Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

All threads that are locked or marked for deletion will be moved to this forum. The topics will be cleared from this archive on the 1st and 16th of each month.
Locked
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Punjab can no longer live in a state of denial

http://www.thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=229877

Ayaz Amir
If FATA represents the cutting edge of terrorism in the name of Islam, Punjab, unfortunately, is the hinterland of this phenomenon. Or, to borrow a phrase from the repertoire of military folly, Punjab is the strategic depth of bigotry and extremism masquerading in the colours of Islam.

...

The dragon's teeth of our sorrows were scattered by Zia. We are reaping the harvest.

Next in the line of military saviours, Pervez Musharraf -- may Pakistan for all its faults never have such a saviour again -- could have reversed the trend of the Zia years. But he had only a limited understanding of things. President Asif Zardari is not the first of our accidental leaders.

...

The ghost it is trying to lay to rest was conceived and tested in its own laboratories. This is the Pakistani way of doing things. First create a problem and then invoke the power of heaven to eliminate it.

As an aside I can't help adding that one of the key figures instrumental in getting US Congress to fund the Afghan resistance was Congressman Charlie Wilson of Texas. Wilson was fond of a hard drink and fond of good-looking women, tempting qualities that suggested a swashbuckling knight errant. (Most men have Wilson's inclinations. But it is not given to everyone to fulfil them.) The irony is piquant: someone like him emerging as one of the central protagonists in an enterprise hailed by its partisans as a great victory of Islam.

...

Meanwhile Zia's missionary zeal, backed by Saudi money, was beginning to transform the Punjabi landscape. Madressahs or religious schools began cropping up everywhere, including Islamabad. Backed by state patronage, mullah power, hitherto not much of a factor in Pakistani politics, began to show its muscles.

There was a ban on politics in any case. Apart from PTV, there was no other TV channel and even PTV was being conquered by the mullahs. Newspapers lay under a heavy blanket of censorship. The only thing to do under Zia was to either watch Indian movies at home or perform the various rituals of religious hypocrisy in public. The begums of the good and great, never behind their men folk in bowing to the prevailing wings, entered heavily into the business of arranging religious ceremonies (milads) under one pretext or another. Pakistan became a very pious and hypocritical society. Even army promotions began to be affected by one's reputation for religious observance or otherwise.

All the extremist outfits with whose names we are now familiar emerged at that time: the jaish this and that, the lashkar so and so. Most of them were Punjab-based and members from all these organisations acquired battle experience in Afghanistan. My friend Colonel Imam of Afghan 'jihad' fame -- and who, like most good people, is from Chakwal -- takes enormous pride in saying that the most fearless fighters of all were from Punjab. And he should know for he was in the thick of it.

...



This was the mood then pervading the top ranks of the army and the intelligence agencies. So it is scarcely to be wondered at that when after the fall of Kabul to the 'mujahideen', a Pakistani delegation was on its way to the Afghan capital, no sooner had the aircraft carrying it entered Afghan airspace when those on board, including some Americans, were startled by a loud cry: "Allah-o-Akbar". This from the then ISI chief, the heavily-bearded Lt-Gen Javed Nasir.

Our rendezvous with our present extremist-flowing troubles did not come about from out of the blue. We had ploughed the land and watered it for a long time.

...

But Afghanistan was bad enough by itself. It reignited the fires of holy war and, given the iron dictates of geography, it was inevitable that Pakistan sooner or later would have its hands burned by another conflict raging in Afghanistan.

...

But now that under a new sun and a new sky we are finally embarked upon a new course -- which marks a true break with the past -- we have to realise the extent and magnitude of the problem. The terrorism we are now fighting is not a provincial subject. It is not confined to any one province. It is a composite whole, organically tied together, growing not from any isolated virus but from a sickness of the mind and soul which had the whole of Pakistan, or at least its strategic quartermasters, in its grip.

If Pakistan is to become something, realising its dreams and potential, if it has to enter the real world and leave the world of dreams and fantasies behind, then there is no course open to it except to tackle this sickness, no matter what it takes and what sacrifices it entails, without ifs and buts, and without any misconceived appeals to the Taliban.



Email: [email protected]
Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Pulikeshi »

shiv wrote: We need to defeat US plans and designs before we can impose any will on our own region - no matter how benign and righteous our will might be.
Shiv,

How does India go about doing that?
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by shiv »

Pulikeshi wrote:
shiv wrote: We need to defeat US plans and designs before we can impose any will on our own region - no matter how benign and righteous our will might be.
Shiv,

How does India go about doing that?
Here is a rhetorical non answer for you;

If you accept prima facie that the problems India faces are somewhat like I have said, you need to ask yourself what you can suggest as solutions.

I can certainly state my opinions - but stating opinions is always subject to the need to defend those opinions if some of them end up sounding like the agenda of a one particular political party or another.

If I support a particular political agenda, in the Indian scheme of things I will have to disagree with even a reasonably good solution to a problem if that solution comes from the mouth of a political opponent.

Dealing with Pakistan is a political problem as much as anything else. Solutions to a "Pakistan problem" must first be arrived at without political lenses, and then one needs to check how the solution might fit in with existing political agendas.

In the short to medium term we have to be realistic about
1) What we need to do in India
2) What we can possibly do if the US opposes a particular Indian action
3) What are the areas in which the US cannot touch us even if it wants to do that

There may be things India needs to do but cannot do because of the US

There are other things that India can do despite the US

There are still other things that India can do using "boldness" but will pay a price if the US opposes it.

We have to have an accurate assessement of the price that will be extracted from India. India is a country, not a person. There are some Indians for whom no price is too much because they are financially and physically sheltered. There are others in the line of fire who will directly be affected. Politicians are a unique group who are targeted by both Indians and foreign powers and face a situation where what is good for them may not be good for India, what is good for the elite is not good for the poor and what is good for the poor is no god for the elite.

Dealing with Pakistan is an issue that covers so many fronts
1) Security
2) economy
3) religion
4) history and sentiment
5) Global geoplitics

That is why it is so difficult and contentious. I cannot suggest any single solution. I can only list out problems as I see them. Solutions will have to suggest themselves There is no single "solution" suitable for all time. No single political affiliation can have all the answers. No single political affiliation is likely to do everything right or wrong.
Malayappan
BRFite
Posts: 462
Joined: 18 Jul 2005 00:11

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Malayappan »

US should also do more: FM Qureshi in the Dawn
Enjoy Americans, while you are at it!
“We have already done too much … Pakistan has done its bit, we have delivered; now it’s your (the US) turn. Start delivering,”
“We have been talking a lot. The time has come to walk the talk,”
He based his optimism on the realisation in the US that 2010 was a crucial year for its efforts towards stabilising Afghanistan in which Pakistan had a significant role to play.
And the Americans should shiver in their trousers!
He said the foreign minister of Pakistani and the US secretary of state should meet annually and Pakistan’s foreign secretary and US regional envoy Richard Holbrooke should hold talks twice a year.
At this rate soon pakistan will refuse to deal with India! :rotfl: And if this goes on for a few years, MMS may end up being asked to meet their Under Secretary in the Ministry for International Aid :rotfl:
My question is: Will he (and his supporters) still say dialogue is the only way out?
Anujan
Forum Moderator
Posts: 7900
Joined: 27 May 2007 03:55

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Anujan »

X-posted

Headley's plea agreement document posted by the Chicago tribune. Please read it carefully

http://www.scribd.com/doc/28575626/Head ... -Agreement
More specifically, in or around late 2005, defendant met with three individuals herein identified as Lashkar Members A, B and D, and received instructions to travel to India to conduct surveillance of various locations in India, including places of public use, and state and government facilities. Prior to receiving these orders, defendant had attended training camps organized and operated by Lashkar e Tayyiba on five separate occasions in or around 2002 through 2005.
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by arun »

anupmisra wrote:The Aha! Moment:

Taliban talks halted by Pakistan arrests: UN envoy

..................... {Snipped} .....................

Aha!
The UK’s Guardian newspaper is carrying the transcript of the BBC’s Lyse Doucets interview of Kai Eide on which the posted Dawn article is based.

Kai Eide is inclined to the view that the Islamic Republic of Pakistan arrested Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar and other senior Afghan Taliban leaders with the view of sabotaging ongoing negotiations between the Taliban and the UN/Afghan Government

Excerpt:
Q: The first person to be arrested was Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the number two in Taliban command, as I mentioned. He was picked up in the Pakistani city of Karachi. It was said to be an operation done with American intelligence and Pakistani intelligence. It was described by both the Pakistanis and the Americans as a lucky accident. What do you say?

KE: The intent is unclear to me, because I don't know the circumstances. Then comes the question of the impact. Now his arrest was followed by the arrest of at least ten, twelve, fourteen other rather prominent Taliban members, and what I can say is that the effect of that in total, certainly, was negative on our possibility of continuing the political process that we saw as so necessary at that particular juncture.

Q: When you say negative, what happened?

KE: Most communications stopped.

Q: So the channels stopped?

KE: Yes.

Q: Do you think that was the intention of Pakistan?

KE: Let me put it this way. If your question had been 'do I believe that Pakistan plays the role it should in promoting a political dialogue that is so necessary for ending the conflict in Afghanistan?' then my question (answer?) would be no, the Pakistanis did not play the role that they should have played. They must have known about this. I don't believe that these people were arrested by coincidence. They must have known who they were, what kind of role they were playing, and you see the result today.

Q: There are many interpretations of reasons for these arrests. One is that Pakistan wanted to stop this channel of dialogue, not just with you, but with the representatives of the Afghan government, including President Karzai, some of his brothers, because Pakistan wants to be in control of this process. Pakistan denies this, but what do you say to that interpretation?

KE: I find that interpretation to be probably the right one.
From here:

Kai Eide lashes out
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Pratyush »

Dear Shiv,

My answers in blue :)


shiv wrote: Here is a rhetorical non answer for you;

If you accept prima facie that the problems India faces are somewhat like I have said, you need to ask yourself what you can suggest as solutions.

I can certainly state my opinions - but stating opinions is always subject to the need to defend those opinions if some of them end up sounding like the agenda of a one particular political party or another.

No need to defend opinions sir, as long as the long term end game is defined and agreed upon by all the participants . Then your opinion is just one of the many routes of achieving that end which to me is the solution to the Pakistani problem.

If I support a particular political agenda, in the Indian scheme of things I will have to disagree with even a reasonably good solution to a problem if that solution comes from the mouth of a political opponent.

True, but I think we have the ability to develop the maturity to accept a solution which is a good, but comes from a political opponent. This I think comes from the acceptable definition of the end game

Dealing with Pakistan is a political problem as much as anything else. Solutions to a "Pakistan problem" must first be arrived at without political lenses, and then one needs to check how the solution might fit in with existing political agendas.

In the short to medium term we have to be realistic about
1) What we need to do in India.

A very important question

2) What we can possibly do if the US opposes a particular Indian action.

The relevant question to ask is what will the US do if India undertakes an action which is purely in Indian interests. The historical precedent for me is the NAM, the Bangladesh war and nuclear tests.

3) What are the areas in which the US cannot touch us even if it wants to do that

I think that the ans to point no 2 also answer this question.

There may be things India needs to do but cannot do because of the US
What will happen when India just says balls like the Pakis

There are other things that India can do despite the US
True, but then why not? That is an interesting question. My take (Personal no hard facts ) is that India dose not want to get into a situation where it has to fend for 180 million Pakis once Pakistan is destroyed and has nothing to do with, what the US can or cannot do WRT India.

There are still other things that India can do using "boldness" but will pay a price if the US opposes it.

We have to have an accurate assessement of the price that will be extracted from India. India is a country, not a person. There are some Indians for whom no price is too much because they are financially and physically sheltered. There are others in the line of fire who will directly be affected. Politicians are a unique group who are targeted by both Indians and foreign powers and face a situation where what is good for them may not be good for India, what is good for the elite is not good for the poor and what is good for the poor is no god for the elite.

The price in today's world will be not be great as India is a "Liberal democracy", and The US will have trouble hurting India. To me the examples' are the Iranian & North Korean nuclear programmes. They are continuing on in spite of the strident opposition from the US. But the ROW is not going along with the US in terms of taking action against those to two. I think we attribute more power to the US. Then, it can exercise over India. If we in India chose to act

Dealing with Pakistan is an issue that covers so many fronts
1) Security
2) economy
3) religion
4) history and sentiment
5) Global geoplitics

That is why it is so difficult and contentious. I cannot suggest any single solution. I can only list out problems as I see them. Solutions will have to suggest themselves There is no single "solution" suitable for all time. No single political affiliation can have all the answers. No single political affiliation is likely to do everything right or wrong.

Cant say it better then you
Last edited by Pratyush on 19 Mar 2010 11:57, edited 1 time in total.
Malayappan
BRFite
Posts: 462
Joined: 18 Jul 2005 00:11

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Malayappan »

Anujan wrote:X-posted

Headley's plea agreement document posted by the Chicago tribune. Please read it carefully

http://www.scribd.com/doc/28575626/Head ... -Agreement
From that document - while mentioning the training provided to Headley by LeT (page 3), pakistan is not mentioned at all. But US is not being coy, while talking about a meeting between Pasha, Ilyas K and Headley (p 13) it clearly says Waziristan in pakistan.
vishal
BRFite
Posts: 336
Joined: 27 Feb 2002 12:31
Location: BOM/SIN

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by vishal »

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/asia/2010/03 ... tanis-edge
Threat to dam keeps Pakistanis on edge

Is this too much to hope for?

Extract:It is estimated that the water is rising by almost two feet per day, and may trigger a dam burst that would leave a trail of destruction downstream - all the way from lower Hunza to Gilgit, the provincial capital of the Northern Areas now known as Gilgit-Baltistan.
::
::
If the dam goes, it could wash away over a dozen major bridges that form the crucial chain in the country's only road to China, known by many as the Karakorum Highway, or the KKH.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by rohitvats »

anupmisra wrote:The Aha! Moment:

Taliban talks halted by Pakistan arrests: UN envoy........<SNIP>
Could he have been "encouraged" to go public with his comments? For this interview looks to me as cat's paw kind of event.

This is the first, iirc, official endorsement of the view (US talks with Taliban), something which has been speculated, correctly if I may add, on BRF for quite sometime now. And by openly naming ISI+TSPA as culprit, someone is trying to show displeasure. Could there be rift in the US Intel on the TSPA issue or may be between US intel and US State Department? And if Karzai was involved in some capacity in the talks, does it mean rapproachment between some section of US Policy making bodies and Karzai?

Request for some gyaan from senior maulanas.Thanx.
rohitvats
BR Mainsite Crew
Posts: 7830
Joined: 08 Sep 2005 18:24
Location: Jatland

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by rohitvats »

vishal wrote:http://blogs.aljazeera.net/asia/2010/03 ... tanis-edge
Threat to dam keeps Pakistanis on edge

Is this too much to hope for?

Extract:It is estimated that the water is rising by almost two feet per day, and may trigger a dam burst that would leave a trail of destruction downstream - all the way from lower Hunza to Gilgit, the provincial capital of the Northern Areas now known as Gilgit-Baltistan.
::
::
If the dam goes, it could wash away over a dozen major bridges that form the crucial chain in the country's only road to China, known by many as the Karakorum Highway, or the KKH.
In as much I'd like to see the KKH washed away along with TSPA assets, the major chunk of tragedy will be visited upon the people of Northern Areas. Something, I don't want to happen. These people have suffered enough under the yoke of TSPA+yahoos and last thing I want is for mother nature to wipe out their meagre assets. I don't expect any sort of realistic compensation/aid from the TSPA for these people, who's only fault is to belong to the other shade of Islam.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by SSridhar »

CRamS wrote:
Malayappan wrote:New approach in ties with US from the Dawn
This should actually read paki wishlist from the US. Recommend reading in full - a) to get an understanding of what pakistan wants from US, and b) to note how much of this US concedes.
The points made in the article in ATOL by MKB tie in quite well with this.
Man, that is one heck of a wish list (if I recall first articulated by Jihadi madam Lodhi and wife beater). I wonder if TSP actually believes that US will conceede those demands. And as they sit across the table and make these demands, I wonder of Hilary & Co will be looking at each other and giggle wondering if these Pakis take them to be some kind of idiots. But the very fact that US is sitting down and talking the scum is a rewarding of terrorists.
Allow me the opportunity to recall for the benefit of all a similar wishlist:
  • Withdraw troops from all Pakistani areas in Indian possession
  • Settle the Kashmir issue according to the wishes of Kashmiris
  • Reduce the size of India's armed forces to reduce the fear of aggression in Pakistan
  • Return all Prisoners of War immediately and unconditionally
  • Ensure the safety of Biharis and pro-Pakistan elements in Bangladesh
Those were the demands of the 'massively defeated Pakistani Army' given to India in c. 1972. One has to wonder who is a victor and who is the vanquished. Pakistanis have this arrogance that has remained unchanged.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by abhishek_sharma »

India rules out composite talks with Pakistan

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 010_pg7_12
India’s National Security Adviser Shiv Shankar Menon on Thursday ruled out holding of a composite dialogue with Pakistan. Menon was talking to the media after attending a book launching ceremony. The Indian NSA, responding to a question about the status of engagement with Pakistan after the recent foreign secretary-level talks said, “To our mind, going back to the composite dialogue process does not make sense. We are talking to explore what we can do but it needs two hands to clap.” Menon said the recently concluded foreign secretary-level talks could be described
as ‘exploratory’ in nature.
abhishek_sharma
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9664
Joined: 19 Nov 2009 03:27

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by abhishek_sharma »

Pak-India water accord against country’s interests: Raja Riaz

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.as ... 010_pg7_28
The 1960’s water accord between Pakistan and India is against the interests of the country and the federal government, if required, will take the necessary steps to have it reviewed, Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) leader Raja Riaz said on Thursday. Talking at a press briefing after an all-parties conference on the water issue at Punjab Assembly, the minister said that being a minister of the Punjab government, he was against the water accord between Pakistan and India “because it had greatly damaged the country”. He said that India was building dams and reservoirs on the rivers that come in Pakistan’s jurisdiction. To a question about what steps the government would take to review the “flawed” accord, he said the federal government, if it felt necessary, might take steps to address the issue. To a question regarding the establishment of small dams, he said that 10 dams in Potohar area had been constructed so far while work on 12 more dams was under progress. He said the dams would become operational within the next two years. When asked about developments regarding the water issue between Punjab and Sindh, he said the matter would be resolved amicably, adding that both provinces were trying to reach a consensus. He said they were trying to reach a consensus, which would ensure that Punjab would accommodate Sindh whenever it needed water and vice versa. staff report
arun
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10248
Joined: 28 Nov 2002 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by arun »

Malayappan wrote:
Anujan wrote:X-posted

Headley's plea agreement document posted by the Chicago tribune. Please read it carefully

http://www.scribd.com/doc/28575626/Head ... -Agreement
From that document - while mentioning the training provided to Headley by LeT (page 3), pakistan is not mentioned at all. But US is not being coy, while talking about a meeting between Pasha, Ilyas K and Headley (p 13) it clearly says Waziristan in pakistan.
X Posted. The Plea agreement is interesting for the contrast between the scope of the information provided in the Mumbai 26/11 terrorist attack case and the planned but unexecuted terrorist attack on Jyllands Posten in Denmark.

In the Mumbai terrorist attack members of the UN designated terrorist organization Lashkar-e-Tayyiba are only identified by alphabets whereas in the planned but unexecuted terrorist attack on Jyllands Posten they have names like Ilyas Kashmiri.

Similarly the location of Headleys training missions, particularly the country, for the Mumbai 26/11 terrorist attack is not disclosed but his meetings in relation to the Jyllands Posten attack is disclosed as Waziristan.

The unevenness of disclosure of information particularly given that Mumbai was a slaughter while the Jyllands Posten incident was not, is disturbing.

The taint of a US endeavour to limit embarrassment for the Islamic Republic of Pakistan caused by their terrorist activities in India, is present.
RayC
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4333
Joined: 16 Jan 2004 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by RayC »

The Danes could interrogate him, but not the Indians.

And the man even when exposed, the US failed to info before the Mumbai blast!

Birds of a feather flock together!
Malayappan
BRFite
Posts: 462
Joined: 18 Jul 2005 00:11

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Malayappan »

One more report of that Qureshi interview!
We have done a lot, it’s time for US to deliver: Qureshi This one is from the News!
This 2010 paki version of Baghdad bob is going to US and is expecting from his ally -
“Better sense will prevail”.
and the newspaper thinks this is a
a “make” or “break” situation for the entire region in the year 2010.
US is in good company!
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by SSridhar »

If past history is anything to go by, US will concede to most Pakistani demands, including a GSP plus status, more arms and more importantly a nuclear deal.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34931
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by chetak »

RayC wrote:The Danes could interrogate him, but not the Indians.

And the man even when exposed, the US failed to info before the Mumbai blast!

Birds of a feather flock together!

RayC ji,

More like Birds of a colored feather flocking together! :(
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by SSridhar »

Slowly, Pakistan is accepting facts known to others
The Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU) vowed on Thursday they would “free Pakistan from the American clutches” and continue jihad for the enforcement of sharia law in the country. The message was released through pamphlets distributed in North Waziristan’s Miranshah town, marking six years of the first-ever coordinated attack by security forces on their hideout near Wana in South Waziristan on March 16, 2004. The IMU is led by Uzbek terrorist Tahir Yuldashev who survived a Frontier Corps attack in Kaloosha region of South Waziristan. The terrorists thwarted the attack and inflicted huge losses to the FC.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by shiv »

SSridhar wrote:If past history is anything to go by, US will concede to most Pakistani demands, including a GSP plus status, more arms and more importantly a nuclear deal.
Quite possible

Long ago (1960s) Pakistan made a conscious and deliberate decision to bandwagon with the US. There was a clear understanding that Pakistan would work in the interests of the US and that the US should work in the interests of the Pakistani leadership. Even today the language used by the Pakis with the US - such as the demands made by Qureshi - is the language of a thief who is unsatisfied with the way loot has been shared - like in the movies.

Even Dubya that great "friend of India" had to respect this code of honor between thieves. I personally have been totally blind to this aspect of the Pakistan question - a pox on me for that. It explains a lot of the things that India has seen since the 60s. In those days India was such an international zero that the US could ship an entire new Air Force to Pakistan and glibly pretend with a nation of 500 million Indiots that this would not matter to India.

I am not worried about a nuclear agreement with Pakistan. Let them get it. After all if Pakis nuclear prowess improves someone else, outside of India is bound to find things reaching criticality. India is already on the target and has been for decades, with US compliance. Since the 1960s - India has in effect been dealing with at least two countries when dealing with Pakistan, simply because that is how the Pakistani leadership wanted it. It also explains the Paki begging for US mediation every time but the US shying away as India has strongly fought for the keeping of the Kashmir issue as a "bilateral" one.

Do not expect neutrality from the US here.
Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9374
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Hari Seldon »

From a tweet:
Pakistan returns the free helicopters it got from the US because they were faulty http://is.gd/aOyMx
:lol:
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Philip »

Shiv ,you're right.WE cannot expect neutrality from the US,why,it has just said so that its "ties with Pak are beyond a strategic relationship"! That was clearly meant to reassure Pakis that the US placed US-Pak ties above US-Indo ties.

In such a scenario,the GOI must wake up and realise that we face a massive enemy axis ,Sino-NoKo-Pak-Saudi-US against us.The only silver lining is that the Ukraine,which had a western stooge in charge-Yuschenko,is now in the hands of a pro-Moscow Yanukovich who would be far more willing to listen to India's concerns about Ukraine selling lethal weapon systems to Pak in the future.The GOI/MEA should immediately send a top team of officials to Ukraine to engage the new administration and cement Indo-Ukraine relations.Ukraine during the Soviet days had a number of major arms manufacturing industries which were vital to many weapon systems still in use in India.Apart from military relations,politically,Ukraine would be a nation willing to support India's UNSC seat.If India is to defeat the machinations of the new "Axis of evil",we should engage with as many friends as possible to defeat the axis' catspaw,Pak and its insidious war of teror against India.
Aditya_V
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14779
Joined: 05 Apr 2006 16:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Aditya_V »

Boss! the only thing that can break this is the PAkis doing somthing really stupid, for that to happen we must keep instilling the fear in RAPE class that the US is somehow Pro- India and selling them away, in the meantime we have to do everthing that is required to make ourselves and economic force.
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11240
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Gagan »

Northern Areas landslide on the River Hunza. The place is north and upstream of Gilgit. If that dam breaks all together, Gilgit will be underwater.
Image

Image

Image
rkirankr
BRFite
Posts: 863
Joined: 17 Apr 2009 11:05

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by rkirankr »

Dus percenti to donate body parts

Only if keeya nahi and co allow him to die in one piece that is
rsingh
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4451
Joined: 19 Jan 2005 01:05
Location: Pindi
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by rsingh »

hreat to dam keeps Pakistanis on edge

Is this too much to hope for?

Extract:It is estimated that the water is rising by almost two feet per day, and may trigger a dam burst that would leave a trail of destruction downstream - all the way from lower Hunza to Gilgit, the provincial capital of the Northern Areas now known as Gilgit-Baltistan.
::
::
If the dam goes, it could wash away over a dozen major bridges that form the crucial chain in the country's only road to China, known by many as the Karakorum Highway, or the KKH.

I can almost hear Jahil Hamid preaching..............
Just as Bakistan was on her knees in hocky, farmers in Punjab were facing draught, crops were burning in the fields, our leaders were begging talks with Hindus,and Pakistani fauz were forced by Amrika to arrest Talibans.....................mirakle habbens...............land slide and Pani-hi-Pani. Allah ne mehrban hoker hame ek kudrati dam bna ker diya ( Allah has given a natural dam as gift). Now it is for govt to supply water from dam to the fields of Punjab befor hindus steal it. :mrgreen:
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by SSridhar »

We need structural reforms, says a LUMS Professor in TFT
Growth rates have been generally high during military regimes. In your opinion, is it due to better economic strategies during military regimes or because of external factors?

There is a major misconception that military rule has resulted in economic stability as compared to democratic governments. For example, the “economic miracle” of General Ayub Khan lasted only from 1961 to 1965 after which the economic situation sharply deteriorated. General Yahya Khan’s tenure resulted in the complete bankruptcy of Pakistan while General Musharraf’s regime witnessed economic growth only from 2003 to 2007. At the same time, one must understand the context of this economic “growth” witnessed during these military regimes. All of them involved a major liquidity injection from western powers that had a strategic interest in aiding these governments. General Ayub Khan received a generous amount of aid from the US as he was perceived as a crucial Cold War ally. General Zia-ul-Haq was even luckier as the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, which transformed Pakistan’s position as a strategic asset for the West in its fight against communism. The same is true for General Musharraf’s regime which received tons of foreign aid after it declared its support to the US-led “war on terror”.

Therefore we see that this economic growth was a result of external factors rather than any foresighted policies on the part of the military regimes. What we can say, however, is that the military regimes completely failed to implement any structural reforms in the system and almost always left the corridors of power with a high budget deficit and a low economic growth, as was witnessed recently with General Musharraf who left his office with the economy in a complete mess. In fact, I blame the military governments more than the democratic regimes as representative governments are unable to undertake unpopular decisions due to political constraints whereas military regimes do not have to take into account public perception in formulating their policies. The failure to institute structural reforms despite complete control over the state apparatus demonstrates how military governments did not have the will to implement change.

What is your economic forecast for the next fiscal year?


I do not see any economic turnaround in the near future. Inflation will not go down as considerable liquidity has been injected into the economy as a result of the provincial government’s decision to borrow from the banks in order to pay subsidies on wheat. The ever increasing budget deficit will keep on increasing as there seems to be no consensus on how to increase our tax revenue. As stated earlier, the constant clash between major political parties will also make it highly unlikely for the current government to push through unpopular but necessary fiscal measures.

Other avenues for revenue generation also seem limited. It is difficult to attract foreign investment considering the security situation in the country. Lack of foreign investment will remain a hindrance for economic growth which means that unemployment will only increase. I feel that the government would desperately search for a bailout package from governments in the West and may eventually end up borrowing another loan from the IMF.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by CRamS »

SSridhar wrote:If past history is anything to go by, US will concede to most Pakistani demands, including a GSP plus status, more arms and more importantly a nuclear deal.
Whar is GSP plus status.

I am not sure US will grant everything TSP wants, but it sure will do some kind of an equal equal. Nuke deal, man, am not so sure. Even after the nuke deal with India has been consummated, Obama & Co are sitting on it (more likely because they are pre-occuoied with domestic agenda), I doubt US has the will, desire, and energy required to expend the bandwidth needed to push TSP's case through. But that said, something will be on the anvil for TSP to claim equal equal. Thats their immediate goal. So bottom line is this. Any TSP demand that does not go beyond equal equal will be conceeded more or less. Because equal equal is a supreme US national interest as well.
CRamS
BRF Oldie
Posts: 6865
Joined: 07 Oct 2006 20:54

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by CRamS »

RayC wrote:The Danes could interrogate him, but not the Indians.

And the man even when exposed, the US failed to info before the Mumbai blast!

Birds of a feather flock together!
Is this really true? I have a question for the gurus: Is India, especially the MMS govt willing to really interrogate Headley? Furthermore, after Headley has cut a deal, where is the incentive for him to reveal anything of substance to India? After all, once the threat of Lakshman Jhoola is off the table, why would he "talk"? Matter of fact, the inbred TSP RAPE in him, he might a cock a snook at India. Perhaphs naming some Hindu outfit, or colone ProHit or some caricature crap like that leaving India licking its wounds as is always the case when dealing with TSP. Plus, even assuming he "talks", and lets say he names a Paki general or local Indians of a particular community. Do you think our "extra mile walking" and "loosing sleep" PM will actually do something with the revelations?
Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1171
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Samay »

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/asia/2010/03 ... tanis-edge
Threat to dam keeps Pakistanis on edge
Its a bigger threat to the rare wildlife in gilgit, than to the piggy army
jrjrao
BRFite
Posts: 883
Joined: 01 Jul 2001 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by jrjrao »

AP report in the WaPo also repeats that Qureshi and the Pakis are in DC mainly to recruit Unkil's help in their eternal war against India:

Pakistan to ask for more understanding at US talks
Link
Claiming that it has bowed far enough to U.S. interests, Pakistan will use next week's high-level talks with the Obama administration to seek more recognition for its part in the fight against terrorism and get Washington to acknowledge its concerns about rival India.

Regional experts say Pakistan will be looking to Washington to recognize the threat it perceives from its eastern neighbor India, against whom it has fought and lost three wars.

Islamabad has accused New Delhi of planting spies in Afghanistan to undermine Pakistani interests. Pakistan also has accused India of using Afghan territory to fire up an insurgency in Pakistan's Baluchistan province and using money and manpower to gain influence over the Kabul government.
All this reminds me of that perceptive thing that Uneven Cohen wrote in his book on TSP, where he explained that in every negotiation over the decades with Unkil, Pakis have framed the talks such that the obligations on US (to deliver to the Pakis) were always real, tangible and substantial, and the reciprocal obligations on the Pakis were always wisps of thin air.

This WaPo article also confirms this. As per the Pakis, Unkil's obligations to the Pakis are:
-- give us money
-- give us fancy arms
-- give us a nuke deal
-- give us more money
-- give us tender love in our musharraf
-- kick India out of Afghanistan
-- get India to give us water
-- get India to give us Kashmir
--
--

And the Pakis, in return, will reciprocate by:
-- feeling more nice and khush and happy with Unkil
-- feeling a little less paranoid about Unkil
-- will reduce anti-American sentiment in the country from 98% to 94%
-- will muzzle Shrilleen a bit at her nutty paper
-- and nothing more.

Note, of course, that the Paki obligations are never that they will build more schools, design a better education curriculum, build a more tolerant society, or (Allah forbid) curtail the export of sundry lashkar and jaish mass murderers.

In the end, all this is good, me thinks. It was only a couple months ago, when Shrileen's daaku reporters were outing American citizens in the nutty paper by publishing photos of their residences, and when US embassy personnel were harassed no end by being stopped at every bridge in Lahore and Pindi, and when Ahmed Qureshi and Zaid Zaman and Hamid Gul and Marvi Memon and others were throwing contempt and abuse at the US daily.

When the US capitulates now (as it seemingly is fixin' to do next week), the Pakis will learn all the right lessons. They will tell themselves that they now have found a new way of dealing with Unkil - that being the ungli up the musharraf of Unkil.

Then, like two contortionist lovers in embrace who have suddenly found new ways of pleasuring one another by reaching around for each other's musharrafs, this reach will turn into overreach, and both Unkil and Pakis will pay a price. A price that will be just and deserving.
kenop
BRFite
Posts: 1335
Joined: 01 Jun 2009 07:28

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by kenop »

The predictioneer: Using games to see the future
This about
Bruce Bueno de Mesquita is a professor of politics at New York University and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University in California. In his new book, The Predictioneer (The Predictioneer's Game in the US), he describes a computer model based on game theory which he - and others - claim can predict the future with remarkable accuracy.
Towards the end we find this
Bueno de Mesquita recently used it to make a prediction on the political situation in Pakistan. Working with a group of students, he asked how willing the Pakistani government would be to pursue Al-Qaida and Taliban militants in its territory, and how the US government could exert influence on their decision.
Targeting terror

In January 2008 the students fed in data on all the players, including the US, Pakistan's then president Pervez Musharraf and other leading Pakistani politicans. Their assumption was that the US would offer foreign aid to persuade Pakistan's leaders to target the terrorists, and Pakistan would try to extract the maximum amount of aid possible from the US.

The model predicted that to get maximum cooperation from Pakistan, the US would need to donate at least $1.5 billion in 2009, double the projected 2008 figure. In return for this Pakistan would pursue the terrorists on a scale of 80 out of 100, but no more. In other words, the leadership would make considerable effort to reduce the terrorist threat but not to completely eliminate it. "The Pakistani government are no fools," explains Bueno de Mesquita. "They know that the money will dry up if Al-Qaida and the Taliban are destroyed. So they will rein the threat in and reduce it, but not utterly destroy it."

The outcome? According to Bueno de Mesquita, the US government authorised $1.5 billion in foreign aid to Pakistan in 2009, and the Pakistani leadership sustained pursuit of the militants at that level. "We have done very well," says Bueno de Mesquita.
The story starts with Bueno de Mesquita predicting corretly the outcome of the 1979 Janata PArty experiment. I wonder if there is some == creeping into scientific articles (of course that is the not the reason why I am posting this here)
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by shravan »

Two killed in Mastung shooting
Friday, March 19,2010

QUETTA: Two persons were killed and two others injured when militants opened fire on a vehicle of the Cadet College in Mastung on Friday.

The attackers who were on motorcycles escaped from the spot after the incident.

Eleven people have been killed in different incidents of target killing in the past three days in Balochistan.
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10205
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by sum »

Pak's Punjab police ad published with Indian logo
An advertisement issued in Pakistani newspapers by the police force in Punjab [ Images ] province on Friday featured the logo of its counterpart in India's [ Images ] Punjab state, triggering an outcry among the people.

The development was reminiscent of the uproar in India in January when a government advertisement featured former Pakistan Air Force chief Tanvir Mahmood Ahmed alongside Prime Minister Manmohan Singh [ Images ].

The Friday's advertisement, which appealed to people to remain vigilant and cooperate with the police to prevent terrorist attacks and other crimes, was carried on the front page of several English and Urdu newspapers.

The logo of the police force of India's Punjab state was placed next to the words 'Punjab Police' at the bottom of the advertisement.

Pakistan's Punjab Police chief Tariq Saleem Dogar blamed the printing company involved in the advertisement for the lapse, saying his department had provided it with the correct logo.
What is with this mixing up of logos and personalities in both nations?

Is this a "off beat" Aman ki Asha attempt? :lol:
Pulikeshi
BRFite
Posts: 1513
Joined: 31 Oct 2002 12:31
Location: Badami

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Pulikeshi »

jrjrao wrote: Then, like two contortionist lovers in embrace who have suddenly found new ways of pleasuring one another by reaching around for each other's musharrafs, this reach will turn into overreach, and both Unkil and Pakis will pay a price. A price that will be just and deserving.
Me thinks onlee India is paying the price.
The west of India is being given on a platter by US to TSP. Entire Asia on another platter to China.
So, when Sri Obama comes a calling to India this summer, he perhaps plans to throw a few crumbs
and advice India to be a source of stability and peace in Asia.
Indian media does Jai ho! Barfi kao, chai pio, nautanki deko! :mrgreen:
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11240
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Gagan »

jrjrao wrote:Then, like two contortionist lovers in embrace who have suddenly found new ways of pleasuring one another by reaching around for each other's musharrafs, this reach will turn into overreach, and both Unkil and Pakis will pay a price. A price that will be just and deserving.
Massa is not a fool to the extent we project him to be.
Massa has so many unglis (Dollahs) that they can afford to play the gymnastics until it humours them. Quite so often and unseen by most massa's ungli inside becomes a fist.
Massa doesn't consider the following to be a big deal:
1. A fistful of dollahs (There is plenty plenty more where that came from)
2. A few thousand lives lost - in fact massa is quite willing to sacrifice more pakistani (or Afghan or Indian) lives for the -uh- greater good of the citizens of the western hemisphere. It is an onerous burden and the sacrifice is great, but one that massa is willing to make.
3. Massa's job is already done - there are no terror attacks on the homeworld, the porks are jumping up and down for money, goodies and the like, fawning for attention.
4. Those dirty and smelly SDRE yindoos are blowing hot and cold, but again trade and investment continues smoothly with them so that they don't blow the top off. Besides the yindoos are at a particularly delicate stage of economic development where their economic model has gathered momentum on the runway and is about to take off - they really really need massa.

Where's the problem sir-ji?
Samay
BRFite
Posts: 1171
Joined: 30 Mar 2009 02:35
Location: India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Samay »

What is with this mixing up of logos and personalities in both nations?

Is this a "off beat" Aman ki Asha attempt? :lol:
paki equal-equal in a professional way
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Prem »

Americans have direct access to Mullah Baradar: officials

WASHINGTON: US investigators have recently been given more regular direct access to Pakistani-led interrogations of the Afghan Taliban’s No 2 leader, US officials said on Wednesday, a month after his arrest was announced. Pakistani limitations on US access to Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar have been a source of tension since he was captured in Karachi. It was unclear whether the “direct US access” was yielding useful intelligence. “There is direct access to him,” a US official said on condition of anonymity. He described the level of direct access of late as “definitely more than minimal”. A military official said on Wednesday that a “good” amount of information was flowing to commanders and “the hope is this is a precursor of things to come”. But the commander of US and NATO forces in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, held out Baradar’s arrest as a potential game-changer, telling reporters separately that it “seems to have shaken the confidence of some of the Afghan Taliban leadership”. “We see indications that they are trying to figure out the way ahead,” McChrystal told reporters, referring to the tentative response of Taliban leaders to Baradar’s arrest. reuters
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk\default.asp?page=2010\03\19\story_19-3-2010_pg1_10
Gagan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 11240
Joined: 16 Apr 2008 22:25

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP), Feb. 26, 2010

Post by Gagan »

Prem bhai
convert the "\" to "/" in the daily times url to make it appear correctly.
Locked