Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan - September 15, 2009

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 04 Nov 2009 22:46

I wonder how much of this "Taliban will take over pakistan" will set the stage for the US to establish a permanent (several) base in Pakistan. Yes, yes I am aware that Pakistan was a sovereign state only on paper etc, but we were still dealing with a somewhat independent state. How good can a takeover of Pakistan on the lines of Afganistan be for India. We will end up with China on one side and US on the other side.
How would nationalist PM's like IG and PVNR react to this building of presence? MMS appears to fulfil multiple goals for the US - defang Indias nuclear power but also help reestablish colonial presence on Indian soil.
This cannot be good

Avinash R · Post by **Avinash R** » 04 Nov 2009 23:14

Why fight my Muslim brethren

The average Pakistani soldier has already psychologically crossed over to the Jehadi side. It is impossible to convince him to undertake military action against his co-religionist brethren.
...
Now, where this gets scary is when you hear a conversation like:

Person 1: “The Taliban couldn’t have blown up the market in Peshawar because a Muslim wouldn’t do that.”

Person 2: “No, the Americans did it. But you know, the market that got blown up catered for women. And you know it’s haram for women to go out of the house.”

Person 1: “oh…..yeah”

anandsgh · Post by **anandsgh** » 04 Nov 2009 23:16

Got hands on these videos.... nothing special apart from the comments from a retired PAF Air Marshal. DO go through the whole series, a decent watch with beer and popcorn.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_mBeUwVZKZk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FLQutGqouQE

manish · Post by **manish** » 04 Nov 2009 23:19

Gagan wrote:It would seem that within the core commanders group, there is a crore commander group ..
..

OT ALERT!
I still find the old BRF term of 'Corpse Commanders' more charming. Not many seem to use it nowadays, but it fits the pakis perfectly IMHO. Of course, they do command crores in TSP!

Who was the inventor of that term?

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 04 Nov 2009 23:20

enqyoob wrote:Trying to "keep it quiet" in Afghanistan must be like being a "Moderator" in BRF. Just a thought...

Was thinking exactly the same. AWMTA

The real problem of Afghanistan is the great Pakinessistan. Not Afghanis. But some moderators behave like our Unkil and Aunty, while others play the lizard on the wall. Only few moderators see the problem for what it is, similar to Bharat that is India. The problem arises when self interests overshadow the truth, similar to the current Afghanistan conundrum. Did you ever think why a thread runs in to tens of pages and for months altogether, before few moderators bring the “religion” clause to lock/delete them? Same goes with Unkil’s modus operandi.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 04 Nov 2009 23:51

EU vigilant against misuse of aid to Pakistan

{My foot vigilant - poodles are always poodles}

‘It’s true that the EU has delivered substantial aid to Pakistan for humanitarian purposes. We are extremely vigilant about the way our aid is used,’ Daniele Smadja, ambassador and head of the EU delegation in New Delhi, told reporters here.

Gagan · Post by **Gagan** » 05 Nov 2009 00:16

All of Pakistan's delusions in one youtube post.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9jQYmnF ... re=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_YbQ5br ... re=related

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Nov 2009 00:17

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg5kSsVEJcs

The documentary takes viewers to never-before-seen locations all across the country, from the politically sensitive Line of Control and the Siachen Glacier to the mountains of Waziristan and the swamps of Sir Creek. Anchored and produced by Dawn News' senior anchor and correspondent Wajahat S. Khan.

Check this out for humor

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Nov 2009 00:19

Acharya wrote: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lg5kSsVEJcs

The documentary takes viewers to never-before-seen locations all across the country, from the politically sensitive Line of Control and the Siachen Glacier to the mountains of Waziristan and the swamps of Sir Creek. Anchored and produced by Dawn News' senior anchor and correspondent Wajahat S. Khan.

Check this out for humor

Have not seen this version of the Indian map before

svinayak · Post by **svinayak** » 05 Nov 2009 00:22

Jarita wrote:

Have not seen this version of the Indian map before

Paki perception of China and China vs India is very important.

The general future narrative is that - Pakistan can gobble India as much as possible and China can gobble as much as of India.
Rest of India will be at the mercy of these two nation.

These kind of narratives should be smashed once for all.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Nov 2009 00:37

[quote="Acharya
These kind of narratives should be smashed once for all.[/quote]

How?

What can folks like us do? Given the vanilla thinkers I encounter in the Indian diaspora (seriously brainwashed - india should not have tested nukes types) how do we dispell this nonsense

Most Pakistanis believe in their claim on Kashmir. they will go on the offensive, however illogical they are. NRI's believe the American narrative - full of doubts etc. It's worrisome

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2009 01:05

For starters be aware of the narratives/perceptions and not dimissis them as CT/VT etc. and point out clamly even if shouted down. It will register sometime, somewhere.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 05 Nov 2009 01:18

RamaY wrote:Did you ever think why a thread runs in to tens of pages and for months altogether, before few moderators bring the “religion” clause to lock/delete them?

I was surprised to see moderators develop cold-feet in the Indira thread. The discussion had just started on the one of the most critical period relating to raksha of bharat.

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 05 Nov 2009 01:23

Folks here are juicy bits ( a long long whine from a Paki belonging to Yale ). I don't know if it was posted earlier.
To Understand Pakistan, 1947 Is The Wrong Lens - The hurt that moves Pakistan is from a wound more recent—1971

(The author is with the Religious Studies Department at Yale University. He is also a member of the MacMillan Initiative on Religion, Politics and Society at Yale and a doctoral fellow at the Centre for Global Islamic Studies at Lehigh University.)

On a recent trip to India, I was moved by the genuine concern people have about Pakistan. As a Pakistani living in the United States, I am subjected daily to serious exasperation, courtesy the American media. Americans do not understand Pakistan because they do not care. And there is no real knowledge without caring. Indians certainly do care. Pakistan has been on the Indian mind since the moment of their co-creation. India and Pakistan are like two ends of a thread tied in a fantastic Gordian knot; their attachment magically survives their severance. And how the love grows! The recent Jaswant Singh controversy over Jinnah only partially unveiled how Pakistan is critical to the ideological coherence of Indian nationalism in both its secular and Hindutva varieties. But behind this veil, Pakistan has always been internal to Indian politics. It should come as no surprise then that establishment Indians (bureaucratic and political elites, intellectuals, media types, and the chattering classes) are well-versed in the nuances of Pakistani society. Indians understand Pakistan like no one else does, or can.

Still, there is this curious blind spot: no one in India appears to remember 1971. Worse, no one seems to think it relevant. For all their sophistication, Indian elites continue to understand Pakistan primarily with reference to the events of 1947. Anything else is incidental, not essential. The established Indian paradigms for explaining Pakistan, its actions and its institutions, its state and society, have not undergone any significant shift since the Partition. The tropes remain the same: religion and elite manipulation explain everything. It is as if the pre-Partition politics of the Muslim League continues to be the politics of Pakistan—with slight non-essential variations. More than 60 years on, the factors may be different but little else has changed.

This view is deeply flawed. It reflects a serious confusion about the founding event of contemporary Pakistani society. The Partition has a mesmerising quality that blinds the mind, a kind of notional heft that far outweighs its real significance to modern South Asian politics. The concerns of the state of Pakistan, the anxieties of its society, and the analytic frames of its intellectual and media elites have as their primary reference not 1947 but the traumatic vivisection of the country in 1971. Indians have naturally focused on their own vivisection, their own dismemberment; but for Pakistan, they have focused on the wrong date. This mix-up has important consequences.

First, Indians tend not to remember 1971 as a Pakistani civil war, but rather as India’s “good” war. It is remembered as an intervention by India to prevent the genocide of Bengalis by Pakistanis. The fact that the Bengalis themselves were also Pakistanis has been effaced from the collective memory of Indian elites. This makes 1971 merely another Kargil, or Kashmir, Afghanistan or Mumbai—an instance of Pakistan meddling in other people’s affairs, and of the Pakistani military’s adventurism in the region. This is why mention of Balochistan at Sharm el-Sheikh created such a stir in India. It was literally incomprehensible to Indians that Pakistan could accuse India of meddling in its internal affairs. Surely, this is the pot calling the kettle black. But what the Indian mind perceives as Pakistan’s ongoing divorce from reality is in fact Pakistan’s most fundamental political reality. The Pakistani establishment has internalised the memory of 1971. In all things, and at all times, it must account for India. Dismemberment has the requisite effect of focusing the mind on existential matters. Nothing can be taken for granted.

Second, the Indian establishment routinely misconstrues as ideological schizophrenia the Pakistani intellectual classes’ complicated responses to India. The nuances of the Pakistani experience of India are the very picture of incoherence to them. Worse, Pakistanis often frustrate the project of creating a common South Asian sensibility to bridge the political gaps between the two communities.

But again, no one in India accounts for 1971 when making such grand universalising (and, if I may add, genuinely noble) plans for the future of the region. Pakistani intellectual elites share with their Indian counterparts the normative horror of what the West Pakistani military did in the East. How can anyone in their right mind not deem such behaviour beyond the pale? But horror does not preclude abiding distaste for the Indian state’s wilful opportunism in breaking Pakistan apart. It is for this reason that while the intellectual classes in Pakistan, especially the English language press and prominent university scholars, have almost always condemned their state’s involvement in terrorist activity inside India proper, they have remained largely quiet concerning Kashmir. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Kashmir does not seem so different to them than East Pakistan. {hahahaha - This is what I learnt from Yale - let us call it as Yale spin }

It is for this same reason that there was no great outcry about the isi’s supposed involvement in the bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul. The general sense among the educated elites was that India deserved it for trying to “encircle” Pakistan through Afghanistan. Indians process this either as paranoia or as a visceral hatred of India that blinds Pakistanis to facts. Perhaps there is some of this too. But it bears appreciating that Pakistan is a post-civil war society. Fear and anxiety concerning India’s intentions in the region are hardly limited to the so-called ‘establishment’ in Pakistan. It is a general fear, a well-dispersed fear, a social fear. And a relatively coherent fear at that.

This leads to the third, and perhaps the most important point. The Indian establishment does not see Pakistan as a ‘normal’ society. The substance of this abnormalcy is religion, which is also the irreducible difference between the two societies. It is the original sin and a foundational incoherence that is ultimately inescapable. And it has tremendous explanatory power. It explains both the ideological nature of the Pakistani state’s hatred of India and, simultaneously, the state’s manipulation of the zealous masses for its own ends. That these two explanations do not hold together coherently is besides the point to most Indians. This is an old story and is as such sensible. In the Indian imagination, Pakistan is endlessly regurgitating the politics of Jinnah and the erstwhile Indian Muslim League. While Indian politics moves on, Pakistan’s holds eerily still. I am certainly not one to deny that there are some obvious asymmetries between India and Pakistan. The nature of the relationship between religion and politics is certainly one of them. But it bears mentioning that perhaps the most relevant asymmetry concerns the repeated defeats suffered by the conventional Pakistani forces at the hands of their Indian counterparts. This asymmetry is neither that complicated nor particularly abnormal. It illuminates the actions of the Pakistani state as essentially strategic and only incidentally ideological. And in that sense, it allows an interpretation of Pakistan as a fairly pedestrian, even ‘normal’ post-conflict society in its relations with its much larger neighbour. {full of spin and and justification of the Paki behaviour. Good job... }

Ultimately, this is the real value of a renewed focus on 1971 rather than 1947. It normalises Pakistan. It allows for discussion of real differences between the two societies and the two states, rather than of reified stereotypes that have little political relevance any more. This is not to justify the actions of the Pakistani state, which are in many cases entirely unjustifiable on both moral and political grounds. It is merely to hope that a mutual comprehension of normalcy may lead to peace and progress. Certainly, no one will deny that there is value in that.

Added later:

A reply blog by K.V.Bapa Rao

http://blogs.outlookindia.com/default.a ... 126&eid=20

This article is a perfect example of what is really wrong with what is sadly, an example of perhaps the best and most thoughtful brains that Pakistan has to offer--they can't, or won't, come to terms with the fact that there is something wrong with being focused on their loss to what they consider an inferior "Hindu" India, all the while having no interest to speak of in examining what it is about their civilizational mindset that makes it all right for them to blithely gloss over one of the most sickening crimes against humanity their country committed in 1971.

Most Indians, and certainly those that were alive in 1971, understand this instinctively (and this understanding is not just conveniently confined to the Indian "state" either but extends to the people), but are generally too polite or otherwise inhibited to say it out loud. That reticence probably accounts for what I'll charitably call this author's confusion. Others might see it as classic Pakistani sophistry that is meant to manipulate a generation of young Indians who might be unfamiliar with the historical and human realities of what happened in 1971.

RamaY · Post by **RamaY** » 05 Nov 2009 01:44

surinder wrote:
RamaY wrote:Did you ever think why a thread runs in to tens of pages and for months altogether, before few moderators bring the “religion” clause to lock/delete them?
I was surprised to see moderators develop cold-feet in the Indira thread. The discussion had just started on the one of the most critical period relating to raksha of bharat.

OT here.... lets go Nukkad...

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 05 Nov 2009 01:52

Muppalla wrote:Folks here are juicy bits ( a long long whine from a Paki belonging to Yale ).

Another one of the Paki RAPE wannabe analcyst who thinks that because they can write grammatically correct english and use spellcheck in word, they can think too.

Let me brief, kind and to the point. The writer is an idiot. The idiocy of his article does not arise from malice, but from a natural inherent handicap of not being able to think. We should sympathize with him.

The substance of this abnormalcy is religion...It explains both the ideological nature of the Pakistani state’s hatred of India and, simultaneously, the state’s manipulation of the zealous masses for its own ends. That these two explanations do not hold together coherently is besides the point to most Indians.

Islam is being used to on the one hand stoke violence against India and on the other hand, manipulate people inside Pakistan. Example for the former: Kashmir, Mumbai, Example for the latter: Hudood Ordinance and Nizam-e-Adl in Swat. Ergo it is a coherent explanation and explains the hatred towards India as well as internal manipulation.

But it bears mentioning that perhaps the most relevant asymmetry concerns the repeated defeats suffered by the conventional Pakistani forces at the hands of their Indian counterparts. This asymmetry is neither that complicated nor particularly abnormal. It illuminates the actions of the Pakistani state as essentially strategic and only incidentally ideological. And in that sense, it allows an interpretation of Pakistan as a fairly pedestrian, even ‘normal’ post-conflict society in its relations with its much larger neighbour.

Has an asymmetric war been waged anywhere in the world, at anytime in history without ideological backing and with purely strategic considerations ? Inquiring minds want to be "illuminated". Has any power anywhere in the world, any time in history, that has been defeated repeatedly, continued fighting because of purely strategic considerations without ideological backing ? I wish to know.

Reading such paki articles sets my IQ back by a couple of points.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 05 Nov 2009 02:07

very interesting article muppalla ji. if you parallel 1971 to what happened to Germany post world war II, germans repented for the atrocities only after the entire leadership that committed the atrocities was wiped out. the leadership that committed 1971 still remains.

as said in BR -- destroy TSPA/ISI -- that is the only way to reform PAK.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2009 02:18

And compare to US Civil War. The society that was defeated continued for another 100 years and still rears its ugly head. There was a lot of naxoius literature that came up- Faulkner et al.. But nothing has come from the TSP.

On BRF we have recognised the contribution that the defeat of 1971 has done to TSP in a Niagara of posts: Islamization of armed forces and society, Nazare-ya- Pakistan etc. Pak society instead of looking at why 1971 happened decided the Bengalis were not Islamic enough and ordered more Islam as the antidote for future separatist movements. And they had full support from US in this prescription.

MurthyB · Post by **MurthyB** » 05 Nov 2009 02:21

harbans wrote:
Indian Hindus should have thier arms and legs amputated at birth so they cant be a threat to Pakistan later in life.
I got this statement from an unmentionable. An 'esteemed' poster that too. Defends the PA strongly. Problem is hate emanating from doctrine. Not alleged wrong doing. The rest are excuses. Doctrine is a problem. Jarita is correct. Ramana is wrong. Doctrine cannot be European, American or Asian. PA and Taliban are wrong both. One can never know who will be worse. India has to confront the doctrine at some point of time. The doctrine can never be respected as long as it aims at unbelievers as a target. No self respecting person can claim to have an iota of respect for a doctrine that labels others as Kafirs/ infidels on whom Jihad is obligatory. Confronting a geographical representation of the doctrine and saying one form of practitioners are better than the other is brushing the real problem under the carpet. Those who practice and believe in the doctrine know this is weakness. Easy to see.

That same retard came up with this gem:

Nobody wants Hinduland to exploit other cultures for self-entertainment but Hinduland insists on doing it anyway. To use some computer terminology, Hinduland's lynch mob has an "installed base" of hundreds of superstitious witlings. The implication is that Hinduland's goal is to burn our fair cities to the ground. This is abject deconstructionism! This is preeminently the time to speak the truth, the whole truth, frankly and boldly. Let me therefore state that I must ask that Hinduland's secret agents extend the compass of democracy to insidious cretins. I know they'll never do that so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to perpetuate harmful stereotypes. In summary, Hinduland's squadristi have the power to quash other people's opinions whenever they feel like it. Is anyone listening? Does anyone care?

Didn't a moron used to write like this in one of the rags in pukeland? I hope there aren't two such people!

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 05 Nov 2009 02:28

Pak-Lanka FTA revision urged

KARACHI - Pakistan-Sri Lanka FTA needs revision to enhance export quota of Pakistan agro-based products. A seminar will be held on the second of next month wherein trade experts, KCCI members and High Commissioner of Sri Lanka will discuss modalities to increase the bilateral trade.
This was agreed in a meeting between President KCCI Abdul Majid Haji Muhammad and Consul General of Sri Lanka , V.S. Sidath Kumar here at Karachi Chamber of Commerce and Industry, said KCCI statement here on Tuesday.
President KCCI, on this occasion, said in Pak-Sri Lanka FTA, the export quota of Pakistani rice , potato, and other agro products is not adequate.
Abdul Majid urged both the Governments for deliberation to revise the FTA in view of expansion in bilateral trade. Sri Lanka is importing Indian agro commodities to fulfil its need whereas the same products can be exported to Sri Lanka under FTA if the quota is revised.
It was agreed in the meeting to hold a seminar on Pak-Sri Lanka FTA on December 2, 2009, wherein Pak-Sri Lankan trade experts, members of KCCI and High Commissioner of Sri Lanka will address and identify products and areas and discuss ways to boost the bilateral trade.
President KCCI Abdul Majid voiced that both countries have good friendly, economic and trade relations. Balance of trade between the two countries is in favour of Pakistan, increasing year by year since 2001-02 Pakistan’s exports increased from dollars 71.96 million in 2001-02 to dollars 214.95 million in 2007-08, shows increase of 198 percent.
On the other hand imports from Sri Lanka increased from dollars 28.52 million in 2001-02 to dollars 61.58m in 2007-08, shows increase of 116 percent.
Abdul Majid highlighted that there is ample goodwill for expansion of trade and establishment of joint ventures between the two countries in agro-based products including sugar production, seafood processing; value-added textiles and garments; tea and its plantation; electronics; metal fabrication and light engineering; pharmaceutical products; dehydration, preservation and canning of fruits and vegetables etc.
Abdul Majid said that Pakistan and Sri Lanka were lucrative investment destinations for exporters of both countries as on the one hand Pakistan was a gateway to resource-rich Central Asian States while on the other hand Sri Lanka enjoyed duty-free access to huge European Union and Indian markets.

What if SL-PAK FTA is signed then can't India push its products to Pak thru SL? Why only otherway round? May the hashish effect.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2009 02:31

The pakis dont have own money. its all baksheesh money they flaunt.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 05 Nov 2009 02:37

ramana wrote:And compare to US Civil War. The society that was defeated continued for another 100 years and still rears its ugly head. There was a lot of naxoius literature that came up- Faulkner et al.. But nothing has come from the TSP.

On BRF we have recognised the contribution that the defeat of 1971 has done to TSP in a Niagara of posts: Islamization of armed forces and society, Nazare-ya- Pakistan etc. Pak society instead of looking at why 1971 happened decided the Bengalis were not Islamic enough and ordered more Islam as the antidote for future separatist movements. And they had full support from US in this prescription.

the literature has not reached because PAK is another country and our secular policies have isolated the vermin.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2009 02:48

You will get into trouble with that term.

However they havent even examined/published in their own pool.

V_Raman · Post by **V_Raman** » 05 Nov 2009 02:56

i hope i have clarified the term enough to not invite trouble from admins.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 05 Nov 2009 03:17

ramana wrote:And compare to US Civil War. The society that was defeated continued for another 100 years and still rears its ugly head. There was a lot of naxoius literature that came up- Faulkner et al.. But nothing has come from the TSP.

Ramana-saar
There are two essential differences between the US and Pakis (well

in this particular context).

1. In the US the society that was defeated, was comprehensively and mortally wounded, with death as a sure consequence. With the raisin dieter completely removed. The US civil war was essentially sparked due to political hostility between "slave power" (the mega rich slave owning community from the south) and the northerners. When the means of getting ultra rich (the slaves) were removed, it essentially broke the back of the southern core -- No more mega rich driven by slave labor. It would take a 100 years to actually desegregate, but essentially when slavery was abolished, the opponents to desegregation were only armed thugs and popular opinion. There was no "powerful core" left.

In pakistan, this would mean land reforms and land ceiling act -- breaking the back of the feudals, and an army commensurate with the size of the country, divested from internal intelligence and commercial interests, with bases away from population centers. Strict separation of church and the state, with curbs on the influence of the mullahs (no mullahism in textbook or hiring lashkars for example).

After that and after 50 to 100 years, Pakis would gradually take on the semblance of being a country. In the meanwhile, we would have armed thugs of minor nuisance, people who crave for the glorious past and yes pakistani Faulkners.

2. If one thing is quintessentially and uniquely American, that is to take mundane considerations and couch it in the form of idealized glorious proclamations. A protest against taxes became

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights.

Similarly a protest in support of slavery (against the anti slavery forces -- the Corwin Amendment, whose defeat triggered the civil war the text is "No amendment shall be made to the Constitution which will authorize or give to Congress the power to abolish or interfere, within any State, with the domestic institutions thereof, including that of persons held to labor or service by the laws of said State {Central guvrmand will not interefere if state guvrmand thinks slavery is a good idea}") became

We oppose the role of big government which intrudes into the rights of citizens and impinges on the rights of the state

Now when the original proponents die, and only the statements remain, they actually become the engine for something positive. People talk about human rights and rule of law (inspired by everyone's "inalienable rights") and forget that 80% of the document was bitching and whining against King George, taxes and Britain. Similarly, people talk about state rights (for example whether the federal government can overrule gay marriage decisions at the state level) and conveniently forget that 50% of the statement talked about slavery, and the intent of that statement was to safeguard slavery. So glorious proclamations do have their uses, and take on positive interpretations with the passage of time*.

In Pakiland on the other hand, the glorious proclamations invariably are religious proclamaitons and there is no room to interpret religious glorious proclamations, in accordance with the times....**

*I think that this is the role of any carefully crafted constitution.
** unless if you consider the statement 1 bious = 10 yindoo, which will eternally be inspiring and true

Vivek K · Post by **Vivek K** » 05 Nov 2009 03:28

Jarita wrote:..Given the vanilla thinkers I encounter in the Indian diaspora (seriously brainwashed - india should not have tested nukes types) how do we dispell this nonsense

Most Pakistanis believe in their claim on Kashmir. .. NRI's believe the American narrative - full of doubts etc. It's worrisome

Come again? Speak for yourself please and do not stereo type blocks of people in one stroke with one color. You seem to have met some really stupid people with no intelligence. That is not your typical NRI.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Nov 2009 03:41

Lalmohan wrote: But the more I read about islamism, the more i see that their agenda is and always has been much larger than India. In that respect Pakistan has always been on the peripheries of their thinking. The pakistanis though have managed the situation so that they are much more to the forefront - by force rather than ideology.

The core islamist focus remains on the arab heartlands, to cleanse and purify them.

The Pakistanis came to the forefront for the Arabs by offering them what every insurgency needs - sanctuary.

Whether it was the 1980s, the 1990s or the 2000s, Pakistan or the Pakistani zone of influence in Afghanistan was the most secure place in the world to be, even if the Egyptians, or Algerians or French or Americans were scouring the world trying to hang you by the bollocks.

When Bin Laden was pushed out of Sudan in 1996 he considered Yemen, and he considered Somalia. He chose eastern Afghanistan.

Of course, the PA has periodically sold out many of Arab jihadis under times of intense US pressure, and the Arabs have been happy to violently pay back for those betrayals.

Yet since 9/11 OBL has had many chances to change his mind and leave Af-Pak, but he has not taken them.

In addition to sanctuary Pakistan has increasingly provided the Arabs with *lots* of additional manpower, as well as opportunities like the opiate trade. OBL still has more allies in high places, and more cannon fodder to surround him than he would find anywhere else in the world.

Plus there always the nuclear hopes.

the right strategy for India would probably be to make the walls stronger and a very big stick ready and visible. the pakistanis can then drown in their own sewage. we'll deal with whatever survives.

India needs to cultivate as many friends clients as possible on the other side of the fence to cope with the tidal wave of humanity that's likely to come.

Cultivating friends in Pakjab and Sindh requires a fundamental weakening of the PA's *political* power east of the Indus. Its not enough for their grip to be loosened in Baluchistan and Pashtun areas

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Nov 2009 03:54

Vivek K wrote:
Jarita wrote:..Given the vanilla thinkers I encounter in the Indian diaspora (seriously brainwashed - india should not have tested nukes types) how do we dispell this nonsense

Most Pakistanis believe in their claim on Kashmir. .. NRI's believe the American narrative - full of doubts etc. It's worrisome
Come again? Speak for yourself please and do not stereo type blocks of people in one stroke with one color. You seem to have met some really stupid people with no intelligence. That is not your typical NRI.

Touchy are we. These so called unintelligent NRI's are professors in big universities, people at the top level in I-banks and fortune 50's and folks one would meet in a standard IIT, Ivy league get together. ABCD's are at the extreme. With the exception of a few groups, most believe that Indian troops have forcibly occupied Kashmir.
While things have been getting better over the years, to date the most influential NRI's do not follow a pro India narrative. They are pro India only as much as it benefits them from a business perspective. Have you checked out groups like Indus Entrepreneurs in the Valley and other business networking groups across North America?
I am pleased that you are surrounded by such patriots.

surinder · Post by **surinder** » 05 Nov 2009 04:05

Johann, following 11/26 you had posted here on the idea of cultivating civilian leadership in TSP. But do you think it makes sense for India to cultivate & co-opt the Talibums? They being the enemy of the enemy (PA) would be excellent source to get on your side. India could provide intel & other resources in exchange for (a) hitting PA, & (b) not hitting India. Of course, it shoud be done with plausible deniability. Is this a workable strategy?

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 05 Nov 2009 04:11

Anyone touching any form of Jihadis - may gain temporarily, but over the long run it is always devastating. Talebunnies should not be touched directly - if at all needed. Better encourage or help a third party with no obvious or direct interest immediately to damage India to use the Talebs. They cannot and should not be trusted. They are opportunists out for the loot. We cannot build up strategy with them - for that particular association will come back to haunt us with immense costs.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2009 04:12

You need to come out into the sunlight.

Johann · Post by **Johann** » 05 Nov 2009 04:21

Surinder,

I've talked here for years about India's unique potential to cultivate an alternative leadership to the PA .

However, even in the best of times the most anyone could have with the Punjabi Taliban would be a hudna. There may be a time and place for that, but nothing more.

Pakjab's middle classes have grown in the last decade - they've enjoyed the coming of satellite television with its local talk shows and Bllywood glamour, they love the new malls and restaurants, They marched against Musharraf, and they're terrified of being caught between American and Taliban bombs.

In the absence of the PA as we know it, I think they will be grateful to work with India to maintain stability - keep the beards down, and try to keep the peasants fed and the lights on.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 05 Nov 2009 04:27

surinder wrote:Johann, following 11/26 you had posted here on the idea of cultivating civilian leadership in TSP. But do you think it makes sense for India to cultivate & co-opt the Talibums? They being the enemy of the enemy (PA) would be excellent source to get on your side. India could provide intel & other resources in exchange for (a) hitting PA, & (b) not hitting India. Of course, it shoud be done with plausible deniability. Is this a workable strategy?

And the Taliban will eventually be grateful to India, not!
The stable solution would be for Pakistan to be broken into 2-5 countries with the Taliban run affair on the Afganistan side and the moderate countries with India friendly leadership bordering India.

pgbhat · Post by **pgbhat** » 05 Nov 2009 04:57

Obama's quest for a Pakistan policy ------ Mushahid Hussain

Unlike the aloof and abrasive Holbrooke, Hillary reached out to the "real" Pakistan. She got a peep into the emerging Pakistani society -- dynamic, vibrant, outspoken and self-confident. She seemed taken aback, used as visiting high-level Americans are to a sanitised Islamabad, where the officially-certified truth of the fawning ruling elite links sycophancy and servility to their self-perpetuation.

A profile of this "new" Pakistan is instructive, with three key ingredients. First, while the "old" Pakistan was politically a "one-window operation" -- monolithic and centrally-guided -- today's multiple power centres go beyond the military-security Establishment or the traditional political elite, and these now include the fiercely-independent media, an assertive civil society, confident young men and women with faith in their country's future, and a free judiciary that for the first time is truly an autonomous player.

WTF is he talking about?

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 05 Nov 2009 05:14

He is probably reading the Yale spin and adding his own!

arnab · Post by **arnab** » 05 Nov 2009 05:53

ramana wrote:He is probably reading the Yale spin and adding his own!

question: why is Mushahid Hussain often referred to as Mushahid 'Mandela' Hussain by Kamran Shafi etc?

Gerard · Post by **Gerard** » 05 Nov 2009 06:19

Because the Paki twit compared his short detention to Nelson Mandela's.

In the Cage, in Search of Grace
By Mushahid Hussain
Published: Monday, February 12, 2001
The New York Times

About a year earlier, I had been assigned as minister-in-waiting to Nelson Mandela when he visited Pakistan. I had asked him, as the 20th century's most celebrated political prisoner, what were the most difficult moments of his 27 years in detention. Without a moment's hesitation, he replied, ''Solitary imprisonment.'' My time in solitary would be much shorter, my experience far less harrowing. But I was to learn something of what he meant.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 05 Nov 2009 06:32

pgbhat wrote:Obama's quest for a Pakistan policy ------ Mushahid Hussain
Unlike the aloof and abrasive Holbrooke, Hillary reached out to the "real" Pakistan. She got a peep into the emerging Pakistani society -- dynamic, vibrant, outspoken and self-confident.

WTF is he talking about?

Like a Paki woman trying to give birth to a multi-headed monster fathered by unknown entities - the "real Pakistan" is emerging .. emerging and continues to emerge. It remains stuck half in and half out.

vavinash · Post by **vavinash** » 05 Nov 2009 07:52

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/daw ... two--bi-11

MIRAMSHAH: A suspected US drone aircraft fired two missiles on Thursday into North Waziristan killing two people, Pakistani intelligence officials said.

The strike hit a house in a village about 18 km (12 miles) east of North Waziristan's main town of Miramshah.

‘The house is on fire. Flames are rising,’ villager Said Wali told Reuters by telephone.

Militants had cordoned off the area and were pulling bodies out of the rubble, one of the Pakistani security agency officials said.

There was no further information about the two people killed in the attack or the identity of the owner of the house which was hit, the officials said.

The United States has launched 44 such strikes on suspected militants in Pakistan this year compared with 32 last year.—Reuters

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 05 Nov 2009 08:01

The South Waziristan based AQAM terrorists have moved into North Waziristan. The PA is not planning to go into North Waziristan because of its friend Gul Bahdur being the ruler there. So, the drones are doing the job.