy He Yafei to "go to Delhi and you have a blank cheque from us". The minister said he had told the envoy that Pakistan would endorse whatever China, all-weather friend of Pakistan, would tell India.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 24 Feb 2010 07:05

PRC knows, it is not just the cheque that is blank, the bank account is also blank...hence the lack of interest. Chincoms will think twice before fooling around too much with India now that Obama is growing some b..s

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 24 Feb 2010 07:06

6 dead, 3 hurt in Hangu over water dispute

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Feb 2010 07:13

SSridhar wrote: I feel that somehow Pakistan is under some great stress for inexplicable reasons.

Sridhar I would agree with this assessment, except that it is not totally inexplicable. Pakistani leaders have plenty of reasons to be under stress. Frankly none of them are leaders and I would prefer to call them the "latest ch**tiyas on top" (LCO or COT) of Pakistan.

The outcome of tomorrow's talks is predictable. India will gift Pakistan a 10,000 page volume containing the names of the last 10 million dossiers we have on Paki oiseaule-giri and Pakis will stonewall, deny and throw accusations at India.

Every dealing with Pakistan nowadays comes with a quid pro quote. Even the US that pays to bed Miss Gonorrhea Pakistani is asking to get it via more than the usual routes.

Malayappan · Post by **Malayappan** » 24 Feb 2010 07:15

Granting that SSS is no Pulitzer winning seeker of truth

, what I found interesting in that piece -
1. There is a local deal between ANA and Afghan Taliban (I use this term for clarity rather than for its appropriateness!) in Nuristan and Kunhar. This has freed Afghan Taliban to look eastward, across the border.
2. A lot of those arrested recently like Baradar, Kabeer, Salam and Mir Muhamed are actually ISI assets. Under normal circumstances ISI would not have wanted this. Arrests after all can go up to rendition! So something must have happened to force ISI to do this. Either US pressure (he is not saying this) or paki generated compulsion (he is saying this).
3. That compulsion is stemming from Kiyani's desire to become friends with the Americans. Reason - he wants US support for his extension.
4. Understandably paki taliban are livid and will react with lots of violence.

Now based on what has been noted on BR over so many threads -
1. Such alliances across Afghan / Pathan elements across the border are feasible.
2. paki army and its jernails will do anything, double cross anyone, to survive - whores after all!
3. US control over paki affairs is total. If they appear incapable of doing / delivering anything, it is because they choose to do so. Here I mean the political parties/ bureaucracy/ army and not the opinions or wellbeing of the average Abdul.
4. It is probable that Kayani had other pressures as well to double cross and wrested talks from India as a quid pro quo (e.g. basing on "Talk and put pressure and you may get territory or water - these guys are weak" spiel)
5. There is no fundamental change of heart with Kiyani, but he could have just decided to pay a higher price for what he gets. He might also be salivating on the possibilities once the Americans are gone. He may even have done a deal with some sections of paki / Afghan taliban for the price of Baradar et al.
6. Marja is not going as per the script. So Kandahar cannot happen for a while. US can understandably put more pressure on Kayani to get them out. At the same time seek opportunities to redefine victory there.
7. If we watch - a) the violence levels in the next few weeks / months, b) the nature of that violence, c) progress in the offensive(s) in Afghanistan, and d) the talks in Delhi, we might get a clue.

Must confess I am just a blind man of Hindoostan here, trying to move around in a room without a light when there is total power failure on a new moon night!

abhishek_sharma · Post by **abhishek_sharma** » 24 Feb 2010 07:15

SSridhar wrote: This is not the first time Pakistan has given the 'blank cheque' to PRC. After 26/11, the same Foreign Minister did the same thing.

No self-respecting country would give a blank cheque to anyone. The Chinese are their pimps.

arun · Post by **arun** » 24 Feb 2010 07:24

X Posted. TOI on the teaming up of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan’s political elite and Jihadi establishments on ranting about India’s “machinations” to “rob” the Islamic Republic of its share of water under the Indus Water Treaty.

TOI characterises this attempt as a “misinformation campaign” by Northern Punjab to cover-up their “Water Greed” from Balochistan, Sindh and Souther n Punjab as well. TOI feels that “the grievance narrative, however, suffers from serious infirmities”.

Has Aman Ki Asha hit a wall?:

Water Pakistan's diversionary tactic?

Guddu · Post by **Guddu** » 24 Feb 2010 07:28

Suppiah wrote:How bout Fanatic Barbarian Terrorist Talibanic State of Pakistan thread

or just TTSP (Terrorist taliban state of pakistan), this will maintain continuity of thought with TSP.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 24 Feb 2010 07:33

Guddu wrote:
Suppiah wrote:How bout Fanatic Barbarian Terrorist Talibanic State of Pakistan thread
or just TTSP (Terrorist taliban state of pakistan), this will maintain continuity of thought with TSP.

Yes Terrorist Taliban State of Pakistan sounds good. It has all the elements of Pakistaniyat. Admins?