Islam as a political weapon in Pakistan

Re: # 189 Sir , i am a great fan of Tigers and Inshallah or without Inshallah they will win one day.I was a great admirer of Sikh struggle against Mughals.I was a freat admirer of Sivajis guerrilla war.I am for all who rock the boat.i am for all who destroy empires.

suicide bombing is a desperate tactic of the weak.but it does drive fear in the stronger party.look how 9/11 destroyed the myth of US invinvibility.

Re: # 189 what other choice does the weaker party have ! the muslim women are fertile and the pashtuns dont believe in family planning

Zeemax Yar,
Zahid ki jan chor do. Who does not know what the real threat is. I agree when Agha summarises it as Globalisation for Neo Colonialisation, Liberalism-democracy for religion and International Political Economy-ideology. Twist it any way, it comes to the same.

#195 Posted by ijaz_gul,

Yes it does come to the same, but the ultimate objective of Globalisation (Wanting other people to want what you want) cannot be furthered unless those six points are accomplished. Once you consider each in the context of globalisation, all events happening today fall in place like a solved jig-saw puzzle.

#195 Posted by ijaz_gul,

For example, to elaborate, when you say "Liberalism-democracy for religion", actually that means democracy is fine unless Political Islam raises its head democratically. See point #2 in the list.

#174 Posted by pavocavalry

“suicide bombing is an effective remedy adopted by Muslims against Christian invaders. Since USA and its Christian allies apart from the Turks who have refused to fight against Talibs are using bombers against civilians and non combatants it is perfectly legitimate to employ suicide bombers against US and its NATO allies.”

#189 Posted by Ranjit

This is really sick. Pavo in one post appears to be a sane person but in the next, he completely loses it. It is sickening to think that some educated people who have some rudimentary knowledge human history like pavo does, appreciate suicide bombing as a legitimate weapon. The legitimacy of this weapon is questionable when it is used on unconnected civilians.

There are differences in people using this weapon. When the weapon is used in Iraq it does have an aura of legitimacy but even in Iraq it should never be the weapon of choice.

Taliban are not legitimate freedom fighters. Their commitment to Afghanistan is not defined. They conquered Afghanistan with Pakistani help and then maintained an iron grip of Afghanistan.

There should always be some leeway for the indigenous fighters that are fighting against an occupying force but do the Taliban qualify for that leeway is an important question.

The human history had seen many struggles for independence both against the conquering armies and the occupying armies but the suicide bombing was never a weapon of choice in any such struggle.

Te extensive use of this weapon by the terrorists/Jihadis shows lack of basic political skills to deal with an occupation.

Re: # 198 i am glad that u are a psychiatrist also . you have to be in helmand to see how the NATO and USA bombs non combatants.i agree with your utopian ideals.but life is not utopian.the ground realities are hard.

Re:pavocavalry
"what other choice does the weaker party have"

When one party is weak they need to understand the root causes of their weakness and fix it instead of killing themselves as suicide bombers. That is the only long term solution to their weakness.

For instance, the pakistanis are weak today because they have willingly become a US toady in order to gain advantage against India. So the root cause is mindless hostility with India which can only be sustained by selling out to the Americans. If they reach out to India and have a genuine peace, what will be the need to listen to the US any more? There will be no need for aid and no need to enslave yourselves and explode suicide bombs.

Similarly the Taliban who are fighting in Afghanistan have forgotten that the root cause was their support to Al-quaeda and its attacks against the US. If they didnt do that, no one would bother them and they would still rule Kabul today. So instead of suicide bombs, they should look at how to get rid of the Al-quaeda from their midst. Once that happens, the US might very well let them come back to power as it has with the sunnis in Iraq after they abandoned Al-quaeda.

Re: # 200 the USA was going to come here Al Qaeda or no Al Qaeda.In war everything is fair.Your ideals are high sounding.Unless fear is driven in the stronger party it will annihilate all who are weaker.

#190 Posted by ijaz_gul
“I had asked HP to identify this catorie but he generalised the army. I feel it is this group of bridge and poker players, counted on frienship rather than prowess.”

Again I would say that you are mistaken. The coteries based on cards table camaraderies don’t last long. There are not institutionalized. The coteries as you see them don’t have permanent interests but the generals in Pakistan have permanent interests and the biggest one is to save the privileges that Army in general has. There is always a new breed of Generals every three years or so but they are together in saving the privileged position that army has whether all of them like bridge or the poker is immaterial.

And btw, Pakistani army generals hardly play any poker and just a few of them can play bridge with some authority.

I am afraid you have not studied the Pak army well and still have some romantic illusions that you are trying to stick to against a proven track record of the Pak army.

Like a Blossom toady , then scattered,life is so like a delicate flower,how can one expect the fragrance to last forever.the bible says there is a time to live and a time to die

Re: # 202 i must add a correction.we respect HP although he is an aql i kul , Major General Aslam Zuberi was one of the best bridge players.Now he has groomed his son , not an army guy in bridge. i think omar is pakistan number 3 or 4 in bridge.

#198 Posted by HP

Taliban are not legitimate freedom fighters. Their commitment to Afghanistan is not defined. They conquered Afghanistan with Pakistani help and then maintained an iron grip of Afghanistan.

Sain, as usual I'm amazed to read this coming from you. Are you implying, Sir, that the Taliban force is not Afghan but in fact Pakistani, and they're not raised from Afghan refugee camps with Pakistan and US help to fight the soviet occupiers of their country???

Re: # 202 more important is camaraderie of the bottle

Re: # 206 the taliban is an indigenous force although they have a large foreign component.its a 75 % pashtun movement but they are not ANP type guys.they believe in an ideology whatever it is .

Re:pavo#201

Sir, the Americans were working closely with the Pakistanis to support the Taliban in the nineties. In fact American oil and gas companies were perfectly willing to align themselves with the taliban to get oil and gas pipelines built through Afghan territory. So where was the need to invade anyone?

Just look at Iraq. Once the sunni tribes ditched Al Quaeda, the US had no problems in supporting them. Why wont they do the same with the taliban in Afghanistan, if they abandon Al Quaeda?