Can anybody explain this.Since 1947, India never accepted Pakistan as an independent state and tried twice to maintain the status of Akhand Bharat” by merging Pakistan into India once again. Militarily India never succeeded in its aim but it has already launched cultural offensive against Pakistan through its media and diplomacy. It has made an ideological attack on Pakistan and has culturally cloned us.
Why Talibunnies? Are Pakis better? What's happened to BRF? There seems to be great support for thekrisna wrote:
hope some of the talibunnies have met their 72.
Thanks James B. Happy to see thatJames B wrote:http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/Natura ... p?id=45091abhijitm wrote:can someone please find 'before and after' satellite images of the flood affected area? In days of tsunami scale of the damage was clearly visible. Here I am not able to find such evidence where billions of pounds are required to "rebuild" something.
and I was not entirely right then.Unless of course, Talibunnies = Pakisshiv wrote:Why Talibunnies? Are Pakis better? What's happened to BRF? There seems to be great support for thekrisna wrote:
hope some of the talibunnies have met their 72.F-35, F-22 Raptoridea that the Pakistanis are good and the Taliban is bad. Is than an American view or is that an American view?
Who has been good to India? The Taliban or the Pakis? Who has killed more Indians so far? The Taliban or the Pakis?
shiv wrote:Why Talibunnies? Are Pakis better? What's happened to BRF? There seems to be a great move towards thekrisna wrote:
hope some of the talibunnies have met their 72.F-35, F-22 Raptoridea that the Pakistanis are good and the Taliban is bad. Is than an American view or is that an American view?
Who has been good to India? The Taliban or the Pakis? Who has killed more Indians so far? The Taliban or the Pakis?
Prasad wrote:By letting the taliban be in afghanistan, aren't we giving the pakis a carefree western border and leaving them with greater time and energy to spend on their eastern border? Isn't a conflict better than none for us in that by settling afghanistan, they can then spend more energy directing stuff against us?
Nope. I'm not overwhelmed by american media reports at all. The pakistanis can and will reign in the taliban if it is in their interest. However, they arent doing so right now because they can keep crying to the americans who will continue to take hits in afghanistan and keep paying the pakis in the hope that they'll reel them in. At the same time, the pakistanis are also getting hit, not by the taliban that they have some semblance of control over but by the so-called bad taliban which doesn't seem to have any love lost for the pak army.shiv wrote: Don't want this to get too personal. Are you overwhelmed by American media reports? Are you saying that the Pakistanis will "settle Afghanistan"? Can you explain how they will do that? When has that been done? Who has done it?
This is probably in response to the Indian news that rich families exceed poor families.SSridhar wrote:Pakistan says poverty had halved
Apparently, a World Bank report says this.
The Pakis have control over Afghan Taliban because of the situation at the moment. The present situation consists ofPrasad wrote:The pakistanis can and will reign in the taliban if it is in their interest. However, they arent doing so right now because they can keep crying to the americans who will continue to take hits in afghanistan and keep paying the pakis in the hope that they'll reel them in. At the same time, the pakistanis are also getting hit, not by the taliban that they have some semblance of control over but by the so-called bad taliban which doesn't seem to have any love lost for the pak army.
In paki mind 1965 War started when India counter attacked, not when Ayub launched Op Gibraltar, his words were 'treacherous enemy has betrayed us'.Acharya wrote:Can anybody explain this.Since 1947, India never accepted Pakistan as an independent state and tried twice to maintain the status of Akhand Bharat” by merging Pakistan into India once again. Militarily India never succeeded in its aim but it has already launched cultural offensive against Pakistan through its media and diplomacy. It has made an ideological attack on Pakistan and has culturally cloned us.
They consider 1965 attack on Lahore as an attempt on Pakistan
There is a reason this time India and the world community has not been forthcoming with aid for TSP.sanjaykumar wrote:I was suspicious of Pakistani claims of the extent of floods, but....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/picture ... ml?image=1
Look at the slide show, the land and people could be Bangladesh/East Pakistan 1970 cyclone.
After Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, both Pakistan and India sent aid to the United States. As much as people here were saddened by the destruction, you could almost hear Indian and Pakistani politicians cackling at the irony of it—the world's No. 1 superpower looking like a developing country. In fact, New Orleans looked worse, in some shots, than did Bombay after this summer's horrific floods or Sri Lanka after the tsunami. In fact, tiny Sri Lanka, which received a massive $2 billion from the international community after the tsunami, was so moved by those images that it donated $25,000 to the U.S. hurricane-relief effort.
So you're saying, effectively there won't be any "good or bad" taliban but just an "independant" taliban who seek out funding from anyone willing to, for whatever their purpose. Being pushtoon dominated, they'd try to make the durand line irrelevant?RajeshA wrote:........
Paa'stans are so busy seeking blessings everyday that one isn't surprised at the state of their booming economy, Jai ho! more power to the blessing seekers and more explosive growth for the economy! Yo Paklurks don't let the floods dampen your gun powdah!He said under Islamic system of economy the amounts we spend to achieve pleasure/blessings from God are the only savings.
What goes around comes around eh Pakistan....Those c**ts have been flooding Britain for years!
...
The readiness expressed there to delink terrorism from dialogue notwithstanding Mumbai damaged our negotiating position on terrorism beyond retrieval. By our readiness to take on board Pakistan’s new concerns about Baluchistan, we compounded our negotiating difficulties further, because this openness implicitly conveyed our willingness to address Pakistan’s older concerns. In this background, Pakistan would have viewed our tougher post-Sharm-el-Sheikh projection of terrorism as a priority issue as tactical posturing and not a fundamental position.
....
...
An over-eager India again yielded to Pakistani pressure tactics and at Thimphu, with no tangible signs of any credible Pakistani action on the fundamental issue of terrorism, we agreed to resume the dialogue, with foreign secretary and home minister-level talks in June and foreign minister-level talks in July. The ‘composite dialogue’ issue was skirted by stating that nomenclatures were not important. Pakistan got the political-level dialogue that it wanted as a gauge of India’s “seriousness” — a code word for Pakistan indicating India’s moving away from the terrorism issue to the issues of Kashmir, Siachen, water, and so on — in resuming talks. Our stance — that while for us the priority issue was terrorism but that we were ready to discuss any issue Pakistan put on the table — exposed us to Pakistan’s relentless demand that we discuss issues of concern to it, even as it paid habitual lip service to our terrorism concerns.
...
...
The “fiasco” at Islamabad occurred because the mandate carried by the Indian minister belied Pakistani expectations. In the meantime, with the situation deteriorating in Jammu and Kashmir to India’s discomfiture, the Pakistani leadership must have decided to play even more hardball than earlier intended. With India on the defensive in Jammu and Kashmir again, for Pakistan to act against the Punjab-based jihadi groups and the United Jihad Council in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir, whose agenda is cross-border terrorism, would have been, in any case, unimaginable.
...
...
It may suit the strong protagonists of a dialogue with Pakistan to give cover to the Pakistani civilian political leadership by blaming the Pakistani armed forces for the collapse of the Islamabad talks. But this entraps us within our existing ineffectual policies towards Pakistan. We should remember that it is the political forces, not any military instrument, that created Pakistan, and those political currents remain potent.
...
...
The greater cause for regret is that we do not seem to learn from our mistaken policies towards Pakistan. No rationale is given to justify the persistent efforts to engage an unresponsive Pakistan except some platitudes about peace and neighbourliness. We reprimand our home secretary publicly for spoiling the atmosphere of the Islamabad talks by speaking out of turn about Pakistan’s official connivance in the Mumbai carnage when, with more grit, Britain’s prime minister can, on Indian soil, disregarding Pakistani reactions, accuse the latter of a two-faced policy towards terrorism and involvement in terror against India and Afghanistan.
To justify continued talks with Pakistan we claim that progress was made in Islamabad. If there was progress why the Pakistani recriminations? We publicly plead with Qureshi to accept our invitation to visit India in December, and so accept the burden of ensuring that he does not make a “leisure trip”. He has already announced that it will be impossible to resume a dialogue with India without requisite attention to the Kashmir issue. So, what are the concessions we have in mind for him?
IRC on the Ground in Flood-Ravaged Pakistan: “The Situation Is Desperate”
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan 04 Aug 2010 -
A girl looks at the damage from a wall after her family returned to find their home destroyed from heavy floods in Nowshera, in northwestern Pakistan.
Photo: REUTERS/Faisal Mahmood, courtesy www.AlertNet.org
The International Rescue Committee is on the ground providing aid to victims of the worst flooding in Pakistan’s modern history. At least 1,400 people have been killed and three million people have been affected by the devastating monsoon rains.
“Our greatest concern right now is that people’s supplies of drinking water have been contaminated by the flood waters,” said the IRC’s Pakistan director Tammy Hasselfeldt. “The reports of diarrhea and gastrointestinal problems are rapidly increasing.”
In response, the IRC will, in the coming weeks, launch a major aid effort to clean contaminated wells and repair broken water systems.
“In the first phase, as water levels are slowly receding, we are also going to distribute plastic sheeting for shelter, blankets, bednets to prevent malaria, hygiene material, water purification tablets and other essential material,” Hasselfeldt said.
Correction: India was seriously threatened first time during Rajiv Gandhi government when Gen.Sundarji was Army chief. It was same as Brass tacks. Second time after the 1993 Bombay blasts when PVRN admin seriously thought of teaching a lesson to Pak. Third time it was during kargil. There were several othertimes it came in paper but not that real.shiv wrote: You will recall that India was first threatened by Pakistani nukes in the 1980s during the PVNR regime. I am not sure if that was the same as the Brass tacks episode. India was threatened again with nuking by various people. I recall Gauhar Ayub Khan saying that (as reported on this forum), Hamid Gul has stated that, and it is a known fact that Pakistani nukes were being readied to hit India during Kargil.
So my question to anyone who is wiling to tale it on is "When India is already under risk of being hit by Pakistanis nukes and has been threatened several times, what is the basis for the conclusion that the same nukes are somehow going to become more dangerous to India just because the Taliban take over Pakistan? Is there a hidden assumption here (not necessarily by you Rajaram-avarhal) that the Pakistan army are somehow more gentle and more rational towards India and that the Taliban control of those nukes somehow raises the risks for India.
India’s nouveau riche are often, sadly, self-centred braggers who enjoy flaunting their wealth. It’s a reflection of a more general trend in India—as it grows and its wealth increases rapidly, it’s also becoming increasingly self-centred as a nation, lost in its own world and not bothering about its responsibilities and moral duty towards its neighbours, even when they’re in crisis.
Pakistan, for example, is facing its worst floods in living memory and the international media is full of stories of the large-scale devastation and massive death toll in flood affected parts of North West Frontier Province, Punjab and Sindh. Millions of lives have been affected by this epic natural disaster.
But while the international community and aid agencies pump aid to those affected, neighbouring India seems to be aloof and blind to the tragedy affecting Pakistan—I’ve yet (at the time of writing) to hear of any aid package for the victims from the Indian government. Meanwhile, the Indian media is barely giving the disaster the time of day, with news channels instead full of stories on the corruption wracking the Commonwealth Games.
Compare this with the United States and other Western nations, which are trying to mobilize resources domestically and internationally to assist the victims. This is obviously good politics—the Obama administration wants to win the trust of a Pakistani public that often sees the United States as working against their interests.
But as an immediate neighbour, India should also try winning the hearts and minds of the Pakistani people. As the largest country in South Asia, India needs to demonstrate big heartedness towards its smaller neighbour. After all, good ties with the neighbours will be a prerequisite if this country of a billion people wants to claim a leading position on the international stage.
The comfort of having a bit more money has made India an international conformist that doesn’t want to take risks. It’s an ironic contrast with the country’s pre-liberalization days, when a poor India was a leader of the Non-Aligned Movement.
http://epaper.dnaindia.com/epapermain.a ... 08/09/2010In one of the biggest seizures under the country's terror financing laws, the Union ministry of home affairs, in coordination with law enforcement agencies, has seized assets and cash worth Rs150 crore from a single person. The identity of the individual has been kept under wraps since he is "very high-profile".
The ministry has made the stunning disclosure in a 508-page confidential report on money laundering submitted late last month to the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). The FATF is an inter-governmental body responsible for setting global anti-money laundering (AML) standards and combating the financing of terrorism (CFT). The report also disclosed that two bank accounts suspected to be connected to financial terrorism have been frozen.
The report gives a graphic account of how financial terrorism has taken root in the country and how it is being executed by influential, well-connected individuals. The report was submitted during the meeting of the Asia Pacific Group (APG) on money laundering on July 29. The first such report, which has been accessed by DNA, has a large number of annexures.
It attacks Pakistan, perhaps for the first time at a world forum, stating that high quality counterfeit notes are printed in the country and then smuggled into India. "The most popular (routes) are via the United Arab Emirates, Nepal and Bangladesh," said the report.
................................................
The finance intelligence unit, working directly under Union finance minister Pranab Mukherjee, has also disclosed alarming details. It told the world body that suspicious transaction reports (STRs) in banks have risen manifold in recent years. The number was 437 in 2006-07 and stood at 4,048 till December 2009. The same trend is witnessed in financial institutions and other intermediary bodies. Law enforcement and intelligence agencies, and regulators tracked down more than 7,000 cases of suspect transaction in the last three years.
paki army leadership is sane, MAD may work with them. My perception is that Taliban are soosai bummers, and therein lies the risk.shiv wrote: in short a Taliban takeover of Pakistan either makes no difference to the nuclear threat that India faces, or reduces it. It will not increase it, unless you believe that Taliban are worse that the Paki army and ISI.
Sorry. I think you actually are being overwhelmed by American media reports.Prasad wrote: Nope. I'm not overwhelmed by american media reports at all. The pakistanis can and will reign in the taliban if it is in their interest. However, they arent doing so right now because they can keep crying to the americans who will continue to take hits in afghanistan and keep paying the pakis in the hope that they'll reel them in. At the same time, the pakistanis are also getting hit, not by the taliban that they have some semblance of control over but by the so-called bad taliban which doesn't seem to have any love lost for the pak army.
This is an assertion being made by Pakistan. Anyone is welcome to believe it and take it as the absolute truth. You seem to have bought into this story, but the likelihood of that happening is only a percentage - not a certainy."The Taliban only want foreigners to leave their lands. The day the foreigners go the Taliban will become peaceful"
I see. So the Pakistani army people who threatened India with nukes are sane. The Paki army cadres who directed the Mumbai attacks are sane? The people who conducted the Kaluchak massacre are sane? Harboring the Mumbai 1993 bombers is sane? Whose side are you on sir? Sending in 50,000 armed infiltrator into India and killing thousands of Indian soldiers is sane?Guddu wrote:paki army leadership is sane, MAD may work with them. My perception is that Taliban are soosai bummers, and therein lies the risk.shiv wrote: in short a Taliban takeover of Pakistan either makes no difference to the nuclear threat that India faces, or reduces it. It will not increase it, unless you believe that Taliban are worse that the Paki army and ISI.
I read it this way flood waters if were not diverted to Shah's contituency would have inundated TSPA's fauji foundation commercial interest so mango abduls can go under water but TSPA needs to be protected.The Pakistan Army took control of the Sukkur Barrage on Monday night as politicians and cabinet ministers squabbled over making a breach in the side canals in a bid to protect major towns in the province from the advancing floods. The move came after a federal minister refused to allow the breach
as the water that would be discharged would inundate parts of his constituency.
A power struggle broke out between federal labour minister Khursheed Shah and the Sindh Chief Minister, Syed Qaim Ali Shah, when the former refused the latter's demand that a breach be made in the Ali Wahan Canal.
This would have allowed thousands of cusecs of water to drain into open fields and plains, which in turn would save towns like Sukkur and Hyderabad from flooding. Engineers said that with the rise in flood water levels, the pressure on the historic Sukkur Barrage was so intense that there was a chance parts of it would collapse. Such an eventuality would flood Sukkur and Hyderabad, they warned.
"The only way to save the barrage is to make a breach in the Ali Wahan canal," experts said. On Sunday night, irrigation authorities were planning to break the embankment of Ali Wahan to reduce pressure on Sukkur Barrage, but were stopped by the residents. Eventually, the Pakistan Army intervened and reportedly also placed Shah under detention.
as the water that would be discharged would inundate parts of his constituency.
A power struggle broke out between federal labour minister Khursheed Shah and the Sindh Chief Minister, Syed Qaim Ali Shah, when the former refused the latter's demand that a breach be made in the Ali Wahan Canal.
This would have allowed thousands of cusecs of water to drain into open fields and plains, which in turn would save towns like Sukkur and Hyderabad from flooding. Engineers said that with the rise in flood water levels, the pressure on the historic Sukkur Barrage was so intense that there was a chance parts of it would collapse. Such an eventuality would flood Sukkur and Hyderabad, they warned.
"The only way to save the barrage is to make a breach in the Ali Wahan canal," experts said. On Sunday night, irrigation authorities were planning to break the embankment of Ali Wahan to reduce pressure on Sukkur Barrage, but were stopped by the residents. Eventually, the Pakistan Army intervened and reportedly also placed Shah under detention.
These Taliban fighters who killed Pakistani troops are merely asking for the US to leave. The minute the US leaves they will go quiet, lay down their arms and apologise for attacking the Pakistani army or just walk into a Pakistan jail.shravan wrote:Three paramilitary troopers killed in Pak attack
Peshawar: Three paramilitary troopers were killed when Taliban fighters attacked a security check post near the Afghan border in northwest Pakistan today, officials said.
The Taliban attacked the check post at Saashi in Mohmand tribal region this evening.
Thanks for the correction MupallaMuppalla wrote:Correction: India was seriously threatened first time during Rajiv Gandhi government when Gen.Sundarji was Army chief. It was same as Brass tacks. Second time after the 1993 Bombay blasts when PVRN admin seriously thought of teaching a lesson to Pak. Third time it was during kargil. There were several othertimes it came in paper but not that real.So my question to anyone who is wiling to take it on is "When India is already under risk of being hit by Pakistanis nukes and has been threatened several times, what is the basis for the conclusion that the same nukes are somehow going to become more dangerous to India just because the Taliban take over Pakistan? Is there a hidden assumption here (not necessarily by you Rajaram-avarhal) that the Pakistan army are somehow more gentle and more rational towards India and that the Taliban control of those nukes somehow raises the risks for India.
Thanks again. Exactly my view. A defeat of the US aims in Afghanistan is a defeat of US aims in Afghanistan. Not a defeat of India. And it is not even going to be a Pakistani victory.Muppalla wrote: Regarding Taliban taking over Pakistan, I would say it is a victory of sorts for India. In fact I would pray that it happens. The major frustration with Indian administration is that by means of talks we are not allowing that to happen. The hawks in the system also wants that to be expedited. I also beleive US is desperate that it does not happen that way. Though a lot of folks seperate Taliban into Pak-Talibs and Afghan-Talibs etc., in the final analysis they are all Pasthuns. If pasthuns really takeover Pakistan (it does not matter if they are even anti-India) there will be a pasthun consolidation at some point of time which shakes the fundamentals of Pakistani establishment. Punjab and Sindh just cannot bear them.
Otherthing is US cannot keep threatening India by means of proxy nukes. Talibs takes over Pak means they will ensure that pak will be nuke nood.
I am of the firm view that Talibs taking over TSP is in the best interests of India.
Air Commodore Jasjit Singh:In Jasjit Singh’s view use of force includes questions of credibility, capability and communication. It also calls for an immaculate selection of time, method and limits. Operation Parakram was India’s first venture in offensive defence. Its failure was because of the stalemate that it permitted. He made two important observations: i) political will sans national will in a democratic set up will result in failure as seen in the case of Operation Parakram, which failed to muster consensus within and outside government. ii) One cannot ignore the international environment or global opinion while making a choice of strategy and application of force.
Hari Seldon wrote: The fear of parakram II has helped unkil clampdown on TSPian spectacular attacks on desi civilians, IMHO.
IMO, Taliban taking over in Afghanistan will be a step backwards. I win for retrogressive forces is just that - bad for India and bad for US.Shiv wrote:Thanks again. Exactly my view. A defeat of the US aims in Afghanistan is a defeat of US aims in Afghanistan. Not a defeat of India. And it is not even going to be a Pakistani victory.Muppalla wrote: Regarding Taliban taking over Pakistan, I would say it is a victory of sorts for India. In fact I would pray that it happens. The major frustration with Indian administration is that by means of talks we are not allowing that to happen. The hawks in the system also wants that to be expedited. I also beleive US is desperate that it does not happen that way. Though a lot of folks seperate Taliban into Pak-Talibs and Afghan-Talibs etc., in the final analysis they are all Pasthuns. If pasthuns really takeover Pakistan (it does not matter if they are even anti-India) there will be a pasthun consolidation at some point of time which shakes the fundamentals of Pakistani establishment. Punjab and Sindh just cannot bear them.
Otherthing is US cannot keep threatening India by means of proxy nukes. Talibs takes over Pak means they will ensure that pak will be nuke nood.
I am of the firm view that Talibs taking over TSP is in the best interests of India.
The only question to my mind is whether the US will allow an anti-West Taliban to take over Pakistan or rather have an anti-India force remain in control in Pakistan.
So the war will have to shift to Pakistan with the US paying Pakistan to keep loyal pro US forces in power. They in turn will remain anti-India. In the meantime the Taliban too will want a piece of Pakistan. Two fronts. If the Pakistan army gets too busy in the west, they will have to take it easy on the eats. if they get too busy in the east, India will hit them and make them weak so they find it more difficult to take on the Taliban in the west.
So the people of FATA are ruled by a local Pakistani "Governor General" called an "agent". No political parties are allowed. If crimes are committed, and entir tribe can be held responsible. these are the existing laws today. So the people of FATA have rebelled and even today some parts - such as North Waziristan are out of Pakistani control. No love is lost between the people there and the Pakis. Perhaps many do not love the Taliban either - but the Taliban are in control.political, judicial and administrative reforms in the FATA. The announced reform package entailed allowing political parties to function legally in the area, curtailing arbitrary powers of administrators called Political Agents (PA), granting the right to appeal and bail in cases involving the Frontier Crimes Regulation (FCR), which among other harsh restrictions places enormous powers at the disposal of political agents and allows these agents to hold an entire community or tribe responsible for the actions of a single person. The reform package also included audits of funds used in the region and would have exempted woman and children from territorial responsibility cases.
What is the basis of this claim? (was this reported in news media?) Is 'cutting the phone lines' that simple? (I mean even if one cuts off power - one can always have secondary power source and satellite phone etc where one simply can't cut-off the 'line')Also, IIRC the phone lines of Indian Consulate in Islamabad were cut right as the plane was flying over TSP.
