Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 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
Prem
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21234
Joined: 01 Jul 1999 11:31
Location: Weighing and Waiting 8T Yconomy

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Prem »

SSridhar wrote:
Acharya wrote:Funny that they want to send terrorist to hit the cities and they want to talk about peace process. All at the same time.
That's what is known as 'Talking with a gun to the head'. While dealing with the 3½, Pakistan puts the gun to its own head and puts it at our head when dealing with us.
Is this not the sign of mental retardenss that they cant think a single thing for which they have to take responsibility and harp on what kuffar indian and rest of the hard working, honest living world can do for them. The similar pattern can be observed in Poaks demanding all sorts of goodies from Clinton like the baby Gooses expecting food from Mama Goose 's mouth.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by RamaY »

Ambar wrote:When will our politicians ever realize that washing dirty linen in public is akin to scoring self goals!
If you think about it carefully you will know that :idea: , it is nothing but a well-orchestrated chanikyan strategy :evil: played by two hands of the same (empty) skull. Our dear leader (who had the popular mandate) uses one to pick his nose and another to scratch his a$$.
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by arnab »

RamaY wrote: If you think about it carefully you will know that :idea: , it is nothing but a well-orchestrated chanikyan strategy :evil: played by two hands of the same (empty) skull. Our dear leader (who had the popular mandate) uses one to pick his nose and another to scratch his a$$.
Though in one sense you have to agree that this is a much better outcome than impotently screaming - 'You killed 170 of our citizens you ba$turds' (and mobilising our army at the border and in the process kill a further 1000 soldiers and learning an expensive lesson about changing doctrines).

See - the whole point is this; you can choose not to talk - thereby leaving all the media opportunites to TSP who appear all 'reasonable' despite having an 'intransigient' India in her neighbourhood. Or you can talk and achieve nothing but manage to show to India at large the true face of RAPEs, that they in thoughts and deeds towards India are exactly the same as the TSP army. The end result is the same and there is no mobilisation.

My opinion - the parakram mobilisation provided a short-term 'sugar hit' for jingoes to see mushy browning his pants on TV - but unless you have the gumption to follow through with your threats, it achieves nothing. Standard game theory.
shravan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2212
Joined: 03 Apr 2009 00:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by shravan »

Nine more targeted in Karachi killings

KARACHI: Nine more shot dead during last 12 hours as target killing continues in Karachi. The death toll reaches to 18 during last 36 hours, SAMAA reported Thursday.
RamaY
BRF Oldie
Posts: 17249
Joined: 10 Aug 2006 21:11
Location: http://bharata-bhuti.blogspot.com/

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by RamaY »

arnab wrote:Though in one sense you have to agree that this is a much better outcome than impotently screaming - 'You killed 170 of our citizens you ba$turds' (and mobilising our army at the border and in the process kill a further 1000 soldiers and learning an expensive lesson about changing doctrines).
In another sense I can see the whole US-Pak perfidy as a chanikian strategy to make India the next super power.

The question is not about talking/not-talking/mobilizing/killing-another-1000-soldiers/nuke-war.

The question is about a cabinet minister publicly criticizing a top bureaucrat for something the Govt (that the minister represents) is supposed to. There is nothing new in what the bureaucrat said. GOI has been saying it all along. The only development is that GOI got confirmation from DH on what it has been saying for more than a year.

Your/my opinion doesn't count. What counts is how the other side perceives and responses to GOI's actions.

How can someone infer that all this is a well-orchestrated game, especially when the dis-functioning of GOI is all visible across India? OT here but a few examples are PC-Diggi, MK-MMS, PM-MMS, KR-AC, SP-MMS, so on interactions...
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4276
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Rudradev »

Nandu wrote:
Op. Parakram was launched in response to the attack by Pakis on our Parliament. Can you list a few concrete things that it actually accomplished for India? Did the Pakis actually hand over, or at least arrest anyone responsible? As far as I can remember, all it resulted in is the sacking of a general who was "too forward", and an inglorious climbdown by India, culminating in the DDM slurping omelettes with Gola at Agra.
.
What complete bilge. At least get your facts straight... or do facts even matter to a barefaced Kangress apologist?

You say Operation Parakram ended with Gola slurping omelettes at Agra. How curious. The Agra Summit took place on July 15-16, 2001. Op Parakram was only launched after the Parliament attack on December 13, 2001. So how exactly did Parakram "culminate" in Agra?

But then I realise the UPA has a way of taking liberties with history... as for example, when they tried to shift the blame for the Warren Anderson release on to Narasimha Rao, when in fact it took place with the blessings and full knowledge of then PM Rajiv Gandhi.

NDA mounted the exercise in brinkmanship known as Parakram, and while there are people who say the deaths of 500 soldiers in Parakram were not worth the results, I can't see how they arrive at that conclusion.

Consider the following table: http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries ... alties.htm

There is a dramatic increase in J&K terrorism-related fatalities from 1991 to 2001; then a clear decline from 2002 to the present.

In other words, average deaths in J&K terrorism for the 8 years 1994-2001 were 2,945 per year and rising; average deaths for the 8 years 2002-2009 were 1,490 per year and falling. I can't see any other reason for this change in the game, other than Parakram (which convinced Unkil that we would go to war and destroy Unkil's Afghanistan plans rather than be a quiescent "safety valve" to absorb Pakistani terrorism). Even things like border fencing and so on were made possible because of the cease-fire following the televised GUBOing of Musharraf, whose pants were browned by Parakram.

So when people say the deaths of 500 soldiers in Parakram was somehow not worth that result, I have only to ask them what (lower cost) alternative can they propose which would have been at least equally effective?

And for that matter, what has the UPA administration done that changes the game to even a fraction of the extent that Parakram did? They haven't even come close. All they have done is Sharm-el-Shaikh and dossier-rattling.

When people say that Parakram was a failure because India did not actually go to war, I have to ask them: how many more (than 500) soldiers would have died if Parakram had actually led to war, how many civilians would have died also, and most importantly: what would have been the increased benefits, as opposed to the increased costs? What game plan was there militarily had we crossed the LOC/IB? Grab Lahore? Seize POK? Would we have been able to consolidate those gains? What cost would those gains have come at, considering Unkil was helping the TSPA with satellite intel already, and would surely have helped them with more than that if it came to war?

Nobody seems to know the answer but we're quite happy to criticize the NDA and Parakram regardless.

We had few options in 2002 and while many aspects of Parakram were not pleasing to us, it undeniably achieved the effect of reducing Paki infiltration and terrorism in J&K.

By contrast, the UPA (despite our stronger economy today than 2002) has done nothing but pander, placate and jeopardize Indian interests while Indian citizens die in terrorist attacks.

So yes, it is a matter of "degrees" between NDA and UPA but so is everything else. Nobody has perfect solutions, and in an imperfect world degrees are all we have to distinguish the acceptable from the unacceptable.
Last edited by SSridhar on 22 Jul 2010 18:34, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Rudradev, mind your language. No name calls here.
chetak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34931
Joined: 16 May 2008 12:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by chetak »

People are walking the "extra mile" but in opposite directions.

When do we stake our claim on POK or is MMS going to keep quiet on that matter too because we need to appear nice to the pakis??



http://www.indianexpress.com/news/india ... k/649888/0


India not responding positively on restarting talks: Pak
Wed Jul 21 2010, 19:54 hrs Islamabad:

Pakistan on Wednesday accused India of not responding positively to its efforts to restart the dialogue process and contended that it would go the "extra mile" if New Delhi takes steps in this regard.
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by svinayak »

arnab wrote:
My opinion - the parakram mobilisation provided a short-term 'sugar hit' for jingoes to see mushy browning his pants on TV - but unless you have the gumption to follow through with your threats, it achieves nothing. Standard game theory.
IT Vity US business and economy comes first - std game theory from the IT companies
svinayak
BRF Oldie
Posts: 14222
Joined: 09 Feb 1999 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by svinayak »

chetak wrote: India not responding positively on restarting talks: Pak
Pakistan on Wednesday accused India of not responding positively to its efforts to restart the dialogue process and contended that it would go the "extra mile" if New Delhi takes steps in this regard.

Pak going the extra mile by sending another 10 terrorist to hit Mumbai which will start the composite dialog process again.
Extra mile == 10 Paki terrorists.
Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9374
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Hari Seldon »

OK, just for laughs...

5 Reasons Tea Partiers Should Move to Pakistan
U.S. Tea Parties and Pakistanis as "two seemingly different but actually remarkably similar groups." Here's why:

* Tax Policy Rothkopf cites a recent "New York Times article on the deftness and ease with which the rich in Pakistan avoid paying taxes," which reminds him of the Tea Party's distaste for taxes and preference for tax cuts.

* Gun Control "Sharron Angle will be in hog heaven in Pakistan. ... There are probably more AK-47s in the country than there are books (see how perfect this fit is?)."

* Religion "Pakistan offers many provinces where the level of religious tolerance is seemingly the same as that of the tea-baggers-roughly zero."

* Immigration Tea Partiers "want to shut down our borders and criminalize looking Mexican." Meanwhile "The Pakistanis have long had their own border problems" with India and Afghanistan. The India-Pakistan border region of Kashmir makes the U.S.-Mexico border look like child's play.

* Foreign Policy "There are probably mountaintops in Pakistan from which you can see the former Soviet Union."
Yup, this is what passes for humor aajkal. Jai ho.
Hari Seldon
BRF Oldie
Posts: 9374
Joined: 27 Jul 2009 12:47
Location: University of Trantor

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Hari Seldon »

"Mr Pillai could have waited till after I had returned to India"
-Sri SM Krishna, Hon. MEA

Or....
Mr Krishna could have waited until after Pakistan had taken action against 26/11 http://is.gd/dBmQx | Wrong timing indeed!
Acorn tweet.
Rudradev
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4276
Joined: 06 Apr 2003 12:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Rudradev »

RamaY wrote: How can someone infer that all this is a well-orchestrated game, especially when the dis-functioning of GOI is all visible across India? OT here but a few examples are PC-Diggi, MK-MMS, PM-MMS, KR-AC, SP-MMS, so on interactions...
Not OT at all, RamaY garu, because apparently this used-car salesmanship of concocting grand delusions about some chanakyan strategy being pursued by our GOI is totally kosher on this thread.

Apparently it is supposed to be some kind of great game wherein Manmohan Singh plays "good cop" and P Chidambaram plays "bad cop". However, the only things visible are Keystone Cops, under the tutelage of an incompetent prime minister.

There is no exonerating Manmohan Singh for his catastrophic sellout at Sharm-el-Shaikh (further compounded at Thimpu, whose "Spirit" SM Krishna upholds even while he derides the Home Secretary of India as "unwise" for speaking the truth.) http://ibnlive.in.com/news/home-secreta ... ml?from=tn

What IS evident, however, is that the UPA GOI is split down the middle, with some nationalistic elements trying desperately to contain the damage wreaked by the Manmohan Cabal's stampede to surrender. Some faction within the government has woken up to the clear and present danger represented by Sharm-el-Shaikh, and successfully pre-empted other Manmohan Cabal initiatives that could have subordinated Indian interests to Western interests. The Nuclear Liability Bill proposed with Manmohan Singh's blessings did not pass, and Manmohan Singh-acolyte Jairam Ramesh found himself on a very tight leash at the Copenhagen Climate Change Summit.

But we need hardly go back that far to explode the myth that our government's Pakistan policy is some masterpiece of coordination.

Just last month, P Chidambaram went to Pakistan and established the expectation that Pakistan would provide concrete action against the 26/11 perpetrators, in advance of the Foreign Minister's visit scheduled last week. Even though the Pakistanis did absolutely nothing, Foreign Minister SM Krishna went ahead with his scheduled visit to Pakistan.

This in itself is disqueting. If the idea had been to "prolong chai-biskoot", the talks could have been postponed or downgraded to secretary-level as a very simple means of achieving this. After all, given the Pakistanis' inaction following their assurances to Chidambaram, it was quite obvious what was going to happen if SM Krishna actually visited Pakistan.

However, the talks went ahead and the inevitable happened. Under the full glare of the international media limelight, SM Krishna gave the turdbag Qureishi a platform to launch into a diatribe very similar to that of Musharraf during the Agra Summit.

During SM Krishna's talks with the Pakistanis, it was stated by Home Secretary GK Pillai that David Coleman Headley had revealed details of ISI and TSPA involvement with 26/11. At that point SM Krishna chose to remain silent even as Qureishi seized on Pillai's statement as a further opportunity for grandstanding.

Following the collapse of the talks, the Indian press abounded with stories of how SM Krishna (and others of the Manmohan Singh camp) were in fact, angry with GK Pillai and the Home Ministry for coming out with this revelation of ISI involvement in 26/11. Until July 21st the press had been citing "unnamed sources", but as of yesterday, SM Krishna has come out and publicly criticized GK Pillai before the news media.

If this was all some vast chanakyan conspiracy to keep the Pakistanis guessing, wouldn't it have made much more sense for Krishna to remain silent? After all, he was silent when confronted with the fact of Pillai's statement during his talks, and even when Qureishi compared Pillai to Hafeez Saeed. Why break that silence now, in an interview with an Indian media news channel... only to criticize Pillai, invoke the "Spirit of Thimpu" and defiantly reiterate his commitment to Manmohan Singh's policy of appeasement? Why would SM Krishna do this, unless the intended audience for his statements was in fact the Indian people?

If this is all just a cunning scheme to give the Pakis a "KLPD", and SM Krishna does not genuinely believe in appeasing the Pakis... then what is the need for him to publicly chastize Pillai and proactively sell the policy of appeasing Pakistan to the Indian people? After all, SM Krishna will have to face some of those Indian people in elections not too far in the future. Many of them may believe that GK Pillai was right to make his statement, and that pursuing the "Spirit of Thimpu" when faced with overwhelming evidence of ISI involvement in 26/11 is wrong and cowardly. Is it worth SM Krishna's political career to defend Manmohan Singh's policy of terrorist-appeasement, only for the sake of pulling the wool over Pakistan's eyes?

This stretches the convoluted assumption of a grand strategy, already far-fetched, beyond the point of any credibility. Far more likely that SM Krishna went to the Indian media, criticized GK Pillai and defiantly reiterated "the spirit of Thimpu" is because he is actually committed to continuing Manmohan Singh's approach to Pakistan... an approach that the Home Ministry has evidently deemed dangerous to Indian interests.

The instances you have raised of the interactions between Chidambaram vs Digvijay Singh, MK Narayanan vs Manmohan Singh etc. are entirely germane here. What we have been seeing are political feuds between the Manmohan Singh Cabal and the Nationalist faction of the GOI being played out in full public view... is all of that, also being staged solely for the benefit of confusing Pakistan? Every bit of it, including MMS' downhill-skiing on the Nuclear Liability bill, and Digvijay Singh's sniping at Chidambaram's handling of the Naxalite menace?

Was it the height of chanakyan diplomacy to give "KLPD" to the Americans on the Nuclear Liability Bill... pretend we were almost about to sign it, and then withdraw it at the last minute? Was that also a sign of the same chanakyan cleverness with which we are giving "KLPD" to Pakistan according to some posters?

Or was it, like the SM Krishna interview, a sign of the pathetic failure of Manmohan Singh to evolve a consensus policy acceptable to those in the GOI with a shred of Nationalist conscience?

As against this, the only reason being offered to us to believe that the GOI is really united and really carrying out some masterful ploy of deception against Pakistan, is that Qureishi accused the GOI of being disunited and alleged that Indian "hardliners" had sabotaged the talks. Therefore, it is implied, we must reject Qureishi's accusations and have faith that the GOI is actually united.

IMO this amounts to giving far too much importance to the words of a Jackass who will say anything that comes out of his mouth. Even a broken clock is right twice a day.
Raghavendra
BRFite
Posts: 1252
Joined: 11 Mar 2008 19:07
Location: Fishing in Sadhanakere

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Raghavendra »

Pakistani caught lying on huffingtonpost

Image


Speaks like a typical conspiracy theorist in the mould of zaid hamid bringing the samjautha blasts and death of karkare.
Uses western name to hide his real identity

Permanent Links to his posts
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Sa ... 97088.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/social/Sa ... 41436.html
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by arnab »

RamaY wrote: The question is about a cabinet minister publicly criticizing a top bureaucrat for something the Govt (that the minister represents) is supposed to. There is nothing new in what the bureaucrat said. GOI has been saying it all along. The only development is that GOI got confirmation from DH on what it has been saying for more than a year.

Your/my opinion doesn't count. What counts is how the other side perceives and responses to GOI's actions.

How can someone infer that all this is a well-orchestrated game, especially when the dis-functioning of GOI is all visible across India? OT here but a few examples are PC-Diggi, MK-MMS, PM-MMS, KR-AC, SP-MMS, so on interactions...
[/quote]

He is criticizing the 'timing' not the 'contents' of what was said. SS Menon made an even more pointed reference to pak state involvement after that. This can also be read as a turf war (unfortunate but it happens - even in the US, think Gen McChrystal-Obama) where the Home Secretary makes the External Affairs Ministry look like a bunch of eunuchs for jumping the gun.

No body is asking you to infer anything from this 'game'. A game is merely a means to an end. It is only the final outcomes which count. In this case - the number of indian citizens killed by TSP terrorists.
Nihat
BRFite
Posts: 1341
Joined: 10 Dec 2008 13:35

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Nihat »

What IS evident, however, is that the UPA GOI is split down the middle, with some nationalistic elements trying desperately to contain the damage wreaked by the Manmohan Cabal's stampede to surrender. Some faction within the government has woken up to the clear and present danger represented by Sharm-el-Shaikh, and successfully pre-empted other Manmohan Cabal initiatives that could have subordinated Indian interests to Western interests
This is an analysis which I find increasingly correct. I cannot point my finger at it but there is definetly some kind of emotional attachement to TSP which has led our PM to set this rather folly vision of everlasting peace and friendship with Pakistan based on the premise that we are one people onleee.

This vision of the PM is clearly not shared by key members of his cabinet (and rightly so), this would include rather prominent members like Chidambaram and Pranab Mukherjee. Among those who support this so called visionary Foreign policy initiative of MMS are his puppet Ext. Affairs minister SM Krishna and other Digvijay singh types.

As I see it , this peace initiative has not found favor with the majority of the Cabinet and most importantly Sonia Gandhi herself, or else she would have backed the PM after S-el-S disaster, this is of utmost importance as Sonia Gandhi's counter view will never allow the PM to have his way with TSP.

Had he been allowed to deal with TSP on his own, we would have seen open borders by now, in addition to a revised IWT, paki involvement in Samjota express and Gujrat riot related cases, highest degree of autonomy to Kashmir (creating a proxy Paki govt.) and go knows what.

I don't think the PM has done badly on any other Foreign policy initiative including maintainng good relation with Russian, strategic engagement with the US, a balanced carrot and stick policy against China among many others. But I just don't know why he loses his mind a little bit when it comes to Pakistan and peace with them.

I feel a much more secure Indian knowing that there are nationalistic elements within the GoI who will not allow a sell out and a shame that an Italian origin woman understands India's TSP predictament better than MMS.
Airavat
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2326
Joined: 29 Jul 2003 11:31
Location: dishum-bishum
Contact:

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Airavat »

Poor labourers go on a rampage
Several factories were damaged and one unit set ablaze when protesting workers went on the rampage. A police motorcycle was also burnt during Tuesday’s clashes. The violent protest started when the power loom workers forced their colleagues to observe a strike against low wages. Labour Qaumi Movement Faisalabad (LQM) had called a strike on July 20, to protest against the failure of factory owners and the administration in increasing the power loom workers’ wages.

According to reports, protestors ransacked six factories in Ghulam Muhammadabad and two in Faizabad area. The clashes continued throughout the day, and police contingents from Rawalpindi, Lahore, Multan, Toba Tek Singh, Jhang and Sheikhpura were required to assist the Faisalabad police.
arnab
BRFite
Posts: 1136
Joined: 13 Dec 2005 09:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by arnab »

Nihat wrote:
I feel a much more secure Indian knowing that there are nationalistic elements within the GoI who will not allow a sell out and a shame that an Italian origin woman understands India's TSP predictament better than MMS.
Look - a recent paper on constituents of the 'middle class' made an important point that while urban India is significantly ahead of Pak in all spheres of quality of life, rural India is barely above it. There were a number of indicators, but one which stands out was the '% of people living under $2 a day'. For pakistan it was 88%, for urban India it was 62%, for rural india it was 88 %. (As a comparison, for South Africa was 30 %).

So here is our predicament - over 650 million people live in India's rural areas. Of these, roughly 350 million live in a condition as wretched as 88 % of the pakis (this number is twice the entire poulation of pakistan). If the question - 'Would you rather be in India or TSP', were posed to them, these 350 million probably wouldn't give a flying ****!!

The 350 million provide a huge base of 'malcontents' whose potential for mischief would make paki terrorism look like a pin-prick. So pakis have to be managed, till we solve our internal distribution issues. Alternatively, like Napoleon, we could choose not to interfere while the enemy is bent on destroying itself. How we do it is up to us. There is absolutely no point looking at aggregate GDP without considering income distribution. GDP is also a meaningless measure IMO, for it does not classify activities as good or bad (so making and selling spurious drugs adds to GDP for e.g).

I remember a movie on Hitler (not 'fallen'), where in his last days hitler was ranting that his greatest achievemt was that while fighting wars on two fronts, he started an internal war against the jews. Diggy was giving nuanced advise to PC - that killing naxalites will not be a solution, for you will not be able to kill them all. Yet not doing anything makes the government look weak. So I hope you undertsand MMS's predicament when he has to singlemindedly focus on economic growth and yet understands that people's perception will matter in the short term electoral cycle.

I'm sure a more nuanced approach can be followed between 'being perennially bent at the waist' and 'being a frothing at the mouth nationalist', and I think we are trying to find that happy equilibrium.
Philip
BRF Oldie
Posts: 21537
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: India

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Philip »

We must start evaluating the MMS era from beginning as far as the security front is concerned.Are we safer or worse off? Despite some successes,we have taken our foot off the pedal when it comes to security,where both internal and external security have now deteriorated to an alarming extent.All our confabulations with Pak have yeilded nothing.
There is an old saying that "jaw,jaw,is better than war,war".However,India is being subjected by Diabolicus Pakistanicus both "jaw" (its diplomutts),as well as "war" (its proxies in J&K).
Last edited by Philip on 22 Jul 2010 14:56, edited 1 time in total.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Lalmohan »

shiv and others, you must look at the derivative of the indicator, not the indicator itself (i.e. rate of change) and then look at applying it to the changing demographic of young, illiterate, unwashed, unemployed mango abduls. the stats today may not be conclusive, but the projections of when things will look different will be far more significant

use some straightforward hypotheses for illustration... e.g. spend on defense is not sustainable, level of subsidies (aid, oil) not guaranteed, % of jobless youths and social cohesion, rate of growth of madrassahs correlated with soosai bumbings... etc., etc.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by RajeshA »

Islamabad Ghabla:

This is my theory:

1) Headley divulged the details linking ISI to Mumbai 26/11.

2) USA did not want that Pakistani Army is put on the spot as a sponsor of terrorism. It disturbs the illusion that the Pakistani Army is an ally in the war on terror and not the terrorist, even though all sides know the truth about the terrorist army.

3) In India there was some information in the public domain - that the perpetrators, the masterminds were Hafiz Saeed, Lakhvi, etc. - the L-e-T.

4) Talking about Pakistan-sponsored Terror with Pakistan, is not MMS strong suit. He would rather simply wish it away with some pappi-japhi. But regardless of how much he tries, reality is reality and he has to talk 'terror'. His has accepted it as his maximum brief to get a few named terrorists to be brought to court in Pakistan and sentenced. Even this is something that the Pakistanis are not willing to yield on.

5) So when Headley started singing and told about ISI links, MMS and USA came to an understanding, that the ISI link would be used to pressure the the Pakistani Establishment to bring Hafiz Saeed to court but not to stamp Pakistan as a State sponsor of Terrorism. If the Pakis go after Hafiz Saeed, India would stay her hand, keep it under wraps, and not confront Pakistan with the evidence against ISI.

6) Most probably some in the government, like Chidambaram were not happy with this course of action. Chidambaram wanted to nail Pakistan publicly. Any court process against Hafiz Saeed and some years of house arrest with all sorts of biryani and kabap, would hardly have been a satisfactory. MMS wanted to remain in the good books of Obama Administration, to keep his dialog with Pakistan on track and at the same to get the laurels for getting Hafiz Saeed 'behind bars', the Indian public acknowledging that MMS could get things done and he had chosen the right approach to dealing with Pakistan, a superior approach to those suggested by jingoes.

7) Chidambaram threw a spanner in the works. He asked Mr. G.K. Pillai to go public with what we had gathered from Headley.

8 ) Minister of External Affairs, Mr. S.M. Krishna went to Pakistan as MMS's man to work on this deal. S.M. Qureishi told him, that they could think of such a deal, but the agreement with MMS on reaching some comprehensive deal had to speeded up. That is why he wanted to talk about the other issues as well, about Kashmir, about water. If the Paki Establishment were to book Hafiz Saeed, they wanted an understanding on the whole gamut of issues. MMS could not afford to rush through with this agenda, especially as there were no results to show for in terms of Mumbai 26/11 investigation from Pakistan as yet. For Pakistan, it was not sufficient that MMS was offering them to spare the Pakistanis the ignominy of being accused of being State sponsors of Terrorism. The Pakistanis misjudged that it was not a big thing if they were being accused of this. India has done that many times before. They were probably not taking the Headley evidence that seriously. They saw that MMS was willing to relent and to strike a deal, so they thought, it would be the right time to push him on the comprehensive deal.

9) Chidambaram was aware of the going ons. He had to stop MMS from reaching a deal, be it a partial deal between India and Pakistan on Hafiz Saeed for Indian silence of ISI complicity, or some grand understanding, with India giving even more concessions, just so MMS can show India some progress on Hafiz Saeed case. So both things were crucial - the ISI complicity exposé as well as the timing of this exposé. Had S.M. Krishna struck some deal with Qureishi (Pakistan Establishment) and had he come home with that agreement, it would have been a done deal. The Cabinet would have had to go along, as it would have been sold in the Cabinet as forwards movement by the Pakistanis.

10) Mr. G.K. Pillai's exposé undid all the grand plans MMS had as well the hopes Qureishi had of getting something from India. Everything was now in the open.

11) Americans were unhappy. It went against their understanding with India on the tactics of handing Pakistan and perhaps also against FBI's terms of interrogation of Headley by NIA. Their speaker has already spoken about each side sticking to their 'responsibility', etc.

12) Chidambaram knew he was risking American cooperation on Headley, but he reckoned that it was better to be bold right now.

13) S.M. Krishna and Qureishi were both mad at the revelations. The deal had fallen apart. India had nothing more to give the Pakistanis. It was out in the open - that ISI was complicit in the Mumbai Terror Attacks - actually an Act of War. As the anger was mutual against Mr. G.K. Pillai, Krishna also felt no need to come to the defense of his colleague at the press conference.

14) Later on MMS and Krishna tried to save their skins, claiming that the only unfortunate thing was the timing of the revelation by Mr. G.K. Pillai, and not the contents of the revelation, as the timing became a hindrance in coming to some agreement with the Pakistanis. That is just a half-truth of course.

15) S.M. Krishna met with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in Kabul, all very Sharm, Sharm! Hillary Clinton probably thought, what a pile of shit.

16) Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao has been saying, that the dialog with Pakistan has not come to an end, and it will continue. This lady may or may not understand, that everything has changed. Now Pakistan stands accused of Terrorism. One cannot turn back the clock! But she still wants to give her boss some hope!

17) Basically Mr. Chidambaram and Mr. G.K. Pillai did a great service to India. It will be interesting to see how it all plays out in the GoI.
Last edited by RajeshA on 22 Jul 2010 15:13, edited 4 times in total.
jagga
BRFite
Posts: 661
Joined: 22 Mar 2010 02:07
Location: Himalaya Ki God Mein

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by jagga »

Jackque spews more venom, this time on Indian Army
Spewing venom against India once again, Pakistan Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi has described the Indian Army's 'cold-start doctrine' as an 'irrational' strategy.

Speaking during a seminar in Islamabad, Qureshi said that the India Army is trying to dominate the region, which was evident from its policies.

Qureshi said that India should look to do away with its 'cold-start doctrine' and cooperate with Pakistan for the well being of people of both the neighbouring nations.
I dont know If the "Cold-Start Doctrine" is just all talk or it is real. But, in Islamabad RAPE's are getting their pants wet. :rotfl:
amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by amit »

Rajesh,

Very good analysis.

But one thing doesn't add up. And that is the NSA's comment in between the Islamabad fiasco and Krishna's stupid comments about Pillai ji.

If we assume that the NSA is in the MMS Pappi Jhappi camp then why would he make those remarks which, if you look at it, went even further than Pillai ji's comments?

Was Krishna's remarks aimed assuaging the US more than the Pacquis after the meeting with Hillary bahen in Kabul?

PS: My personal opinion is that Krishna's interview to IBN blows a hole in the hypothesis that the whole thing was well-orchestrated. It still could be so as some are saying but we've got to wait and see.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by RajeshA »

The NSA knows that the cat is out of the bag. Any criticism of Mr. Pillai would be suicidal for MMS, were it to come out, what the whole deal was. So it is better to come out in full support of Mr. Pillai and some anti-Pakistan rhetoric right now, as the talks were already dead anyway.

Krishna is harping on spilled milk and trying to justify his initial reaction in Islamabad, that it is all about the timing and nothing more. Probably also trying to downplay the whole thing.
amit
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4325
Joined: 30 Aug 2007 18:28
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by amit »

RajeshA wrote:The NSA knows that the cat is out of the bag. Any criticism of Mr. Pillai would be suicidal for MMS, were it to come out, what the whole deal was. So it is better to come out in full support of Mr. Pillai and some anti-Pakistan rhetoric right now, as the talks were already dead anyway.

Krishna is harping on spilled milk and trying to justify his initial reaction in Islamabad, that it is all about the timing and nothing more. Probably also trying to downplay the whole thing.
Boss,

Again you could be right. But that would suggest that Krishna was acting on his own during this stupid interview. Does he have that kind of spunk or is he incredibly stupid?

Somehow the dots don't add up.
Last edited by amit on 22 Jul 2010 15:26, edited 1 time in total.
kittoo
BRFite
Posts: 969
Joined: 08 Mar 2009 02:08

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by kittoo »

From Orbat, had to post cause its directly related to what we think on BRF-
*

Reader David J. Barta wrote in to what we thought of Bharat Rakshak Forum's discussion on what do the Taliban do after Afghanistan is again theirs.
*

Let us first commend BR, a fine website which Editor often consults. The Forum discussions are crowded and lively, and well moderated, mercifully free from the potty-mouthed contributors so common - for example - in Chinese national security forums. No ad hominem attacks are permitted
*

The BRF argument is that when Afghanistan is done, as it will be shortly, the Taliban will turn on the Pakistan Army and the people of Pakistan, and that will be the end of Pakistan.
*

Not quite To understand why not, you really have to go back to the relationship between the Pakistan Army and the Taliban. And to understand that relationship, you cannot rely on external analysis, you really have no choice but to rely on intelligence information, Indian, Afghan, American, and Russian. This is because the relationship is not on the record.
*

To start, it is a mistake to assume there is any fight between the Taliban and the Pakistan Army It has suited the US, and very much suited Pakistan, to talk of the bad Taliban and the good Taliban. Sorry, folks, there is neither good Taliban or bad Taliban. There is just the Taliban, and it remains a combat arm of the Pakistan military.
*

Backtrack a bit, if you don't mind. The Taliban is not a monolithic organization like - say - a regular army. It is composed of many groups, some with just a few hundred fighters, some with thousands of fighters. Each group has its own interests and differences with the other groups, with Pakistan, with Afghanistan, and so on. So you cannot issue a Directive from Pakistan GHQ saying "On the 1st of August the following Taliban units will report to Place X in preparation for Operation Top Secret."
*

Rather, think of the Taliban as social networkers with AK-47s and bad attitudes, whose form of operations is the swarm. It is not a true swarm, because it has a very Big Dog - the Pakistan Army - that lays down rules, and provides money, training, equipment, ammunition, supplies and - yes - leadership and advisors.
*


The rift between the Pakistan Army and the "bad" Taliban is history all that happened here is the Pakistan Army sought to tell the Taliban "Look, the Americans are on our tail, we need to stage an "operation" - think Austin Powers - and can you cooperate? We need you to lay low, and let us march around making a big bang-bang show."
*

After a point some of the Taliban groups told the Pakistan Army: "You are a bunch of running dogs and we want you to stop sucking up to the Americans or we're going to get mad."
*

Harsh words were spoken. Blows were exchanged. Yes, a few hundred Taliban and Pakistan security forces personnel were killed. It all played very nicely into the hands of the Pakistan Army, which could now "show" the Americans it was seriously battling the Taliban.
*

Problem was, it was all a show. For example, the Mesuds and Pakistan Army declared war on each other, they were very angry at each other. But the Pakistan army never acted to seriously hurt the Mesuds, and the Mesuds showed restraint on their side.
*

This shadow play came to an abrupt end when (a) US insisted on real results; (b) it became clear the US was going to leave Afghanistan. if you go back over Pakistani statements over the last nine months or so, you will see the Pakistanis have openly, clearly, and unambiguously told the Americans that they have core interests with the Taliban, and these interests are not going to be surrendered. Have the Americans gotten mad? No really. They actually understand.
*

Is this a weird situation or what? After all, this is the same Pakistan Army/Taliban killing American and Coalition forces in Afghanistan. But the Americans are completely worn out and openly acknowledge Pakistan has core interests in Afghanistan and pursuing these interests is legitimate. So weird or not, the Americans and Pakistanis have reached an accommodation; the Pakistanis and the Karzai Government have reached an accommodation, etc etc . Too complicated to explain today.
*

But you will object - correctly - what about all the bomb attacks against civilians, against the Pakistan Army, the attacks on the Frontier Corps etc etc.? Does this not show that the Taliban is off on its own agenda, and is not under control of the Pakistan Army?
*

Excellent question. We'll address it tomorrow.
RajeshA
BRF Oldie
Posts: 16006
Joined: 28 Dec 2007 19:30

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by RajeshA »

amit wrote:
RajeshA wrote:The NSA knows that the cat is out of the bag. Any criticism of Mr. Pillai would be suicidal for MMS, were it to come out, what the whole deal was. So it is better to come out in full support of Mr. Pillai and some anti-Pakistan rhetoric right now, as the talks were already dead anyway.

Krishna is harping on spilled milk and trying to justify his initial reaction in Islamabad, that it is all about the timing and nothing more. Probably also trying to downplay the whole thing.
Boss,

Again you could be right. But that would suggest that Krishna was acting on his own during this stupid interview. Does he have that kind of spunk or is he incredibly stupid?

Somehow the dots don't add up.
Well actually Krishna was made to feel very stupid in Islamabad. MMS sent Krishna there to hammer out a deal on the lines of Hafiz Saeed for Silence on ISI complicity. Instead his negotiating position is undercut by the revelations from Mr. G.K. Pillai. Now Krishna was not acting on his own. He was given his brief by MMS.

However after G.K. Pillai made his revelation, NSA tried to save his boss, MMS, by coming in favor of a hard line with Pakistan, but in Islamabad, it was Krishna who was publicly putting out his head out of the window. Now Krishna can't really admit that it was all MMS's idea. Otherwise Krishna loses his standing as an independent minded External Affairs Minister. Qureishi already hinted at that with Krishna getting his orders from Delhi.

So Krishna has to fend for himself now, so he is harping on the timing of the revelations, as being the reason, which undercut his negotiating position. MMS can't really come to the defense of his own man, the man he sent to Islamabad to do his dirty work!

The crux of the matter is that MMS wanted to bury the evidence of Pakistan's complicity in Mumbai 26/11 in exchange for selling some address change for Hafiz Saeed within Pakistan as a victory for India and a peace agreement with Pakistan. He thought he could carry the Home Ministry with him, but Chidambaram refused to play ball.

Somehow it reminds me of the last season of 24. :D

MMS needs to be questioned on this by the Indian Parliament and a no-confidence motion should be brought against him. This is gaddari! :evil:

Satyamev Jayate!
Last edited by RajeshA on 22 Jul 2010 16:05, edited 1 time in total.
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Pratyush »

I don't understand all the intellectual gymnastics to justify the actions in Islamabad (Krisha)and Delhi (Pillai). I look at it as just a happenstance of two parts of the GOI acting independently of one another without any coordination. The consequence being just a road kill in terms of the discussion in Islamabad.

So sit back and get back to regular programming till the next round of Chai and biskut session.
Lalmohan
BRF Oldie
Posts: 13257
Joined: 30 Dec 2005 18:28

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Lalmohan »

actually, the more we spin it around, the more it looks like Unkil and GOI are playing tag team KLPD on TFTA martial pak-fauj to move on the GWOT agenda. sooner or later unkil needs to decide if he'll go from KLPD to brandishing a big danda... depends on how well/badly unkil thinks he's doing on GWOT. I dont think the Pillai episode is purely accidental.
Muppalla
BRF Oldie
Posts: 7115
Joined: 12 Jun 1999 11:31

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Muppalla »

However after G.K. Pillai made his revelation, NSA tried to save his boss, MMS, by coming in favor of a hard line with Pakistan, but in Islamabad, it was Krishna who was publicly putting out his head out of the window. Now Krishna can't really admit that it was all MMS's idea. Otherwise Krishna loses his standing as an independent minded External Affairs Minister. Qureishi already hinted at that with Krishna getting his orders from Delhi.
:)
Let me give you some local anology of this behavior. During 2004-2009 regime of YSR in AP, he wanted to allow some churches on one of the seven hills abode Tirupathi. First he declared Tirumala hill as no-entry for any religion except hindus so that he can do whatever on the other six hills. There was huge opposition. Sensing backlash, he declared that all the seven hills as no-entry for non-Hindu religious activity.

:)

RajashA ji,

good post sir.

In summary what you are saying the doves in the establishment were drowned by Pillai and they scrambled to escape from the water. In the process they made more hawkish statement which made Krishna look like a fool.

If your theory is correct then the whole doves-hawks hand in glove theory falls flat. As I said earlier, we can only analyze and this will never comeout in the way someone is expecting proof here.

I personally does not beleive in the well-coordinated theory but I am happy the end result was better.
Ambar
BRF Oldie
Posts: 3248
Joined: 12 Jun 2010 09:56
Location: Weak meek unkil Sam!

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Ambar »

kittoo wrote:From Orbat, had to post cause its directly related to what we think on BRF-
*

Reader David J. Barta wrote in to what we thought of Bharat Rakshak Forum's discussion on what do the Taliban do after Afghanistan is again theirs.
*


Excellent question. We'll address it tomorrow.
Although Orbat makes several valid points and i do agree that Taliban wrecking havoc in Pakistan and turning it into another Afghanistan is perhaps far-fetched,i disagree that Taliban is under firm control of the Pakistan army.
9/11 turned the tables around,Taliban was no longer an inconspicuous tribal militia,it became the 'poster child' for global jihad.It now has the backing of much of islamic world,Taliban is no longer a poor cousin of the Pak army and they don't need the later for guidance.And then there is the widening fault line between Pashtuns and Pakjabis..this will not converge anytime soon.

So yes,if Pak turns into another Afghanistan,it would be because of their ghosts that they have failed to exorcise and not because of renegade talibs.But i do expect the odd suicide bombings in Pak cities and attacks on govt and military symbols in frontier provinces to continue for a long long time to come..
Brad Goodman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2443
Joined: 01 Apr 2010 17:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Brad Goodman »

No IED mubarak this time but torrential rains takes 43 abduls to meet their 72
[quote=http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... ding-qs-05]Torrential rains, flooding kill 43 across Pakistan [/quote]
sum
BRF Oldie
Posts: 10205
Joined: 08 May 2007 17:04
Location: (IT-vity && DRDO) nagar

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by sum »

MMS needs to be questioned on this by the Indian Parliament and a no-confidence motion should be brought against him. This is gaddari! :evil:

Satyamev Jayate!
Wow, strong words from a "Pak guru".

This post( and SMK interview yesterday) evaporated all the happiness about GoI playing Chankian games etc!!! :cry:
Pratyush
BRF Oldie
Posts: 12686
Joined: 05 Mar 2010 15:13

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Pratyush »

I have been watching this drama of talks with TSP for almost ten years on BRF. What I do notice is that every time talks are bout to take place BRF goes on Hyper drive talking of surrender to TSP (normal times its only overdrive WRT TSP in terms of bashing it ) . Interestingly TSP also thinks the same way, that India will surrender to it. But when the talks are mid way or 3/4th over it become clear to TSP that no Surrender is going to happen.

Very very interesting.

OTOH, the only objective of the GOI is to hold the line against TSP and nothing else.
Brad Goodman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2443
Joined: 01 Apr 2010 17:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Brad Goodman »

Nandu wrote: Op. Parakram was launched in response to the attack by Pakis on our Parliament. Can you list a few concrete things that it actually accomplished for India? Did the Pakis actually hand over, or at least arrest anyone responsible? As far as I can remember, all it resulted in is the sacking of a general who was "too forward", and an inglorious climbdown by India, culminating in the DDM slurping omelettes with Gola at Agra.
I disagree as far as I see there were two distinct advantages out of parakram.

1) Indian Armed forces and government learnt a hard lesson that their war doctrine and their preperdness were woefully out of date and that resulted in self introspection resulting in boost to defence spending as well as Cold Start doctrine. Now its cold start that gives paki some cold sweat.

2) Remember Mushy's lay off speech? Least of all what it did was cool down Kashmir. Forget all the bravardo that mushy said in that speech look at the results on ground we were able to get the 3 tier fence erected all across the LOC and IB. The casulty rates for IA are down. So I feel parakram was a limited success in those circumstances.
KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4849
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by KLNMurthy »

Rudradev wrote:
...

If this was all some vast chanakyan conspiracy to keep the Pakistanis guessing, wouldn't it have made much more sense for Krishna to remain silent? After all, he was silent when confronted with the fact of Pillai's statement during his talks, and even when Qureishi compared Pillai to Hafeez Saeed. Why break that silence now, in an interview with an Indian media news channel... only to criticize Pillai, invoke the "Spirit of Thimpu" and defiantly reiterate his commitment to Manmohan Singh's policy of appeasement? Why would SM Krishna do this, unless the intended audience for his statements was in fact the Indian people?

If this is all just a cunning scheme to give the Pakis a "KLPD", and SM Krishna does not genuinely believe in appeasing the Pakis... then what is the need for him to publicly chastize Pillai and proactively sell the policy of appeasing Pakistan to the Indian people? After all, SM Krishna will have to face some of those Indian people in elections not too far in the future. Many of them may believe that GK Pillai was right to make his statement, and that pursuing the "Spirit of Thimpu" when faced with overwhelming evidence of ISI involvement in 26/11 is wrong and cowardly. Is it worth SM Krishna's political career to defend Manmohan Singh's policy of terrorist-appeasement, only for the sake of pulling the wool over Pakistan's eyes?

...
Just want to point out that these machinations by Krishna et al have nothing to do with electoral politics. A party can condone terrorism (as the Congress is doing) and still win elections.

The debate is for the hearts and minds of the elite establishment, and the power struggle is for the support of Sonia / Rahul.
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by shiv »

arnab wrote: So here is our predicament - over 650 million people live in India's rural areas. Of these, roughly 350 million live in a condition as wretched as 88 % of the pakis (this number is twice the entire poulation of pakistan). If the question - 'Would you rather be in India or TSP', were posed to them, these 350 million probably wouldn't give a flying ****!!

The 350 million provide a huge base of 'malcontents' whose potential for mischief would make paki terrorism look like a pin-prick. So pakis have to be managed, till we solve our internal distribution issues. Alternatively, like Napoleon, we could choose not to interfere while the enemy is bent on destroying itself. How we do it is up to us. There is absolutely no point looking at aggregate GDP without considering income distribution. GDP is also a meaningless measure IMO, for it does not classify activities as good or bad (so making and selling spurious drugs adds to GDP for e.g).
You have said in 2 paras what I have tried to say in 250,000 posts
shiv
BRF Oldie
Posts: 34981
Joined: 01 Jan 1970 05:30
Location: Pindliyon ka Gooda

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by shiv »

Lalmohan wrote:shiv and others, you must look at the derivative of the indicator, not the indicator itself (i.e. rate of change) and then look at applying it to the changing demographic of young, illiterate, unwashed, unemployed mango abduls. the stats today may not be conclusive, but the projections of when things will look different will be far more significant

I have actually been following the trend for a while now Lalmullah. I have been following "stats" since the late 1990s (for Pakistan) (and from India from the 1970s).

I am happy to see more people jumping on the the bandwagon.
Brad Goodman
BRF Oldie
Posts: 2443
Joined: 01 Apr 2010 17:00

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by Brad Goodman »

shnkr wrote:
abhik wrote:Pillai revelations causing some takleef to US:sources
http://www.ndtv.com/article/india/discl ... rces-38688
If the US wanted desperately for India to have talks with and make concessions to pakistan, then why wouldn't they have delayed releasing the Headley confession to India to after the talks? It's hard to believe that they just trusted us not to use the info and scupper the talks.

Again the fault is we are trying to paint a simplistic picture to make things easy for us. Unfortunately geo-politics can be anything but simple. Now put all three actors on a piece of paper and write down their gains and losses based on every step that has taken place your answer will pop out immediately. let me take a swag at it

Pakis:
Advantage:
Delay unkil retreat so that aid money keeps flowing
Dont let unkil win on ground keep bunnies supplied
maintain bunnie advantage (not a lot but enough to stay as powerful actor on stage)
keep india bogey alive to extract money from 3.5 as well as occupy abduls

Disadvantage
Economy in shambles
CSF money will dry out eventually

US
Advantage:
Pay pakis money example CSF & KL bill
Tell pakis we will bring Indians to negotiating table so that you can move forces to west
Give them some new toys like AAMRAM and f16

Disadvantage
Double game by pakis is bleeding them
will lose all the gains made in past decade with hasty withdrawl

India:
Advantage
talk to pakis so that they do not plan any misadventure since unkil is now the big brother
buy time to upgrade economy and control prices
cultivate relations with 3.5 so as to undercut paki power

Disadvantage:
Pakis just suspend terrror not dismantle it
Unkil does not do enough


So once you start adding you will see that some times the advantage and disadvantage stem out of the same condition example for pakis keeping unkil in Af pak means money but also means losing bunnies so this is where the art of fine balancing comes in. Like an expert kite flyer you need to pull the string as well as give it a slack. More of anything means the kite will not fly so that is where the complexity kicks in. Same of India whether it wants to act tough or keep talking or do both is a delicate art and Pillai Ji and Krishna are jugling the balls in air only time till tell if they were successful or not
KLNMurthy
BRF Oldie
Posts: 4849
Joined: 17 Aug 2005 13:06

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by KLNMurthy »

This is an analysis which I find increasingly correct. I cannot point my finger at it but there is definetly some kind of emotional attachement to TSP which has led our PM to set this rather folly vision of everlasting peace and friendship with Pakistan based on the premise that we are one people onleee.

This vision of the PM is clearly not shared by key members of his cabinet (and rightly so), this would include rather prominent members like Chidambaram and Pranab Mukherjee. Among those who support this so called visionary Foreign policy initiative of MMS are his puppet Ext. Affairs minister SM Krishna and other Digvijay singh types.

As I see it , this peace initiative has not found favor with the majority of the Cabinet and most importantly Sonia Gandhi herself, or else she would have backed the PM after S-el-S disaster, this is of utmost importance as Sonia Gandhi's counter view will never allow the PM to have his way with TSP.

Had he been allowed to deal with TSP on his own, we would have seen open borders by now, in addition to a revised IWT, paki involvement in Samjota express and Gujrat riot related cases, highest degree of autonomy to Kashmir (creating a proxy Paki govt.) and go knows what.

I don't think the PM has done badly on any other Foreign policy initiative including maintainng good relation with Russian, strategic engagement with the US, a balanced carrot and stick policy against China among many others. But I just don't know why he loses his mind a little bit when it comes to Pakistan and peace with them.

I feel a much more secure Indian knowing that there are nationalistic elements within the GoI who will not allow a sell out and a shame that an Italian origin woman understands India's TSP predictament better than MMS.
Sometimes it is useful to consider the pedigree & background of the players. Not trying to over-generalize but partition affectees tend to have a peculiar (stockholm-like) mental relationship with the nation and people that destroyed their family roots. Others with names like Pillai, Menon, Maino etc. can be more objective. Interestingly SS Menon blows hot (Se-S) and cold (Headley) on Pakistan, he happens to be related to Krishna Menon who by some accounts was such a national security disaster.
SSridhar
Forum Moderator
Posts: 25382
Joined: 05 May 2001 11:31
Location: Chennai

Re: Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): July 07, 2

Post by SSridhar »

kittoo wrote:
To start, it is a mistake to assume there is any fight between the Taliban and the Pakistan Army It has suited the US, and very much suited Pakistan, to talk of the bad Taliban and the good Taliban. Sorry, folks, there is neither good Taliban or bad Taliban. There is just the Taliban, and it remains a combat arm of the Pakistan military.[/b]
I agree to a certain extent with the statement that there was actually no fight between the PA and the Taliban. But, things changed later. We had concluded here a few years back that an unseen Pakistani hand was stage-managing the whole show. We had suspected that the invisible hand comprised of Musharraf, Corps Commanders and ISI Chief. In some cases, a genuine fight with the Taliban was staged by the PA (the lower level officers and men thought they were fighting a real war) etc. At that point, there was no good or bad Taliban. The hudaibiya that Gen. Musharraf & Co. favoured was too sophisticated an idea to be comprehended by the frothing-at-mouth-corners jihadi foot soldiers. Let's remember that it was *not* the Pakistani Taliban that took on the PA first. It was the Punjabi Taliban of HuJI, JeM and LeJ. They tried to assassinate Gen. Musharraf, Shaukat Aziz and the Karachi Corps Commander. Today, the JeM is a fence sitter. The Pakistani Taliban took on the PA in March 2004 at Kaloosha in South Waziristan when the PA tried to attack the Uzbeks led by Tahir Yuldashev. The PA has been saying for quite many years now that the Taliban would need to be part of a final solution or else no solution was possible. The PA dubbed those it wanted to get rid of as 'bad Taliban', like the 'foreign' Uzbek, Egyptian, Chechen etc. fighters and later it even included some hardcore Punjabi Taliban as well. So, today, one cannot simply dismiss that there is no such thing as 'good' or 'bad' Taliban, as defined by the PA.
The rift between the Pakistan Army and the "bad" Taliban is history all that happened here is the Pakistan Army sought to tell the Taliban "Look, the Americans are on our tail, we need to stage an "operation" - think Austin Powers - and can you cooperate? We need you to lay low, and let us march around making a big bang-bang show."
That is quite true. Musharraf gave two speeches after agreeing to US demands. The English speech was addressed to world community and he said all those they wanted to hear. He asked India to 'lay off', thus implying to the Americans his *only* condition for cooperation. The Urdu speech referred to Prophet Muhammad and his Hudaibiya treaty. Most Pakistanis and terror leaders were perhaps skeptical. But, that is exactly how it has panned out even without a Musharraf, the architect, not being there in the last stages. But, many emotional and quick-to-the-holster terrorist leaders could not comprehend that or did not believe Musharraf sufficiently and went awry.
Pakistanis have openly, clearly, and unambiguously told the Americans that they have core interests with the Taliban, and these interests are not going to be surrendered. Have the Americans gotten mad? No really. They actually understand.
True. That is exactly what Holbrooke has articulated today at Delhi.
Locked