Bharat Rakshak

pankajs wrote:Baki media on Howdy Modi. This is a good one.

MUZAFFARABAD: An earthquake of magnitude 5.6 shook several cities on Tuesday, killing at least 30 people and injuring 452 others, government officials said.

HAASS: I want to talk, and I want to try to cover a lot of different subjects before we turn to the members here. They ask the tough questions, by the way. I’m just here—I’m here to lull you into a sense of complacency. (Laughter.) I want to talk about U.S.-Pakistani relations. And, full disclosure, I’ve been involved with them many times in the U.S. government. And, you know, each side has something of a narrative of frustration, even bitterness, with the other. But I want to quote a sentence or two from the memoir of Jim Mattis. James until recently was the U.S. secretary of defense. And I’m quoting here. “Of all the countries I’ve dealt with, I consider Pakistan to be the most dangerous because of the radicalization of its society and availability of nuclear weapons.” James Mattis is a respected, temperate man. So when you hear someone like that writing those words, what is your reaction?

KHAN: Just that I do not think James Mattis fully understands why Pakistan became radicalized. You know, there’s just a short history which, you know, everyone may or may not know. In 1980s, when the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Pakistan, along with the United States—helped by the United States, we organized the resistance to the Soviets. And the resistance was organized by Pakistani ISI training these militants, who were invited from all over the Muslim world to do jihad against the Soviet Union. And so we created these militant groups to fight the Soviets.

Then, of course, fighting the Soviets, jihad was glorified. And I never forget when Ronald Reagan invited the mujahedeen leaders to Washington and he said they reminded him, and I quote, “the moral equivalence of the Founding Fathers of the United States.” So jihad was—you know, jihadis were heroes then.

Come 1989, Soviets leave Afghanistan. The United States packs up and leaves Pakistan with a lot of those who would have reminded Ronald Reagan of the moral equivalence of Founding Fathers, and we were left with these groups. And then comes 9/11 and Pakistan again joined the U.S. in the war on terror. And now we are required to go after these groups as terrorists, who were now—now, they were indoctrinated that fighting foreign occupation is jihad. But now, when the U.S. arrived in Afghanistan, it was supposed to be terrorism. So Pakistan took a real battering in this.

I have to say, Richard, I opposed this from day one. I said we had first trained these guys to fight jihad and it was a great idea, and now we are telling the same groups it’s terrorism. So we should at least have stayed neutral. Pakistan, by joining the U.S. after 9/11, committed one of the biggest blunders. Seventy thousand Pakistanis died in this. We had some say over a hundred and fifty billion, say two hundred billion—some economists, Pakistanis—two hundred billion lost to the economy. And on top of it, we were blamed for the U.S. not winning in Afghanistan. I thought it was the worst period for Pakistan.

The lessons learned now, I think the Pakistan government should not have pledged what they could not deliver. How could they deliver? They were—there were—there were insider attacks in the Pakistan army. The groups that were close to the Pakistan army, the army was now trying to kill them. So in a nutshell, when Mattis—(audio break)—

HAASS: Isn’t, though, the criticism fair that you are partially responsible for our difficulties in Afghanistan because Pakistan continues to accord sanctuary—provide sanctuary to the Taliban? And even if you can’t always succeed against radicals who are on your territory, it seems to me it’s totally legitimate for the United States to expect 100 percent effort. And at times we would—we have argued and we would argue that the effort is anything but 100 percent.

KHAN: You know, look, here was someone who kept saying that there’s never going to be a military solution in Afghanistan. I kept telling Pakistan government, whenever I had a chance. I came here in 2008. President Obama had not taken office. I spoke to senior Democrats. I told them that there will never be a military solution in Afghanistan simply because I have read the history of Afghanistan. You just have to read the history. They fight each other; the moment a foreigner comes through, they all get together and the resistance starts. Started with the British. You know, three times the British tried. The Soviets killed one million Afghans. They were still—the resistance was stronger after a million Afghans had been killed. So I kept trying to tell this—I tried to explain to—I remember meeting Joe Biden, John Kerry, Harry Reid. I, you know, tried to explain. And I realized they hadn’t a clue. No one understood Afghanistan. The politicians didn’t understand what was going on, and this madness kept going on and on.

And Pakistan kept being blamed. Now, Pakistan had two right now—but it had even more—we have 2.7 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan. There are camps of five hundred thousand refugees living there. How do we know who’s coming in and going out? Clearly, this was not—from Pakistan, the idea that there were these insurgents going from Pakistan, how were we—first of all, the tribal area bordering Afghanistan, there is no border there. The Durand Line is a line made by the British which—there is no border there. Now we are fencing the border because of the allegations that fighters are going from Pakistan. We are fencing the border. We’ve also time and time said that, look, if you want—if you want Pakistan to completely stop anyone going across, then, you know, take the refugees back, 2.7 million people. But it’s not possible that—you know, that 2.7 million refugees there and expect Pakistan to completely shut the border.

Having said that, I do not think that it’s because of Pakistan the U.S. has not been able to succeed in Afghanistan, simply because there is a history behind it. It was never going to happen. And fortunately—fortunately, President Trump has done, you know, by him forcing there to be a dialogue and then this peace deal, which was just about to be signed—this is painful for us. The peace deal was about to be signed and, you know, it’s—President Trump has—we read it in the papers. I mean, we should have—at least be discussed with us. But now I’m meeting President Trump later on and I will try and tell him that, look, there is—there’s not going to be a military solution. For nineteen years if you have not been able to succeed, you’re not going to be able to succeed in another nineteen years.

HAASS: I actually agree with you that there can’t be a military solution. What I doubt is that there could be a peace deal that holds. So even if there were an agreement with the Taliban, what is there about the DNA of the Taliban that leads you to believe that any peace they would sign would be anything more than tactical?

KHAN: I feel that this is not the Taliban which was there when—in 2001 who was displaced by the U.S. Things have changed. You know, they say that you only cross the river once. This is a—you know, realities have changed. They have learned. This is—Taliban realize that they cannot control the whole of Afghanistan. The Afghan government knows that they cannot—you know, there needs to be some sort of a peace deal. There has to be a political settlement.

Let’s just face it, you only have two choices. Either you fight or you have sort of a political settlement. There’s no point in fighting anymore. I wish that this deal had been signed. There would have been ceasefire and then we would have proceeded towards the only way there’s going to be—the U.S. is going to eventually take the troops out and there will be peace there.

So I agree with you, Richard; it’s going to be tough. I never for one minute assumed that this was going to be easy. But it is the only way.

HAASS: Actually, just for the—I actually think there is a slightly different way, which is one idea is we would fight for a military victory—I agree with you that’s not within reach. I am profoundly skeptical of a peace agreement. The third approach for as long as it takes is to support the government and basically preserve what you can in Afghanistan so it can’t again become a basis for terrorist attacks. It’s not a solution, but the United States has kept forces in other countries for more than half a century. We have—we have supported governments. It’s not a solution, but it might be preferable to a situation of Taliban control over the country.

KHAN: I don’t think Taliban will be able to control the whole country. I think there will be—there will be a settlement.

Look, people of Afghanistan have suffered for forty years. I mean, it is inhuman what they are going through. Anyone with any humane feelings would want there to be peace there. Every day there are bomb blasts going and people dying. So anything to actually stop this, I—you know, I—again, Richard, I agree with you that after seventeen years of bloodshed and the way things have gone, I agree that it’s not going to be easy. But I also don’t think that if we go the other way, you know, it’ll be just more of the same.

You know, if—Taliban today are stronger than they were for, you know, maybe in 2010, when last time there was chance for peace talks, when Holbrooke was there. They are much stronger than that now. And when they see that the U.S. is about to leave, you know, their morale is up.

HAASS: Exactly—(laughter)—which is why some of us are skeptical. But—

KHAN: No, so what I mean is that—(laughter)—military is not the solution. If they are now feeling stronger than before, they are not going to be able to give up if you kill or bomb more of them.

HAASS: I’m going to move on, but thank you. I think it’s an important exchange.

HAASS: I should just tell the members here before I go to questions is that the Indian foreign minister will be here later this week, so I expect we will return to some of these—

KHAN: And I hope you’ll ask proper questions to him—(laughter)—not be too diplomatic.

HAASS: So we will have Ambassador—Foreign Minister Jaishankar here.

Amber G. wrote:Doing = = .. Trump and Modi, also at UN meet..

pankajs wrote:Pak Media on Howdy Modi

pankajs wrote:A good one ... start @ 2:00. Realistic about bakis's prospects and khayali pulau about India's position. Lastly everything boils down to the bestern press pressure and all dubious local/global hooman rights orginizations. That is how they plan to win in Kashmir.

@11:30 > Hum kaar kya rahe hain asks the anchor. The reply is out of the world. Some bakis advising to play their "criticality" card.

ramana wrote:So what was the objective of Immy meeting George Soros?

CalvinH wrote:Looks like PTI is trying to throw Qureshi under the bus on Pakis inability to get a topic in UNHRC. The blame for Kashmir diplomatic fiasco will be piled on him eventually. A seasoned politician he is on a tough wicket.

After the CFR conference Imran is a big liability for Paki Establishment. If the upcoming Dharna from JUI is successful that means establishment has decided to dump Imran. In future we may see a fight between Imran and Paki Establishment.

Do we see establishment pasand anchors who are Imran cheerleader slowly starting to criticize Imran? That would be a sure sign.

saip wrote:Looks like Immy the Dimmy's days are numbered. That cartoon in Nation says it all. I do not remember seeing such cartoons even about the previous PMs and Immy the Dimmy is the selelcted PM and the blue eyed boy of Bajwa.

Pak terror groups use Chinese drones to airdrop 80 kg weapons in Punjab for J&K


Sep 25, 2019,
Shishir Gupta.


Five people have so far been arrested by Punjab Police in connection with the drone drops.

At least eight drone sorties, carrying a total of 80 kg of weapons (arms and ammunition), were sent across the border into Punjab by Pakistan-based Khalistani terror groups between September 9 and 16, officials in security agencies and the Punjab Police have confirmed on condition of anonymity.

The entire consignment, using the Khalistan Zindabad Force (KZF) network, was supported by Pakistan’s spy agency Inter Services Intelligence and orchestrated through Germany and Lahore; the ultimate aim — to fuel terror attacks in Jammu & Kashmir.

The details of these drops have emerged following investigations that led to and following the September 22 weapons seizure at Tarn Taran district; the eight payloads were dropped in Amritsar and Tarn Taran.



Police recover a half-burnt drone that was used for smuggling weapons into Punjab from Pakistan.

Five people have so far been arrested by Punjab Police in connection with the drone drops, with one 22-year-old Subhdeep held on Tuesday. Investigators said he was from Amritsar district and was radicalised by the prime accused in the case, Mann Singh, and another accused, Akashdeep, in Amritsar jail. The other four people, suspected to belong to a terror module, were arrested from the outskirts of village Chohla Sahib in Tarn Taran on Sunday. They were using a white Maruti Swift with a Punjab registration number.

The investigation involved multiple agencies – the Punjab Police, central security agencies, the Border Security Force, the Indian Air Force – and prima facie found that multiple Chinese commercial drones with 10 kg payloads have been used in the weapons drop operations across the border. The drones, the investigation reveals, may have been launched from locations 2 km inside Pakistan and made to travel the distance of five kilometres at a height of 2,000 feet, and then dropped off the weapons after descending to 1200 ft. The payload was slung from the platform using Chinese mountaineering ropes.



Chinese batteries recovered from the drone that crashed in Tarn Taran, Punjab.

With drone activity also being seen in Punjab’s Ferozepur district, the IAF and BSF have been asked by the Punjab police to intercept these unmanned aerial vehicles through low-level radars and destroy them. Officials fear that they could also be used to carry and drop off bombs.

The interrogation of those arrested has revealed that KZF’s Germany-based operative Gurmeet Singh Bagga in coordination with his Pakistan-based chief Ranjeet Singh aka Neeta have made deliveries of at least four weapons, grenades, electronics, and fake currency through drones. The deliveries were made on the intervening nights of September 6/7, 9/10 and the last one on 15/16. The last drone crashed at Rajoke Village, Khalra police station, in Tarn Taran, near a border drain which is 2km from the fencing on the international border with Pakistan. The entire operation came to light after the discovery of the burnt drone, whose eight Chinese batteries were stripped off by the accused on instructions from across the border. “ It has also been revealed that such deliveries took place on four different dates, mostly between 9.30 pm and 10.30 pm with the drone making two sorties within an hour,” said a senior Punjab Police official. As many as five AK-47 rifles, which weigh about four kilograms with magazine, four Chinese pistols , nine HE grenades, Rs 10 lakh fake currency, 1000 rounds of ammunition and two electronic receivers were recovered by the police from the accused.

The main concern of Indian security agencies is the revelation that entire consignment was meant for Islamist groups in Kashmir. “ We are not very clear as to how many other consignment has made their way into Kashmir using similar modus operandi and with the help of Pakistan based Sikh terrorists,” said a senior security official.

Aditya Raj Kaul @AdityaRajKaul

Imran Khan: We (Pakistan) can't attack India. Clearly that's not an option.

iMac_too @iMac_too

Five years back Mannu govt used to say us war is not an option & Pak used to bluster away with war mongering. Today Rajnath ji daily threatens Pak & Immy says "attack" is not an option. If you don't see the sea change, you are blind or a Congressi

Amber G. wrote:Did Imran's third wife came to US or he left her in SA? How is he getting all the spiritual advice and who is performing black magic?

Peregrine wrote:Jaish readying specialsquad to target PMModi, NSAAjit Doval : Intel - Raj Shekhar | TNN

HIGHLIGHTS

- A major in Pakistan’s notorious spy agency, ISI, is collaborating with the JeM brass for the “sensational attack”, sources in the intelligence establishment said

- Accordingly, an alert has been issued to police in 30 “vulnerable” cities including Jammu, Amritsar, Pathankot, Jaipur, Gandhinagar, Kanpur and Lucknow

NEW DELHI: Jaish-e-Muhammed is readying a squad to target PM Narendra Modi and NSA Ajit Doval in retaliation to the defanging of Article 370 in J&K, sources in the intelligence establishment said. A major in Pakistan’s notorious spy agency, ISI, is collaborating with the JeM brass for the sensational attack”, they added.

Deans wrote:If indeed we have this intel, I'm surprised its out in the public domain.

Rsatchi wrote:Baba tweeting orange alert at four bases
Something is going to happen
I sincerely wish they are not stupid enough to use dirty bombs
But you never know what the TSP will do
The response should be long lasting this time around