Terrorist Islamic Republic of Pakistan (TSP): 15 Jan 2012

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Jan 2012 18:02

kenop, in the on-going Mumbai trial case at ATC, Adiala, it was made clear that evidence and examination of a witness through video-conferencing was not permissible under Pakistani criminal law.

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 22 Jan 2012 18:46

Suppiah wrote:Isn't such wrestling against Islam? If so it is aganst Pakistan and hence treacherous. Enough to jail him for life, if not wajibulcattle..

Mansoor Ijaz is an Ahmediya. Dont know from where you go the idea that he is a muslim

SSridhar · Post by **SSridhar** » 22 Jan 2012 18:49

From a review of the book, Women, War, and the Making of Bangladesh: Remembering 1971 in DAWN,

The Pakistanis believed that the war would be quickly won as Bengalis being “weak and unmartial, and cowardly,” would quit their rebellion. This “myth of power” over Bengalis held sway over rank and file Pakistani soldiers, whose martial “manliness of bravado,” and ignorance of Bengali society, language, people and even body language made for a destructive brew. At checkpoints, young Bengali men were forced to remove their lungis (sarongs) in front of their elderly and womenfolk to see whether they were circumcised and thus Muslim. The Pakistan Army killed Bengali Hindus simply for being Hindus, as they were readily assumed to be either Indians or Indian agents crossing into East Bengal to attack the Pakistan army.

The racialised discourse that deemed Bengalis as Hindu (or Hindu-like), polluting and destroying the nation from within, made the purging of the Bengali essential to restoring the nation to its original purity {like the Nazis}. In Saikia’s words, “Muslim Pakistani (read: Pure) men assumed that the sacrifice of the Hindu women was necessary to undo the malaise.”

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 22 Jan 2012 18:50

SSridhar wrote:kenop, in the on-going Mumbai trial case at ATC, Adiala, it was made clear that evidence and examination of a witness through video-conferencing was not permissible under Pakistani criminal law.

Strange thing this Pakiz criminal law, seems to have been framed by criminals so that it is next to impossible to nail a Packi. It seems the only crime that gets punishment in Bakistan is blasphemy by non muslims.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 22 Jan 2012 19:59

Mahendra wrote:Mansoor Ijaz is an Ahmediya. Dont know from where you go the idea that he is a muslim

Really? Then he is bull-cattle already, no need to commit any further crime..

Mahendra · Post by **Mahendra** » 22 Jan 2012 20:16

And none of the 72 he is entitled to are going to look like those wrestlers..oh wait a minute he aint getting no 72 since he is an infidel

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 22 Jan 2012 20:52

shiv wrote:
In every case Pakistan is between the extremists and the USA. And Pakistan positions itself between the USA and India and fights for the US's attention as the best alternative to all extremists and India.

This model works well if the US is relevant. If the US becomes weak or irrelevant, the Indians need not give a flying fuk about Paki voice and which way it howls. The US's relevance is vital to this model. If the US sinks - Pakistan's "appeal to USA" model is finished.

Indeed, but where you and differ is that US is not going to become irrelevant in the next 200 years at least. Lets not get carried away by declining American power and rising Asia BS. I just skimmed through Fareed's Sunday show, and he was talking about US projection of power under Obama. Its simply spectacular, the latest being US decision to place troops in Asia. Why? To control the Asians just in case they turn uppity. As it is most Asians, middle class Chinese and Indians included are in US hip pocket, but even that needs to be watched. And to rub salt and shall we say US chutzpah, US pompous calls itself an "Asian power". I mean look at the gall, US brags about the superiority of its Judeao Christian western civilization but in the next breath pompously calls itself an "Asian power". Its like one man stealing another man's wife, and tells her helpless husband that he is her lover too

. Thats unadulterated arrogance of power.

No wonder you see TSP's downhill sking after talking tough for a few days. And they know tallel than mountain friends are no substitute to the massive aura & power US brings to the table. No leaf turns in the world without US blessing if the turning of that leaf has the remotest impact on US interests.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 22 Jan 2012 21:12

CRamS wrote: Indeed, but where you and differ is that US is not going to become irrelevant in the next 200 years at least. Lets not get carried away by declining American power and rising Asia BS.

CRamS - you betray your anxiety about my attitude to the US by making such statements to reassure yourself. I do not need such reassurance. I know the US is powerful and will remain so for a while. Have I ever denied that? You can't stand the idea of talking about a weak US even as a hypothesis which tickles me greatly

If you look back, at my post I said :

If the US becomes weak or irrelevant,

Two possibilities
1. Weak USA
2. Irrelevant USA

Even if the US does not become weak it can become irrelevant as Pakistan itself and other local events might make it. The other meaning of my post that you failed to extrapolate while the "weak US" barb got your all American goat was that India's long term need is not to fritter itself away in fighting Pakistan - which you say is provoked by the US need to keep India in check. Surely any Indian with a fraction of a brain will understand that in the long term Indian should be looking at toppling the US - which would then make the US both weak and irrelevant. An American may not agree with me, but that is his prerogative. The US is a far more worthy competitor than Pakistan and the US surely seeks to keep India down using Pakistan. Why get misled by US subterfuge? Absorb some blows from Pakistan and get the US into trouble. That is the way forward IMO. bring the US down. We (I mean Indians, not Americans) can get lot of allies in doing that, including Pakistan.

But your anxiety and desires are different from mine - so the concatenation of the word "weak" with the name "USA" gets you to react instantly in a howl of protest in a post seems to be an attempt to reassure yourself about what your crystal ball says about America,

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 22 Jan 2012 21:25

Listening to Tareq Fatah video as I write this...fantastic..

Some nuggets

- When the first officer dies in Kargil they throw down their arms. No problems if hawaldars are dead in large numbers..
- Even the whiskey sipping 'secular' generals think they are Mohd. Ghaznavi or bin Kasim.
- Kerry Lugar bill will stop funds for the TSPA if there is a undermining of Pak democracy..
- 2 orderlies polish your boots, 3 take your wife shopping. Sons sell your plot to study in US..They come to army to loot.
- Aam fauzi used like gun fodder.
- If any honest man is in this army, they kill him themselves - like Gen. Adam Khan (?)
- Quran itself recognises Israel!
- About Punjab - you cannot make Mercedes in a Fiat factory

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 22 Jan 2012 21:36

Suppaih

what video??

sorry for the trouble

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 22 Jan 2012 21:37

The one that got promoted to the first page...posted many days ago..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=26lC3A7d ... r_embedded#

g.sarkar · Post by **g.sarkar** » 22 Jan 2012 21:57

http://www.economist.com/node/21543156
"A game of chicken
Squeezed between the army and the courts, Pakistan’s civilian government may yet survive
Jan 21st 2012 | from the print edition
IN RECENT months, despite coup threats, economic crisis, a heart scare and incessant vilification in the press, Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan’s president, has never appeared in public without one constant companion: a stubborn, face-splitting grin. He seems not to have much to smile about. The coalition led by his Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) is just over a year away from the end of its five-year term. But you could get long odds in Islamabad for a bet on its getting there. Like any civilian government in Pakistan, it survives only so long as the army allows it to, and the army would like to see the back of it. That does not necessarily mean, however, that a coup is looming. There is more than one way to skin a civilian government.
Times have changed since Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, the country’s first elected leader (and the last to serve a full term in office) was overthrown by a coup in 1977 and later hanged. The pattern set in a more recent phase of democracy, in the 1990s, was to topple governments through legal or constitutional intrigue. Three, including two led by Mr Zardari’s late wife, Benazir Bhutto, fell in that way before a fourth tried to get rid of the army chief, Pervez Musharraf, in 1999, leaving the affronted general no option but to retaliate with an old-fashioned coup.
Even though the PPP’s victory in an election in 2008 has led to an unusually long stint under Mr Zardari and his prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, their sway has hardly been smooth or unchallenged. From the outset their coalition has been engaged in a chaotic tussle for power with the combined forces of the army and the judiciary. This tussle is reaching its climax for two reasons: one letter and one memo.
The letter is one the Supreme Court insists the government write to the Swiss authorities asking them to reopen a money-laundering case against Mr Zardari, despite his presidential immunity. Ever since it was first asked, in 2009, to send the letter, the government has refused. This week the Supreme Court began contempt proceedings against Mr Gilani, who would be disqualified from office if convicted of a crime. Hauled before the court on January 19th, he brazened it out, insisting there was no case to answer, since the president “has complete immunity inside and outside the country.” The hearing resumes on February 1st......."
Gautam

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 22 Jan 2012 22:30

Shiv ji..on the topic were were at earlier (don't know if this was posted):

Implications of unification of terrorist groups in Pak-Afghanistan region By SD Pradhan
06 January 2012, 10:39 AM IST

A worrisome development is that some important terrorist groups in Pakistan and Afghanistan have formed a council to resolve all differences among various militant factions, regroup them, and formulate an effective joint strategy. This development had been the work of several months and the decisions were taken at two meetings- one in November and other in December, 2011. Two factors make it very significant - first is that Mullah Omar of Taliban (Commander-in Chief and Amirul Momineen) had been involved in this effort and second is that Tehrik-i- Taliban of Pakistan (TTP) has joined this council, reflecting this group would also non- Pakistani forces.

Reports suggest that several jihadi groups in consultation with Islamic Emirate Afghanistan (shadow Taliban Government in Afghanistan) have set up a committee to support war against western forces in Afghanistan. The committee, known as Shura-i- Murakbah, includes jihadi factions like Waliur Rehamn group, Hakimullah Mehsud group, Haqqani group, Gul Badar group and Mullah Nazir group. The TTP has also approved this move. The five members of the Shura-Murakbah are as follows-

• Maulvi Azmatullah (Taliban Commander in Barwan) represents Waliur Rehman group.

• Noor Saeed (Taliban Commander in Barwan) represents Hakimullah Mehsud group.

• Saeedullah (Commander in South and central Afghanistan) represents the Haqqani group.

• Saddar Hayat (Commander in North Waziristan) represents the Maulvi Gul Badar group.

• Amir Hamza (Commander of Ahmadzai Wazir tribe) represents the Mullah Nazir group.

The Pak Army could have encouraged unity amongst the different jihadi factions to target Indian interests. The unification taking place soon after India and Afghanistan signed Strategic Partnership Agreement would suggest this.

First, while the main objective of this group is to fight jointly against the NATO forces, others who are seen as anti-Taliban would also be targeted. India is perceived to be against Taliban. Second, since the signing of the Indo-US civil nuclear deal, India is seen as the ally of US and this factor too would bring the Indian interests in this group's sharper focus. Third, the Haqqani group had been involved in attacking Indian interests in Afghanistan and their strengthening does not bode well for India. And fourth, Pakistan security forces are less likely to be targeted by TTP and that would enable them to work with undivided attention to get the Indian interests targeted.

abhijitm · Post by **abhijitm** » 22 Jan 2012 22:40

It would be fun if khan now arrests Ijaz bhai, an american citizen, for spying for ISI. hehe

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 22 Jan 2012 23:02

It would really help we keep the messaging of Puki Army's role in promoting Terrorists of all kinds and then betraying them for American dollars.

How Pakistan continues to help US drone campaign despite political tensions

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 22 Jan 2012 23:09

A fractured policy

Brahma Chellaney is Professor of Strategic Studies at the New Delhi-based Centre for Policy Research.

With the stage set for secret US-Taliban talks in Qatar, the White House strategy for a phased exit from war-ravaged Afghanistan is now couched in nice-sounding terms like 'reconciliation' and 'transition to 2014'. These terms hide more than they reveal. In seeking a Faustian bargain with the medieval Taliban, President Barack Obama risks repeating the very mistakes of US policy that have come to haunt regional and international security.

Since coming to office, Obama has pursued an Afghan War strategy summed up in just four words: surge, bribe and run. The military mission has now entered the 'run' part, or what euphemistically is being called the 'transition to 2014'.

The central objective at present is to cut a deal with the Taliban so that the US and its Nato partners exit the "Graveyard of Empires" without losing face. This deal-making is being dressed up as 'reconciliation', with Qatar, Germany and Britain getting lead roles to help facilitate a settlement with the Taliban.

Yet what stands out is how little the US has learned from past mistakes. In some critical respects, it is actually beginning to repeat the past mistakes, whether by creating or funding new local militias in Afghanistan or striving to cut a deal with the Taliban. As in the covert war it waged against the nearly nine-year Soviet military intervention in Afghanistan, so too in the current overt war, US policy has been driven by short-term interests.

To be sure, any president must work to extricate his country from a protracted war. Obama thus is right to seek an end to the war. He, however, blundered by laying out his cards in public and emboldening the enemy.

Within weeks of assuming office, Obama publicly declared his intent to exit Afghanistan, before he even asked his team to work out a strategy. A troop surge that lasted up to 2010 was designed not to militarily rout the Taliban but to strike a political deal with the enemy from a position of strength. Yet even before the surge began, its purpose was undercut by the exit plan. This was followed by a publicly unveiled troop drawdown, stretching from 2011 to 2014.

A withdrawing power that first announces a phased exit and then pursues deal-making with the enemy undermines its regional leverage. It speaks for itself that the sharp deterioration in US ties with the Pakistani military has occurred after the drawdown timetable was unveiled. The phased exit has encouraged the Pakistani generals to step up support to the Taliban. Worse, there is still no clear US strategy on how to ensure that the endgame does not undermine the interests of the free world or further destabilise the region.

US envoy Marc Grossman, who visited New Delhi last Friday for consultations, has already held a series of secret meetings with the Taliban over more than a year. Qatar has been chosen as the seat of fresh US-Taliban negotiations so as to keep the still-sceptical Afghan government at arm's length (despite the pretence of 'Afghan-led' talks) and to insulate the Taliban negotiators from Pakistani and Saudi pressures. Meanwhile, even as a civil-military showdown in Pakistan compounds Washington's regional challenges, the new US containment push and energy sanctions against Iran threaten to inject greater turbulence into Afghanistan.

In truth, US policy is coming full circle again on the ISI-fathered Taliban, in whose birth the CIA had played midwife. The US acquiesced in the Taliban's ascension to power in 1996 and turned a blind eye as that thuggish militia, in league with the ISI, fostered narco-terrorism and swelled the ranks of the Afghan war alumni waging transnational terrorism. With 9/11, however, the chickens came home to roost. In declaring war on the Taliban, US policy came full circle.

Now, US policy, with its frantic search for a deal with the Taliban, is coming another full circle. The Qatar-based negotiations indeed highlight why the US political leadership has deliberately refrained from decapitating the Taliban. The US military has had ample opportunities (and still has) to eliminate the Taliban's Rahbari Shura, or leadership council, often called the Quetta Shura because it escaped to the Pakistani city.

Yet, tellingly, the US has not carried out a single drone, air or ground strike in or around Quetta. All the US strikes have occurred farther north in Pakistan's tribal Waziristan region, although the leadership of the Afghan Taliban or its allied groups like the Haqqani network and the Hekmatyar band is not holed up there.

When history is written, the legacy of the Nato war in Afghanistan will mirror the legacy of the US occupation of Iraq - to leave an ethnically fractured nation. Just as Iraq today stands ethnically partitioned in a de facto sense, it will be difficult to establish a government in Kabul post-2014 whose writ runs across Afghanistan. And just as the 1973 US-North Vietnam agreements were negotiated by shutting out the Saigon regime - in consequence of which South Vietnam unintentionally disappeared - the US today is keeping the Afghan government out of the talks' loop even as it compels President Hamid Karzai to lend support and seems ready to meet a Taliban demand to transfer five incarcerated Taliban leaders out of Guantanamo Bay.

Afghanistan, however, is not Vietnam. An end to Nato combat operations will not mean the end of the war, because the enemy will target Western interests wherever they may be. The fond US hope to regionally contain terrorism promises to keep the Af-Pak belt as a festering threat to regional and global security. This is a chilling message for the country that has borne the brunt of the rise of international terrorism - India.

brihaspati · Post by **brihaspati** » 22 Jan 2012 23:51

The Paki army will wait until the US admin gets paralyzed in the buildup to November. If Romney wins, its bad for PA - or at least so the PA thinks. So PA needs Obama. if that becomes uncertain the ghazis may launch a desperate move.

There are two crucial paralyzing events coming up for TSPA - the US elections and the CCP party fiesta. Depending on which factions take over in these two clients of the prostitute, the TSPA may not have much choice left from the positions it has worled itself into.

The Taleb - or caliphatism should be showing its signs soon from late February. Not sure if IKhan is bumped off, blamed on the "civilian", and the civilian removed. The road will be open for jihadis to take over through the backdoor.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 22 Jan 2012 23:55

The Bomb: Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan

By Pervez Hoodbhoy

Once upon a time Iran was Pakistan’s close ally — probably its closest one. In 1947, Iran was the first to recognise the newly independent Pakistan. In the 1965 war with India, Pakistani fighter jets flew to Iranian bases in Zahedan and Mehrabad for protection and refuelling. Both countries were members of the US-led Seato and Cento defence pacts, Iran opened wide its universities to Pakistani students, and the Shah of Iran was considered Pakistan’s great friend and benefactor. Sometime around 1960, thousands of flag-waving school children lined the streets of Karachi to greet him. I was one of them.

The friendship has soured, replaced by low-level hostility and suspicion. In 1979, Ayatollah Khomenei’s Islamic revolution, and the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, set major realignments in motion. As Iran exited the US orbit, Pakistan joined the Americans to fight the Soviets. With Saudi money, they together created and armed the hyper-religious Pashtun mujahideen. Iran too supported the mujahideen — but those of the Tajik Northern Alliance. But as religion assumed centrality in matters of state in both Pakistan and Iran, doctrinal rifts widened.

These rifts are likely to widen as the US prepares for its withdrawal from Afghanistan. Iranians cannot forget that in 1996, following the Soviet pullout from Afghanistan, the Taliban took over Kabul and began a selective killing of Shias. This was followed by a massacre of more than 5,000 Shias in Bamiyan province. Iran soon amassed 300,000 troops at the Afghan border and threatened to attack the Pakistan-supported Taliban government. Today, Iran accuses Pakistan of harbouring terrorist anti-Iran groups like Jundullah on its soil and freely allowing Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and its associates to ravage Pakistan’s Shia minority. Symptomatic of the grassroot-level change, Farsi is no longer taught in Pakistani schools.

On the other hand, Saudi Arabia’s footprint in Pakistan has grown steadily since the early 1970s. Pakistani leaders, political and military, frequently travel to the Kingdom to pay homage or seek refuge. The dependency on Saudi money grew. After India had tested its Bomb in May 1998 and Pakistan was mulling over the appropriate response, the Kingdom’s grant of 50,000 barrels of free oil a day helped Pakistan decide in favour of a tit-for-tat response and cushioned the impact of sanctions subsequently imposed by the US and Europe. The Saudi defence minister, Prince Sultan, was a VIP guest at Kahuta, where he toured its nuclear and missile facilities just before the tests. Years earlier Benazir Bhutto, the then serving prime minister, had been denied entry.

The quid pro quo for the Kingdom’s oil largesse has been soldiers, airmen, and military expertise. Saudi officers are trained at Pakistan’s national defence colleges. The Pakistan Air Force, with a high degree of professional training, helped create the Royal Saudi Air Force and Pakistani pilots flew combat missions against South Yemen in the 1970s. Saudi Arabia is said to have purchased ballistic missiles produced in Pakistan.

So what happens if Iran goes nuclear, and Saudi Arabia wants to follow?

For all its wealth, Saudi Arabia does not have the technical and scientific base to create a nuclear infrastructure. Too weak to defend itself and too rich to be left alone, the country has always been surrounded by those who eye its wealth. It has many universities staffed by highly paid expatriates and tens of thousands of Saudi students have been sent to universities overseas. But because of an ideological attitude unsuited to the acquisition of modern scientific skills{Isn't pukistan in the same boat?}, there has been little success in producing a significant number of accomplished Saudi engineers and scientists.

Perforce, Saudi Arabia will turn to Pakistan for nuclear help. This does not mean outright transfer of nuclear weapons by Pakistan to Saudi Arabia. One cannot put credence on rumours that the Saudis have purchased nuclear warheads stocked at Kamra air force base, to be flown out at the opportune time. Surely, this would certainly lead to extreme reaction from the US and Europe, with no support offered by China or Russia. Moreover, even if a few weapons were smuggled out, Saudi Arabia could not claim to have them. Thus they could not serve as a nuclear deterrent.

Instead, the Kingdom’s route to nuclear weapons is likely to be circuitous, beginning with the acquisition of nuclear reactors for electricity generation. The spent fuel from reactors can be processed for plutonium. Like Iran, it will have to find creative ways by which to skirt around the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty – which forbids reprocessing spent fuel. But it doubtless takes heart from the fact that the US forgave India for its nuclear testing in 1998, and eventually ended rewarding it with a nuclear deal. Saudi Arabia had unwillingly signed on to the NPT in 1988. Its position then was that it would be happy to sign up but only if Israel did the same. That, of course, never happened. But Saudi Arabia had no option but to follow the US diktat.

The Kingdom’s first steps towards making nuclear weapons are being contemplated. In June 2011, it said that 16 nuclear reactors were to be built over the next 20 years at a cost of more than $300 billion, each reactor costing around $7 billion. Arrangements are being made to offer the project for international bidding and the winning company should “satisfy the Kingdom’s needs for modern technology”. To create, run and maintain the resulting nuclear infrastructure will require importing large numbers of technical workers. Some will be brought over from western countries, as well as Russia and former Soviet Union countries.

But Saudi Arabia will likely find engineering and scientific skills from Pakistan particularly desirable. Since many are Sunni Muslims, the Pakistanis would presumably be sympathetic with the Kingdom’s larger goals. Having been in the business of producing nuclear weapons for nearly 30 years under difficult circumstances, they would also be familiar with supplier chains for hard-to-get items needed in a weapons programme. And because salaries in Saudi Arabia far exceed those in Pakistan, many qualified people could well ask for leave from their parent institutions at the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission, Kahuta Research Laboratories, and National Development Complex.

Good sense dictates that Iran stops its pursuit of the Bomb. But whether it does or not, Pakistan should stay out of the Iran-Saudi nuclear rivalry. Over and above all this, Israel and the United States must stop threatening to bomb Iran.

Shaashtanga · Post by **Shaashtanga** » 23 Jan 2012 00:26

Suppiah wrote:Listening to Tareq Fatah video as I write this...fantastic..

Some nuggets

- When the first officer dies in Kargil they throw down their arms. No problems if hawaldars are dead in large numbers..
- Even the whiskey sipping 'secular' generals think they are Mohd. Ghaznavi or bin Kasim.
- Kerry Lugar bill will stop funds for the TSPA if there is a undermining of Pak democracy..
- 2 orderlies polish your boots, 3 take your wife shopping. Sons sell your plot to study in US..They come to army to loot.
- Aam fauzi used like gun fodder.
- If any honest man is in this army, they kill him themselves - like Gen. Adam Khan (?)
- Quran itself recognises Israel!
- About Punjab - you cannot make Mercedes in a Fiat factory

Suppiahji, did you watch another bila-takalluf video i posted on previous page regarding Balochistan? I again request everyone who understands hindi or urdu to watch it. Mods, please post to first page of TIRP thread (if there is consensus).
Here is the link again -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQS-TOc ... r_embedded

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 23 Jan 2012 00:29

Good hard-hitting op-ed by Brahma ChellaneyJi, none of this crap about TSP is too nuke to fail peddled by US charlatans to justify propping up TSPA, just hard-nosed facts. But his arguments are flawed in some respects.

1. US is not making a mistake, this is a deliberate, cunning, diabolical, calculated policy of US to keep Talibunnies and TSPA happy
2. Also, Talibunnies will by themselves will not be able to target western interests, they need state support, and TSPA will take care that western interests are not targeted
3. He is right about India bearing the brunt of TSPA, Taliban, and pigLet fury, but who said SDRE interests exist in US calculations? Does it even exist in India leadership calculations?

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 23 Jan 2012 00:43

CRamS wrote:This has been the seminal unstated US policy.

CRamS ji

While I don't agree with the "centrality" of keeping us SDREs down, one or two dots are the two slips of tongue by Leon Panetta. I don't have any idea how to resolve that antinomy.

Regards

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 23 Jan 2012 00:54

CRamS wrote:1. US is not making a mistake, this is a deliberate, cunning, diabolical, calculated policy of US to keep Talibunnies and TSPA happy

While I do not claim to know or understand US thought or actions, I would assume if the above was their goal, it could have been achieved at a much lesser cost (Human and Monetary) by simply not going to Afganistan in the first place and letting the Talibunnies and TSPA rule the roost. Not to mention the loss of face.

JE Menon · Post by **JE Menon** » 23 Jan 2012 02:44

>>US is not making a mistake, this is a deliberate, cunning, diabolical, calculated policy of US to keep Talibunnies and TSPA happy

This is exactly what GoI is doing also, at much cheaper cost.

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 23 Jan 2012 02:45

Taliban video shows execution of Pakistan soldiers
this looks like video of earlier reported deaths of FC

Dipanker · Post by **Dipanker** » 23 Jan 2012 02:53

pankajs wrote:
1. US is not making a mistake, this is a deliberate, cunning, diabolical, calculated policy of US to keep Talibunnies and TSPA happy
While I do not claim to know or understand US thought or actions, I would assume if the above was their goal, it could have been achieved at a much lesser cost (Human and Monetary) by simply not going to Afganistan in the first place and letting the Talibunnies and TSPA rule the roost. Not to mention the loss of face.

The keyword here are deliberate, cunning, diabolical, calculated . Once you take that into account it makes perfect sense why US would spend $1+ trillion at the cost of serious damage to the economy, have nearly 2000+ american soldiers killed there, another 10's of thousand injured by the Paki in AfPak, of course to keep the Talibunnies and TSPA happy!

It sounds a bit like Lahori logic, isn't it?

Satya_anveshi · Post by **Satya_anveshi** » 23 Jan 2012 03:02

another view..could be paki propagandu

TTP fractures into more than 100 groups

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Jan 2012 05:16

CRamS wrote:Good hard-hitting op-ed by Brahma ChellaneyJi, none of this crap about TSP is too nuke to fail peddled by US charlatans to justify propping up TSPA, just hard-nosed facts. But his arguments are flawed in some respects.

1. US is not making a mistake, this is a deliberate, cunning, diabolical, calculated policy of US to keep Talibunnies and TSPA happy
2. Also, Talibunnies will by themselves will not be able to target western interests, they need state support, and TSPA will take care that western interests are not targeted
3. He is right about India bearing the brunt of TSPA, Taliban, and pigLet fury, but who said SDRE interests exist in US calculations? Does it even exist in India leadership calculations?

Highlighted the relevant word that sums up the quoted post.

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Jan 2012 05:26

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Pakis ... story.html

"We have arrested a man who runs a private hospital but has been successfully pretending to be a lieutenant general for three years to grab land and garner undue favours," senior police official Ghulam Subhani said.

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 23 Jan 2012 06:40

Due warning!!

Taliban spreading images of executions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwdzAprNSh0

CRamS · Post by **CRamS** » 23 Jan 2012 06:43

Dipanker wrote: The keyword here are deliberate, cunning, diabolical, calculated . Once you take that into account it makes perfect sense why US would spend $1+ trillion at the cost of serious damage to the economy, have nearly 2000+ american soldiers killed there, another 10's of thousand injured by the Paki in AfPak, of course to keep the Talibunnies and TSPA happy!

It sounds a bit like Lahori logic, isn't it?

You are the one being repetitive with these #s you keep quoting. How many times do I tell you that yes, US foreign policy is based on Lahori logic. Otherwise, we would not be seeing Iran hounded for nukes while the biggest terrorist entity there is, TSP, is allowed to keeps its arsenal and even justified because of big baaad India.

Post 9/11, the fury was so intense that football players, news anchors, feminists, homosexuals, not to mention Pentagon, CIA, the entire US launched into this crusade to "get the bad guys". Slowly but steadily, reality sinks in, and after killing Al Queda #2, 3, ... many times over, and finally getting Al Queda #1, the "getting the bad guys" was difficult to justify or pin down, and the thrill of the good guys Vs the bad guys lost its luster. Just witness the current US republican primary election campaign, its no longer get the bad guys, Obama has done that, rather its Obama apologizing for US. One has to invent differences even if there are none

.

So currently pragmatism has set in among US policy makers, and the realization has dawned that with the mighty Al Queda gone, how best to secure US interests, declare victory, and head back to the land of milk and honey. Cutting a deal with Talibunnies and their TSPA masters is not such a bad idea from US PoV.

Anujan · Post by **Anujan** » 23 Jan 2012 07:18

Remember Shaheen Sehbai? The oldies here will recognize him from the "South Asia Tribune" days. During those days he was quite the anti-army fellow writing columns very critical of Musharraf.

A little birdie tells me that all of that was taqqiya to get GC in massa. Once that was firmly in his pocket, he turned Paki and is a closet Khakhi supporter. Apparently he led the charge in drumming up the current Media ruckus about the memo and is also the beneficiary of pots of money from Mansoor Ijaz.

Just a data point while read his columns or while reading that Paki rag "The News International" that he runs these days.

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Jan 2012 07:39

Shaashtanga wrote: Suppiahji, did you watch another bila-takalluf video i posted on previous page regarding Balochistan? I again request everyone who understands hindi or urdu to watch it. Mods, please post to first page of TIRP thread (if there is consensus).
Here is the link again -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqQS-TOc ... r_embedded

Just did so..quite a revelation..and thankfully no Punjabi mix in the dialogue, not that I understand Urdu 100%

He goes into history of Balochistan and its present situation quite candidly..

One statement I liked was when he says if one great game had enslaved them, it is possible that the new great game can free them too. as Balochistan is buffetted by powerful states (Iran/TSP) and also is part of western and regional powers' great games.

He is also quite categorical that PRC is in cahoots with TSP/TSPA in looting and plundering Balochistan's wealth. It is endorsing, supporting TSPA's atrocities. Yet another reason for India to play deeper and more meaningful role here..

The anti-TSPA rants are quite strong. And too numerous to post..

The pro TSP Balochs are mostly tanzeems floated by TSPA/ISI. TSP has leased the state to TSPA and hence all the talk of 'apology' by Imran, Nawaz, Zardari etc., are fake and not from heart.

As for political solution, he does not see that happening ie., a TSP where there is federalism and democracy. The other choice left is azaadi.

Free Baloch would be secular and not war-mongering or supporting terror as state policy unlike TSP.

Unfortunately no question on India..or statement. Perhaps for the better as it would fuel TSPA propaganda.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Jan 2012 07:44

The USA's grip on Pakistan is totally centered on Pakistan's hatred for India. If Pakis did not hate/fear India the US would have no grip on Pakistan. The violence and killing requirements of Pakistani hatred were outsourced to Islamic jihadis so the army brass would not have to get killed. The same was done when the US required it.

The jihadis are now trying to gain power in Pakistan and the Pakis who unleashed them are now having second thoughts about whether the price they are paying is too high to continue to use them to fight an unwinnable war with India.

It is the US that is now asking them to fight the jihadis and Pakis don't want to do that - they want to start detente with India. Detente with India isolates the US and the jihadis because Pakistan is now not fighting India or the jihadis. The Jihadis need Pakistan support to fight India and the USA. The USA needed Pakistani support to fight jihadis. If you remove the majority of Pakis from the fight - the USA is basically powerless.

The only question is what percentage of Pakistanis are jihadi and what percentage are so worried about jihadis that they will try and hold India's hand. For the US this is a "Catch 22" situation. If "Pakistan" sinks only jihadis will be left and these jihadis are fighting the US as much as India. The US was aiding those jihadis to fight India (indirectly via Pakistan) and the same jihadis ended up fighting the US.

The situation for India is slightly different. Unlike the US, India has not enjoyed sex with Pakistan. India has been at war for 60 plus years and will continue to fight that war for another century if need be. It is only the US's carnal relatiosn with Pakistan that finds that divorce proceedings have started.

Of course CramSji is welcome to do a shrill protest at any hint that the US might be getting both weak and irrelevant in the region - but that is the way things are going. And guess what? The US has agreed to open and "office" for the Taliban in Qatar with for Guantanamo bay detainees as "negotiators". What the mighty government of the USA will now do is to negotiate with the same people US soldiers were pissing on in Guantanamo.

Of course the US is the sole superpower and will remains more powerful than me for the next 200 years. It's only their power vis a vis Pakistan that matters in this case.

Here is how things are going:

The USA really loved this and thrived on the following scenario. It's not just Pakistan that positioned itself like this. The USA enjoyed sex in this particular position.

USA <> Pakistan <> unreasonable extremists <> reasonable extremists <> India

But now Pakistan is moving to

USA <> Pakistan <> unreasonable extremists <> reasonable extremists <> India

And things are moving towards an end point of:

USA <> unreasonable extremists <> India

What India can pull off is this

USA <> unreasonable extremists <>Pakistan <> reasonable extremists <> India

Suppiah · Post by **Suppiah** » 23 Jan 2012 08:00

BTW one nice phrase used by Tariq Fatah in his video that we may want to use more often is "Is Hamam me sub nange hain" - he was referring to Pakistan's political parties..

A_Gupta · Post by **A_Gupta** » 23 Jan 2012 08:13

CRamS wrote: Otherwise, we would not be seeing Iran hounded for nukes while the biggest terrorist entity there is, TSP, is allowed to keeps its arsenal and even justified because of big baaad India.

It is rather obvious that Iran is hounded for nukes because of the perceived threat of said nukes to Israel. When an American Jew in Atlanta, GA, can suggest in his newsletter, the Atlanta Jewish Times, that one way of denuking Iran is to assassinate the current American President, so that a President can be installed who is more inclined to wage a war against Iran in order to protect Israel; and when to criticize Israel in the US is to unleash a storm of accusations of "anti-Semitism" against oneself, it should be fairly clear what the main reason is for Iran to be so hounded. Nothing at all to do with Lahori logic.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Jan 2012 08:15

As an Indian one gets used to being told that he is led by incompetent nincompoops in a nation whose brains were drained out long ago. It is no use arguing against this fundamental belief, this fundamental starting point that is used in any analysis of India's position in the pecking order of the world. The interesting thing to me is exactly who insists on telling Indians about this - but that is not the subject of this thread or my post.

But the reason I make this introductory paragraph is to set aside for a moment the idea that India is a stupid nation full of stupids, led by stupids, media full of stupids and imagine, even at the risk of extreme mental discomfort at the sheer temerity of having such a facetious thought process that India is a normal country with normal interests.

Pakistan split away from India in 1947. Let us accept the western/Pakistani narrative that "India and Pakistan are arch rivals who have been to war xyz times" Forget about who or what is responsible for this state of affairs and accept that the preceding sentence is true.

Indians sitting in India and looking at Pakistan were not afraid of Pakistanis or Muslims. They were afraid of the Pakistani armed forces. Media reports in India from the 1960s have centered around the power of the Pakistani armed forces to impose its will on India. So while India was never anti-Muslim or even anti-Pakistan - all that India did was to arm herself against the Pakistani armed forces might.

The USA on the other hand called Pakistan as an "ally". But the main ally that the USA had was not Pakistan's 70% rural poor, but the top 1% including the Pakistani army. All India's wars with Pakistan have ended up being a war between India and the USA where the Pakistan army is the USA's proxy. As long as the Pakistan army survived and as long as the US supported the Pakistan army, it was claimed that "Pakistan is surviving because of the Pakistan army". The Paki army says it and hey what do you know? "Pakistan experts" from the US of A are saying exactly the same thing.

Fact is Pakistan can survive without the Pakistan army. It is the USA and the Paki army who lose the most as the Paki army goes down. Pakistan can survive without the Pakistan army because India is not about to swallow up Pakistan. And as we have argued on here for over a decade, whatever happens to Pakistan, the people of Pakistan will remain there and will live on whether or not the Pakistan army or US support of that army survives.

But as the Paki army sinks - it is the USA that is finding itself without an ally. Trade and peace with India will make Pakistanis far more secure than they have ever been with US kool aid. But the Paki army and its ally the USA will have to be rendered irrelevant for that. The power to render that army irrelevant is technically there in Pakistan.

The only wild card here is the actual power that jihadis wield. My view on that is that it is the jihad fraction of Pakjab that is the biggest hurdle.

OK Now back to normal programming..

India is a country of stupids led by stupids because Indian brains were drained out long ago.

shiv · Post by **shiv** » 23 Jan 2012 08:38

Satya_anveshi wrote:Shiv ji..on the topic were were at earlier (don't know if this was posted):

Implications of unification of terrorist groups in Pak-Afghanistan region By SD Pradhan
06 January 2012, 10:39 AM IST

With due respect to this former intelligence official, I find that he has provided data, as would be expected from a person priviy to information, but has not gone far enough in data analysis.

After a quick(cursory) read, here are some quibbles:

1. What is Al Qaeda? What is Al Qaeda without the support of the Pakistan army? What is the Pakistan army without US support?

2. Splinter groups of rebels often unite when their numbers are decimated and their leaders are dispersed. All this unification of jihad groups could also be a last gasp that would work only if the Pakistani army survives as the most powerful entity

3. The history of the Pakhtun tribals has always been one of tribal factionalism. There have been numerous efforts at "unifying them" Nothing has worked so far. How can Mullah Omar suddenly reunify all of them without money and support from some powerful agent? That powerful agent has always been the Pakistan army supported by the USA

Rangudu · Post by **Rangudu** » 23 Jan 2012 08:55

Anujan

Sehbai's recent writings have nothing to do with the army. He has a longstanding personal enmity with Zardari, which is the driver behind his campaign against the civilians. He is still based out of DC.

member_22286 · Post by **member_22286** » 23 Jan 2012 09:10

The best way to get Pakistan on its knees is to target the supposedly "moderate intermediateries" or RAPES as we say through the Jehadi scum bags or Manipulate them to do so by qadrifying the elites.This will also simultaneously produce tremors in the whiskey swivelling Jehadi ranks of the PA.The moment this gains heavy momentum in the Pakjab area the feudals will be empowered and will engage in chaudary eat chaudary scenario as they do not need to fear the Pakistani Army.

Thinking of how to deal with Pakistan the best way is to get this RAPE class bumped off this in turn will open an entirely new can of worms for all the players engaged in Pakistan .The 3.5 will be groping with the problem of whom they must engage with and whole of pakistan will turn into Karachi.

At the same time the cleavages among the Jehadi factions must be exploited well enough that will cause blood to flow on the street.

We need to plan all this keeping in mind that the inbred pakjabi refugees do not enter India

devesh · Post by **devesh** » 23 Jan 2012 10:05

Ashok garu,

the idea of getting the feudals into a self destructive fight is spot on. a sufficiently weakened feudal elite will pave way for new power brokers and aspiring rising segments of the population. this is where India must work its "magic". and India's stamp as the facilitator of this process should be open for the aspiring rising classes to see.