Emerging Pakistan-U.S. relations

I don't think it is easy for Pakistan to get out of this GWOT. It is the classic scenario of jumping from frying pan into the fire.

If Pakistan is not fighting (or not seemed to be fighting) the Taliban in its regions, America would take the fight into Pakistan. There is really no choice.

shankar #: "My argument in not why Pakistan should be neutral, but HOW she is going to do it. If you cut off logistical supplies, you will be faced with economic sanctions. Will Pakistan be able to withstand them?"

...i think i misunderstood....my apologies.....

......your point is valid and is perhaps the decisive reason on which the current govt. is basing its decisions, despite the massive public opinion that is against gwot...... by the way this opinion is also against taliban....i am against usa's gwot policies and pakistan supporting them......however, i also think pakistan needs to clean up its act in fata.....clean up its extremism.....clean up its obsession with india....etc....pakistan is a major, if not the major cause of the taliban problem historically.....the solution to that however isn't joining usa's gwot and making taliban even more popular....

to me these are two exclusive items....i am not only against usa's policies in gwot, due to moral reasons....i am against it because the usa has proved disastrous in planning gwot......and beacause even after 7 years, there is no direction to it and no end in sight.....

.....now to the economic sanctions.....i don't think usa will sanction pakistan, for not allowing logisitical lines.....it would have sanctioned turkey as well.....it think the usa (specifically the republican party) is in desparate states in this gwot.....they have lost it and don't know what to do.....hence one cannot base one's strategy on us policy, which itself is a lost case......i doubt anyone in the usa sheds a tear for any lives lost in pakistan......

....i think the usa would sanction pakistan if it felt pakistan was not doing anything within fata etc.....

......so first and foremost, pakistan has to sell the idea to the usa that it cannot tackle fata if every policy is seen to be in support of usa's gwot.....which is a fact......and that supporting gwot and bombing indiscriminately is making taliban stronger in pakistan; not weaker.....

.....so pakistan disassociates from gwot......much like turkey....but continues internally in fata etc.......on its own terms, with the support of locals, which would then be easier to get......

....assuming usa does sanction pakistan.....it would be counterproductive.....and i doubt it would have the support of europe (which is fed up with us policy), china, russia and perhaps middle east....

in any case, the impact of suicide bombings on pakistan's economy is far more than any type of sanctions.....usa sanctioned pakistan after nuclear explosions......pakistan survived....however, it is not going to survive these suicide bombings......

in addition, usa is giving only 1.5 billion dollars of aid a year......mostly to the military......pakistan is losing more than that out of its stock exchange each month....

.....pakistan has to make one major decision, however.....it has to open up the border with india....it is, now, practically impossible for pakistan to fight on both borders......it needs to release the pressure on the eastern borders.......the politicians want to do that....i don't know if the military is ready.....

secondly, pakistan needs to totally throw itself in the chinese camp....china is giving $200 billion dollars of loans to usa, annually and is keeping the usa economy afloat....i am sure it could support pakistan's economy in these tough times......

but one thing i am sure of....first and foremost, pakistan has to stop these suicide bombings, even if it has to make a deal with the devil.....and i cannot see those stopping as long as pakisatn is in gwot......

even the people pushing pakistan to do more in gwot on this site, have not presented any strategy on what doing more means and how they know that doing more is going to actually make pakistan more peaceful.....

98...

Do you feel, Pakistani nation, created in the name of Islam, participated in a war, where their own moslems are getting killed, voluntarily?

#94 Bull...
Joining GWOT was definitely bad option for Pakistan, but the worst would have been, not joining it. Do you feel, Pakistani nation, created in the name of Islam, participated in a war, where their own moslems are getting killed? Couple of jihadis and soldiers are sacrificial lamb, in this war...
Anyhow, Mush was very cunning. He has saved Pakistan from heavy bombing and destruction....

Majumder,
After 9/11, there was a communication delay between our US office and India office. Then, as usual, there was emotional mail from the US counterpart, regarding what bad happened to USA. My manager (that time) was quite unmoved. She told the engineer communication with the other side that, we (Indians) are facing it in Kashmir for decades. Even financial capital, Mumbai, experienced such stuff. If a small,weak nation like India can sustain such prolonged terrorism, why USA ( superpower) should be purturbed by a single event?

Majumder....
Islamic barbarism in India has historical roots. Indians are fighting it for centuries. It is nothing new to India. Now, after the demand and price of petro products increased and europe become financialy weak, the barbarism is creating trouble everywhere.So, what was essentialy India's problem has become global now....

Now, though India is not part of GWOT, has it been successful in evading islamic barbarism? Last 5 years, how many allahoooooooo Akbooms, India has experienced?
Kashi, Mumbai, Bangalore, Koimbatore, Gujrat, Jaipur, Delhi (twice)....
Majumder, if USA withdraws from the GWOT, it will loose nothing. But these jihadis will come to Kashmir and more trouble for India....

Anyhow, it is wring to say Indians are not part of GWOT. India deployed more troops in Kashmir than US in Afghanistan....

Romair,

My argument in not why Pakistan should be neutral, but HOW she is going to do it. If you cut off logistical supplies, you will be faced with economic sanctions. Will Pakistan be able to withstand them?

majumdar #: "And in spite of being an ardent Hindoo, I wud rather India stay away from WOT (either side), it is not our shyte...."

yes, that would be the wisest thing for india to do.....and so far, it hasn't joined gwot....i believe there are no indian soldiers deployed any where in any capacity, in gwot....

which is also, probably, why no indian has been targeted in gwot.....

.....setting aside all the hype about ideology, and looking at everything analytically, all the terrorist bombings have a tactical military purpose......

.....spain was bombed, because it was in iraq......it withdrew and has not been bombed since......australian tourists were bombed in bali, because australia was gung-ho in this war......britain was bombed, as it was in iraq.......it has now announced its withdrawls....

.....there are now, only two countries actively involved in the military side of gwot - usa and pakistan.....that is it....

.....usa is too far away......pakistan is right next door as is being bombed regularly......these bombings may have an ideological methodology (suicide bombers brainwashed religiously), but they have a tactical strategy behind them.....

......the aim is to get pakistan out of gwot also, thereby cutting off usa's logistical lines in afghanistan.....making it more difficult for the usa to conduct the war......

......an overwhelming amount of pakistanis are against gwot, and nearly every pakistani (barring some expats) is against pakistan being a part of gwot.....yet the govt. is still participating in it.....

this has escalated the violence and terrorism in pakistan.....it has also made it impossible for the govt. to sell the idea that this is pakistan's war......no one is buying this line.....they, like me, think this is, primarily the usa's war, which has been forced upon pakistan, thereby enflaming the extremist elements in pakistan, who up til now, had not turned militant.....

i.e. it is becoming pakistan's war, for no rhyme or reason....pakistan is shoving itself into it......

.......until pakistan disassociates from the gwot and from usa, i doubt the govt. will ever be able to sell the idea that this is solely pakistan's war.......and will never get the complete following of the people.....

if pakistan disassociates from gwot, i am sure the violence will decrease tremendously, as the terrorist's aim of cutting off us logistic lines will be achieved......

at that point some elements will continue fighting in pakistan, which then will be pakistan's war......at that time, it will be possible for the govt. to convince the population of pakistan that it is, now, fighting pakistan's war......then it should be able to corner the terrorists more easily......

however, as long as their is even a hint of american support vis a vis gwot, i doubt the govt. will ever be able to tackle this problem.....

And in spite of being an ardent Hindoo, I wud rather India stay away from WOT (either side), it is not our shyte.

Regards

FM Romair,

Much of the troubles in India today- whether it is SIMI's jihad or the Bajrangi's goondagardi is homegrown shyte and will be solved/worsened by our own choices. Should India not join WOT, even a worsening in Pak's situation will have minimal impact.

Regards

#88 by bulleya

even the americans no longer want to hook their ship onto anything related with bush....why should pakistan?.....

But that Captain Clueless is because Americans have a choice, they can vote for someone else. What choice does Pakistan have? If not for the US, no one in the world would have wanted anything to do with it, and Pakistan would have gone under a long time back.

So please spare us your "banal"ysis.

majumdar #: "The War came to Pak 'cos its elite chose to make it Pak's war, it did not come uninvited. Same ways, if India chooses to stay away from the war it wont come to India...."

...this is a valid point.....if india ends up joining the gwot with the same intensity as pakistan did, then india will become a part of the theatre of gwot.....in which case it will extend into india.....

....however, if the indian leadership does not join gwot (logistics etc.) then it may remain immune to it to some extent, or to a great extent.......

however, i don't think india can remain totally immune to it.....there are plenty of fissures in the indian society, which would grow further, regardless of the decision made by india, if the gwot fully extended into pakistan......

turkey was along the same lines.....had it joined gwot, al-qaeda would have entered turkey.....a few explosions in istanbul, and turkey's lucrative tourist industry would have been dead......

....more importantly, turkey would have gotten into the middle of the kurdish problem.....luckily for turkey, it did not join gwot......and the kurds within iraq, became an ally of the usa, and not an adversary......

had they become an adversary, i think a similar situation to the pathans of the afghanistan/pakistan border......

in any case, i think india's foreign policy political experts are quite saavy and i doubt they will make the same mistakes that pakistan made, wrt to gwot......having said that, this govt. has inherited a lot of the mistakes of musharraf.....

FM Romair,

much like the wave that has come, since the first (and second) afghan war has swept from afghanistan to pakistan, it will eventually sweep into india also.....

The War came to Pak 'cos its elite chose to make it Pak's war, it did not come uninvited. Same ways, if India chooses to stay away from the war it wont come to India. In that sense Iqbal's theory about Pak being India's first line of defence would come true in an ironical sort of way.

Regards

shankar #: "Cut off the logistical supplies? close the air space...that would be tantamount to a declaration of war!"

...can you highlight, under which law, not allowing one's country to be a logistical route to someone else's war is a declaration of war?....this is a new one, that i have never heard before.....

...if country a wants to declare war on country b, according to your definition, country c must allow its land to be used as a logistical route?....

...based on this, turkey has declared war on usa......it has not allowed its land to be used as a logistical route for the iraq war....a much bigger and more important operation than the afghanistan war.....this despite the fact that turkey is a very close ally of usa...

....is it now the world's legal responsibility to open up themselves for us logistical supplies, whenever the usa decides to declare war on someone....if tomorrow usa declares war on iran, is it pakistan's responsibility to become usa's logistical lifeline in that war also?

....if tomorrow usa decides to declare war on nepal, should india then have the responsibility to open up is land routes to usa, even if it wants to stay out of the war?....

...have the americans reached this level of arrogance that everyone must join every war they want to start?....

the usa's gwot is lost......bush is screwed.....republican party is screwed.....obl has outlasted bush's two terms......and still cannot be caught....all the countries that allied with the usa are realizing that they will be screwed also, if they don't dump gwot.....

because of this ill-thought out gwot, even the us economy is screwed....imagine.....obl's predictions of changing the us lifestyle may have come true.....who would have thought that the mighty american govt. would one day be asking arab sheikhs and chinese govt. to bail out its ass(et)s......

....and you think pakistan should continue on this misguided misadventure.....when all the other countries are jumping off this sinking ship, one by one......why?.....that too, when it is devastating pakistan's society, through violence......

pakistan has its internal problems with extremism........no doubt about that.....they are the result of a series of events which started when pakistan joined the first afghan war as a frontline state.......no doubt about that, either......

and pakistan must accept that and solve it....

....but the moment pakistan allows its own problems to be linked with the usa's gwot, pakistan has lost the battle.....since the gwot has little credibility and is about to be lost....

......pakistan should solve these internal problems on its own......i.e. separate them out from anything the usa is doing in the region......otherwise pakistan has had it......it will sink under the weight the usa's gwot......

...and trust me the after affects of this misguided gwot are not going to stop in pakistan.......much like the wave that has come, since the first (and second) afghan war has swept from afghanistan to pakistan, it will eventually sweep into india also.....

...so the solution to this is not indiscriminate bombing that will further flame this violence......the solution to this also isn't joining it with some global war......the solution is regional......i.e. separate it from anything global and handle it regionally.....

even the americans no longer want to hook their ship onto anything related with bush....why should pakistan?.....

shankar #: "The WOT was not fought on Canadian, Spanish or Dutch territory. They can afford to withdraw.

How in the world can a country ,whose land is part of the battleground, where OBL is given sanctuary, whose govt has created this Frankenstein, declare NEUTRALITY?? Its absurd! The West will not accept that...."

...it doesn't matter what the west accepts or doesn't accept......pakistan has to look after its own interests....it is the job of the pakistan govt. to protect pakistani citizens, not nato troops......

...secondly the west is, itself, fed up with this gwot.....so you need to differentiate between the west and usa.....

......this is now a war being fought by the usa alone....how many other countries have soldiers actively fighting this war......none....the few that do have soldiers in this war, have them in logistical roles.....

....this war has gone on longer than wwII....there is no strategy, no end in sight....it was an ill-thought out adventure initiated by misguided neocons......and the whole world has had to pay a price for it......

.....pakistan cannot afford to be sucked into this us misadventure any longer....look at the damage it has done to pakistan.......if you seriously feel this war has raised pakistan's economy, i have a few lehmann brother shares i would like to sell to you......

......let me give you an example of a country that did not allow the us to use its land as a logistical route....turkey......why, because they knew the usa would screw everything up and turkey would become suicide bombing central....iran didn't either.....both countries are safe.....

Re: # 71
masadi...
ha ha ha...
People of FATA and NWFP were leading civilised life before 9/11 and suddenly switched to islamic mode after 9/11 !!!!

#83 Posted by shankar on September 21, 2008 9:02:40 am


use the billion dollars/ yr it gives to Pakistan & give India 1 billion dollars/yr of military aid.


India doesn't need the money..it's IT exports alone grow by that amount every year..

remember...IT..the thing capt clueless told us required Pakistani management skills to be successful at...

bulleya#77:

Any conclusion is as good as the information it is based upon; so let me first list the sources of my imressions:

- chowk interacts by pavocavalry and zeemax who seem to have access to reliable sources inside Pak army and taleban;

- a few intrepid foreign reporters who have actually been in the area of operations;

- interviews of intelligence and other experts, esp. on Jm Lehrer's Report; and

- my own interactions with some Pashtoons in 2004, which showed that all Pashtuns hate Americans.

Based on these, this is my impression:

1. The figure of 93,000 Pak troops is misleading; they are mostly men of Frontier Corps and not from the regular army battalions which are still mostly stationed on the Eastern border.

2. It is one big mess out there and there are wars within wars and taleban within taleban. Pak army actually supports some taleban and is against others.

3. Pakistani soldiers stay in their camps and rarely venture outside. Most of the Pak casulaties are the result of attacks on those camps by Taleban factions opposed to Pak army and not during actual operations against the Taleban.

4. Pakistan is actually supporting the Haqqani faction of Taleban in Afghanistan.

5. Afghanistani agencies have supplied Pakistanis with actual names, telphone numbers and addresses in Quetta of the Taleban leaders, only to find them relocated.

6. The US intelligence has stopped sharing information with the Pakistan as any information they supply goes directly to the people against whom it is supplied.

If these observations are incorrect, blame it on the sources I quoted above.

Romair,

The WOT was not fought on Canadian, Spanish or Dutch territory. They can afford to withdraw.

How in the world can a country ,whose land is part of the battleground, where OBL is given sanctuary, whose govt has created this Frankenstein, declare NEUTRALITY?? Its absurd! The West will not accept that.

Ok--how is Pakistan going to do that? Cut off the logistical supplies? close the air space...that would be tantamount to a declaration of war!

Irfan Hussein says the 7th fleet, which is in our pond, can destroy your military many times over..

But there are "peaceful" ways of twisting Pakistan's arm

Pakistan is on the verge of bankruptcy..let it sink. Worse than than, use the billion dollars/ yr it gives to Pakistan & give India 1 billion dollars/yr of military aid.

Even death is less terrifying to Pakistan than that!:)

#71 Posted by masadi on September 20, 2008 8:35:30 pm


Regardless of what Arjun says there was no Taliban problem in Pakistan before the farce of the US GWOT


Of course there was no jihadi problem in pakistan before 9/11...that's because the jihadis you created were killing afghans and indians in kashmir...

of course, you'll also deny that...

#78 Posted by bulleya on September 21, 2008 1:26:41 am



.....the usa has lost in iraq....it is withdrawing slowly


2005 called...it wants it's meme back...

masadi#54:

I do not think that the US will attack Pakistan; there is no reason for them to do so - attacking Pakistan, presuming they have enough resources - a big if - will cost hundreds of billions while Pak army and civilians can be bought much more cheaply. A civilian govt. would find it very difficult to fight its own people and the US should/would understand that but the covert Pak support for the taleban will have to end. Woodward has already suggested that the US will adapt the Anbar strategy in Afghanistan as well but incursions into Pakinstan will also become more intensive, and with the help of "bought" taleban, better targeted.

Urstruly#53:

It is not my contention, it is Hamid Mir's that Pak army has not killed any taleban, only some innocent people. BTW, based on my personal interacts, I would say that, generally speaking, there is no difference between taleban and Pashtoon; they all support their Pushtoon brothers' fight against their enemy in Afghanistan even if some call it jehad.

HP #: "The Pakistan army should start cleaning up one area at a time and make all efforts to push these criminals back in Afghanistan for the US army to worry about them..."

...i think all of this is well and good in theory....but i am not sure if it works out practically....

....first and foremost, take a look at the whole gwot....it has now gone on longer than ww11, with no end in sight....all western nations have slowly, but surely, disengaged themselves from the fighting side of this war....it is now, only pakistan and usa fighting.....

.....the usa has lost in iraq....it is withdrawing slowly.....it is losing in afghanistan.......and will eventually lose out totally.....

based on this, pakistan is, now, part of an ill-planned gwot, with no end, fighting in an area, where no one has ever won a war in the past century......

added to this, pakistan is paying with extremely heavy internal casualities......

so, while i agree with the theory of what you are saying in pushing out the taliban......there doesn't seem to be any practical way to do it, militarily.....

and as long as pakistan is considered even remotely to be fighting america's war, there will never be any national consensus behind any strategy adapted by pakistan......

i think pakistan has to, first and foremost, get out of the american alliance in gwot.....then the pakistanis need to sit down and plan out a long term strategy for handling extremism, in pakistan, based on pakistan's own interest......and not based on an ill-thought gwot....

dost-mittar #: "So, Pakistan has already withdrawn from the war, if it ever was in it, and is letting the Americans do it; the difference is that earlier it was making the pretense of "fighting" the taleban to the Americans, now it is making the pretense of "protesting" American actions for domestic consumption..."

...i am not sure how accurate this is....

...pakistan is the main (and probably only) logistical line for nato in afghanistan.....this means thousands of trucks must have passed through pakistan, providing logistics to nato.....

...in addition, pakistan is the main air route to afghanistan for nato....

...pakistan has 120,000 troops on the border with afghanistan......

....there is active air force and army action going on in the tribal areas, by pakistani troops....

....pakistani troop casualities are higher than all of nato combined.......and pakistani troops have been the biggest target of suicide bombings....

this would, surely, indicate that pakistan is actively involved......

...as i have said if the usa with $80 billion could not win against the insurgency in iraq and with $20 billion a year is losing in afghanistan......how in the world is pakistan going to win in tribal areas.......

.......the whole gwot is coming back to haunt its originators.......this was an ill-though out, ill-planned war with no goals defined......it had reluctant allies who saw its shortcomings......and it is now totally unravelling.....

....the usa will have to announce its retreat in afghanistan, much like it has done in iraq.....it's nato allies are no longer fighting on the frontlines in either country.....

once this whole thing unravels, who will be left holding the bag......obviously iraq and afghanistan......but if pakistan doesn't change its policies shortly....then pakistan will be left holding the bag also.......

......pakistan needs to disengage from this war.......much like canada has done......it needs to tell the usa that it has done all it can.......

then it needs to plan out a solution for this war, internally.....i.e. how to handle the internal extremism......and that should be done keeping in mind pakistan's interests.......

otherwise, it will always seem that pakistan is fighting america's war......and it will never be possible for any pakistan govt. to gather the critical mass support it needs to tackle this problem......

HP,
Just wait.

Re: # 56

[They use us badly and we do not deliver. They are trying to buy us cheap way, it does not work.]

Ahmedmadani sahib, name your price!

in #70 "From Iraq to Pakistan (via Afghanistan of course) per US design.."

Hamid sahib, after the Nacirema incident, you have lost all steam, so please keep your 2 cents where they don't reveal your ignorance and cause you further disgrace.

thank you kindly,.

TNI Masadi

In fact let me conclude by saying that the US "thinks" that Afghanistan is much more dangerous for it, compared to Pakistan and FATA, and hence it is looking for closure over there as well as opening a new front in Pakistan. If you notice Iraq and then the problems of Afghanistan have all but vanished from the mainstream media. This is not just coincidence, even Iran has gone to the background...

In # 70

Regardless of what Arjun says there was no Taliban problem in Pakistan before the farce of the US GWOT. It is not just FATA , it is the Baluchistan area as well that the US is interested in which is strategically important for it to surround Iran, together with being quite resource rich

HP writes "Many people say that BUT no one has ever said what interest US has in 'those areas'"

HP sahib, salam and greetings of peace. When the "interest" is fueling the engine that is driving a farcial GWOT, you do not need land-specific interests. The US behemoth is like a spreading cancer, incorporating greater and greater areas of the globe forming nodal tumors everywhere it gets a chance. The purpose is escalation through handing over Pakistan to the Taliban, regardless of what Arjun says there was no Taliban problem in Pakistan before the farcical US GWOT. It is not just FATA as well, it is the Baluchistan area as well that the US is interested in that is strategically important to surround Iran together with be quite resource rich

If I remember correctly, it was you who said that suicide bombing is the symbol of the farcial GWOT and since the center of activity is shifting from Iraq to Afghanistan per US design, this symbolism will be most evident in this area. Now you've done a 100% about face.

Have a nice day,
TNI Masadi

Re: # 68

arjun mian,

.... please don't lump mad masadi with the rest of the pakis who might be clueless and blinded by faith, but come nowhere close to the idiocy of this man ...... now i wish the brroklyn community college had given him tenure so that we could keep an eye on him right here ..... by now we would have shipped him off to bellview ...... unfortunately, in pakistan it is hard to differentiate between the sane and the insane ........

#62 Posted by masadi on September 20, 2008 3:02:24 pm


The "Taliban" on the Western Frontier is a US created problem


Nice way to give pakiland a pass for it's support of islamic terrorism as a state policy...

all pakis can be fooled all the time..

Re: # 64

masadi mian,

.... this is a well known fact and well documented ... according to my uncle -a durrani) - an afridi was walking along on a hot summer day with a coin clutched tightly in his fist; he opened his fist to look at the coin and found that it was all wet ... in a gentle voice he said, "paisa, paisa, waley jaree .. kuna warqam, ta na warqam"

..... do you need any more proof of the venal nature of the pathan ?

Re: # 65

hp,

... why is it so diffult for you to understand what masadi is trying to say ...let me try and explain it .... the us elite want to control fata and every other place on god's green earth because they are evil - simply evil ...... they are like boogie men who eat babies and feast on human blood .... you are trying to find geo-political reasons where there arn't any .....

.... in any case the afghans will (and do) sell their own mothers for a few bucks so what you had suggested before will work ..... buy half of them and then turn them against each other - if it worked in the anmbar province it will work in waziristan ..... unfortunately pakistan does not have the money to buy a pao of ganderis and its army couldn't fight a hijra with ghungroos on her feet ...... hence, we need the americans to do our dirty job

#62 Posted by masadi
"They have been relocated into Pakistan as a "problem" because the US is interested in those areas of Pakistan."

Many people say that BUT no one has ever said what interest US has in 'those areas'. I understand the US wants to stay in Afghanistan for strategic purposes for a long time. I understand that the US wants to continue the WOT to maintain its occupation of Afghanistan. But what good fata is to the US?

The US can be present in FATA with cooperation from the Pakistan army. After all Pakistan has never said no to providing bases to the US.

Initially, it was good to use the Pak army agents as alqaeeda or Taliban in the area to maintain the occupation but now I think it is beyond the Pak army and the ISI. They have lost control and that worries the US.

I think the US thought that the ISI was double crossing and they asked for reforms in ISI. Those reforms are happening. Number two, number three, and number four from the old leadership are already gone. Musharraf brought his trusted man as number one with US approval. The situation still hasn't changed on the ground. So it is not the ISI controlling these Taliban. They may have some agents but not in control.

Now going by your theory, if we assume that the US wants FATA for some reason, wouldn't the US just add another 4 to 5 million who oppose the US under its control?

The whole problem for the US is the Pashtoon belt, why would the US add more Pashtoon in the mix for its own army to fight?
There are no known natural resources in the area. The US can use Gwadar with Pakistani permission and it has neutralized china's interest in Gwadar by positioning itself in afghanistan.

So why should it occupy FATA?

hamid writes "they love money more than they value their ass" ....."

Might I politely request that you keep your 2 cents out of areas that are beyond your dumb-ass understanding...

Have a nice day,
TNI masadi

HP writes "The game as it is being played out now and the right strategy is to force the Pak army to be more proactive in FATA and the US should be ready to pay part of the expenses with new arms to the Pakistan army and the political Government to continue to provide the cover."

This is more of the same and will produce similar results, the only difference will be that the political institutions will get blames and will further deteriorate as a result, setting the stage for a movement of the electorate towards either the military or the Taliban types who will gain in legitimacy. That might be what the US wants but it is certainly not good for Pakistan or for democracy or for restructuring the Pakistan military.

HP writes "I think in the end if Pakistan gets rid of the criminals in FATA, that would be good for Pakistan. So it is a win-win strategy for the US and Pakistan."

HP sahib you are way off on this one. No GWOT US strategy can be good for Pakistan, we have seen the results of these strategies thus far. The "Taliban" on the Western Frontier is a US created problem, it is a problem the US wants to escalate and so has brought its effects into mainland Pakistan. It is not something the US wants to fix. The US is not bothered as much as it advertises, with these so-called "hit and runs" from this side of the border, they can be controlled on that side of the border. The purpose of this "pushing" is for escalation. And the "strategy" as I have elaborated on many times in the past will only mainstream the Taliban types. They have been relocated into Pakistan as a "problem" because the US is interested in those areas of Pakistan. If polite occupation wont work, and these U.S. hit and runs were for just such pressure building, then the US will not hesitate to cross the border as an invasion force. The U.S. has enough forces to mount a buildup if it so desires, why buildup when you can painlessly occupy through agreement is the question..

Have a nice day

Re: # 59

hp,

... once again i agree with you ..... as my uncle, who is a pathan himself once said, "the reason there are so many kunees in afgahanistan is because they love money more than they value their ass" .....

Hamid

"high flying b-52's dropping tons of bombs instead"

That will never work in the terrain in both Afghanistan and FATA. That is why the US is using drones and gunship helicopters.High flying bombers can drop bombs in the mountains but the outcome would always be unknown. It is a guerrilla war and you have to fight it at the same level.
You have to follow them in the mountains and that increases the number of army losses in terms of life.

It is the loss of life that is a big hurdle for the Pakistan army and the US. No one wants to take that loss otherwise I think the Pak army would have fried all the Talibans already.

I am not a racist to blame all followers of Islam.

The US and Pakistan are starting another strategy that is now generally known as the Alanbar strategy. In Iraq the US bought many tribes to fights the insurgents. Tons of money was spent to show that the surge worked.

So now the US and Pakistan would spend money(of course the US money) in both FATA and Afghanistan to buy off some tribes that are not completely allied with the Taliban and encourage them to face Taliban in the mountains where both the US army and the Pakistan army have failed repeatedly as they cannot move their equipment in the areas and are unfamiliar with the terrain.

What are the chances of the success? No one can tell. People who have read history of the Soviet occupation know that afghans switch loyalties very quickly. In the old days, the groups of fighters would move from one side to another based on the money they were getting.

That means even some taliban would come forward to get the money but what they do afterwards...is any body's guess.

The Pakistan army should start cleaning up one area at a time and make all efforts to push these criminals back in Afghanistan for the US army to worry about them.

Re: # 55 If USA delivers Kashmir like Kosavo pakistan army will fight like hell and liqidate Jehadi in no time. It is not in national interest to have full stop as when this double game will come to stop and money stops. Man and armies are slave to money, same dirty money. America wants cheaply pakistan army to fight for them, they will but not with this peanuts thrown and army and leaders children getting entrance visas to white west countries. Pay as good as nato soldiers to pakistani army they will deliver Osama Bin Laden in know time, packaged, deliverwd, no questions. Americans are stingy and not paying adequately.

Re: # 55

hp mian,

..... i agree with everything you say in your post - i think pakistan should force america to do its share in killing the taliban .... america is not doing enough - it should be using high flying b-52's dropping tons of bombs instead of using sissy 500 pound hellfires from drones ..... heck, even the ragtag taliban can drive up with one ton bomb in a truck ......

.... the part i don't agree with you on is that al-qaeda is a 'hoax' ...... it is very real - it is as real as death ...... you just might know it by its other name - 'political islam' which is sometimes simply called 'islam'

It is abusive relationship both ways. They use us badly and we do not deliver. They are trying to buy us cheap way, it does not work.

Alqaeeda is a hoax but there is no doubt that Taliban are a reality. They are supported by the people in FATA. I think some of us get caught up in the conspiracy theories too. The US does not have enough army to fight these folks in FATA and that is why they are pressing Pakistan to help out.

For the last six years the US paid every single dollar spent on the 100,000 Pakistani army posted in the tribal areas but results are not encouraging.

As I said the US does not have enough army to send to Afghanistan but even if it did, in the current financial crisis, this admin does not have the strength to send more troops out there and start a war in the Pakistan area. But that does not mean they can't force the Pak army to fulfill its promise for the money the pak army has taken from the US over the year.

Blame it on the US, ISI or the Pak army as much as you want but no government should allow these criminals from FATA and their friends Taliban to harass and destabilize Pakistan.

The US would never make the tactical mistake of entering Pakistani area for military campaign. The US may continue incursions but never a full fledged attack- at least not in this admin. Any crossing of the Pakistani borders by the US or the NATO armies would just legitimize the attacks on Afghanistan from the FATA areas by the criminals. That will also end the Pak army's whatever cooperation the US is getting now.

The game as it is being played out now and the right strategy is to force the Pak army to be more proactive in FATA and the US should be ready to pay part of the expenses with new arms to the Pakistan army and the political Government to continue to provide the cover.

I think in the end if Pakistan gets rid of the criminals in FATA, that would be good for Pakistan. So it is a win-win strategy for the US and Pakistan.

It is in Pakistan's interest to end this Taliban nonsense in Pakistani areas. They should go and fight the US in Afghanistan.

Dost writes "It seems that now the US has decided that it has to fight the taleban in Pakistan itself, as Pakistan is not doing it."

Mian you are one weak analyst. First your "data", the claims of one journalist and his offer of giving up is job is quite pathetic, second, the Americans have enough "taleban" to fight in Afghanistan, why would they be interested in Pakistan when they have their hands full already? The reason is similar to why they "relocated" the al-qaeda to Iraq. It was about Iraq stupid not al-qaeda, just as right now its not about the Taliban stupid, its about Pakistan....comprendey?

Have a nice day,

TNI Masadi

Re: # 52

Your contention is not true. Hamid Mir is a journalist at the top of his peers crying horase for years now, begging and pleading napak fouj to stop massacres in tribal areas. There are over a million pakistani citizens who have been displaced by the attrocities committed by this fouj. The only difference between now and then is that the so called civilian political establishment knows very well that making deals with americans is political kiss of death for any political party. Fouj doesn't have a political constituency and they don't run in elections so the things were different.

My assessment is that paki political establishment by emphasizing the "sovereignity" issue is trying to save face until November, whereas Republicans are trying to play 9/11 card once again to push McCain - "the tough and experienced guy; who knows how to deal with terrorsit states like Pakistan capable of destroying civilization in 45 seconds just like saddam" -

bulleya:

Actually, I was referring to your solution: Pakistan is hardly fighting the so-called WOT; what it was doing was to exploit this "war" to get some halwa from the Americans. As is becoming abundantly clear, Pakistan was not fighting the taleban in tribal areas, but only doing a pretense of so doing; reports by as diverse Pakistani reporters as Hamid Mir and Rashid Ahmad point to this fact; Hamid Mir, no friend of Americans, has boldly challenged that he would give up journalism if the army has killed a single taleban or al qaeda.

It seems that now the US has decided that it has to fight the taleban in Pakistan itself, as Pakistan is not doing it. Pakistan can not openly support such action, hence the imaginary "conversation" by SR.

So, Pakistan has already withdrawn from the war, if it ever was in it, and is letting the Americans do it; the difference is that earlier it was making the pretense of "fighting" the taleban to the Americans, now it is making the pretense of "protesting" American actions for domestic consumption.

So the Americans have sent a message through their suicide bomber in the heart of Islamabad to remove glitches in establishing a large scale base near Islamabad, and to give a clear message to Zardari before his upcoming US trip (Tuesday), isn't it a 'self fulfilling prophecy' of some months back which said that if the Pakistanis didn't follow the US line, including the punctuation and what not that similar attacks like the one that killed BB could follow!:

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/washingtondc/la-fg-mullen19- 2008sep19,0,1310930.story

U.S. military advisors may soon head to Pakistan

The U.S. and Pakistan have cleared remaining obstacles, so the long-delayed team may arrive within weeks, Joint Chiefs Chairman Michael Mullen says.

Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
September 19, 2008

A long-delayed plan to send dozens of U.S. military advisors to Pakistan to train its army in counterinsurgency could begin in a matter of weeks under a new agreement on a training base, according to the top U.S. military officer.

Washington for months has urged the Pakistani military to accept the training team. Pakistan has resisted, asking for additional weaponry and equipment some U.S. officials believe is best suited for its standoff with regional rival India.

But Navy Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the primary stumbling block had been the fact that Pakistan could not build the training site, near the western town of Peshawar, quickly enough. The two sides have agreed to use an alternative base north of the capital.

"We're still going through some administrative delays, but I do see it happening," Mullen said in an interview en route from Washington to his hometown of Los Angeles, where he plans a series of talks in coming days. "I think it's in the next few weeks."

A couple of weeks ago in an award ceremony at a high class private school in Islamabad, a grade 10 student awardee, refused to shake hand or accept award from the female principal of the school. He rushed to the mike and told the school management to be ashamed of themselves, referring to a group dance presented by some of the female students on stage earlier. According to him it was Ramadan and teachers, parents, and girl students should have been ashamed of themselves for desecrating the sacred month.

For a moment there was pin drop silence in the school hall. But soon the principal tried to take control of the situation by apologizing for the "mistake". But after realizing that the situation was not that bad and she did have some support in the audience, she invited a firebrand butch type auntie to address the audience. The auntie started yelling and screaming at the "Taliban" in the hall and told them to "Go home" - she was booed from the opposite camp; which incensed her to the extent that she set her bra on fire while screaming "Taliban Go Home".

This indicates the extent of schism that has developed in our society (which in yours truly's opinion is a good thing - how can there be any alliance between party of God and enemies of God?)

Only yesterday a very senior columnist referred to Pakistan military's top brass in the biggest urdu daily as "expensive prostitutes" - an impossibility in the 61 years of history of Pakistan.

Sabres are rattling - and opponents are straightening their columns. Now there is no going back. If Americans think that they can impose upon us in the guise of a so called "civilian government", the gang of most corrupt people, the custodians of graves, dabba pirs, libral fascists, ethnic terrorists like MQM, and feudal lords who burry women alive in their fiefdoms - then they are sadly mistaken. Like I said, revolution has gained momentum and it is going to go in only one direction - elimination of bastard children of East India Company. Between Feb 18 until now there was time to avert the impending clamity, now the time has passed.

dost-mittar#: ...."To some of us, Pakistan has been following your preferred policy all along;"

....actually, this is not my prefered policy.....it was an idea floated to hamidm mian, i.e. if the taliban are to go somewhere, why not afghanistan, instead of kashmir....

....my prefered policy is as follows:

- get out of gwot.....if us allies like canada are not willing to commit to it, then why should pakistan.....do you think canada would have kept its few soldiers in afghanitan if it had faced 160 attacks within its borders....

- adapt the policy of turkey, and stop being the logistical lifeline for usa's gwot....

- then handle pakistan's internal situation separately, solely from a pakistani perspective......the job of the pakistan government is, specifically, to save pakistani lives, first and foremost......

....pakistan has been pulled into usa's war, and is now becoming a part of the theatre......it has to get out of this.....

usa has lost in afghanistan as well.....as i had predicted, it is not possible to win civil wars with brute military force.....now it is looking for a scapegoat.....which will be pakistan....

......pakistan needs to pass on the responsibility of cross-border crossings to nato......why are they allowing crossings from the afghan side......why don't they stop them there......if they cannot stop them, how do they expect pakistan to stop them......

.....once the above is sorted out, then pakistan needs to tell these militant forces that pakistan is no longer a part of gwot......hence they should stop their violence in pakistan.....if they agree, well and good.....if they don't, then pakistan should go after them militarily.........

canada, holland etc. are all pulling out of afghanistan.....they are not even on the frontlines, there......spain pulled out of iraq, after one explosion in spain.....

.why in the world should pakistan continue in this useless conflict, which is totally ill-planned, with no end in sight.....it has gone on longer than wwII....

the reason the usa is losing in afghanistan, has nothing to do with safe havens in pakistan....a few safe havens and a few border crossings cannot defeat a superpower.....which can fence the border anytime it wants (but isn't doing so).....

they are failing because it was totally ill-planned and is viewed as an occupation by that country's pathan population....

bulleya:

To some of us, Pakistan has been following your preferred policy all along; the rest is showbiz and the inability of some taleban to comprehend the showbiz. Watch hamir mir's interview from the affected areas, if you don't believe.

I have developed a simple yet effective detection strategy concerning explosions in Pakistan:

If there was any element of human sacrifice on the part of the perpetrator(s), the explosion is the work of our "Islamic" brethren.

If there is a huge loss of life, following a limited loss of life in an explosion in India, AND there is no suicide involved in the attack, then it is the work of our lovely neighbors to the east.

If the explosion catches the Paki military by total surprise (wink, wink) AND every officer swears up and down on a stack of Korans that they were not consulted prior to the bang bang, then it's the work of our American benefactors. \

Pakis are supposed to die in great numbers, but we need to know who is dispatching us to paradise?

#45 Posted by bulleya on September 20, 2008 10:17:47 am


mullah umar and bush are both, equally, bad for pakistan's health.


wow...quite a change in tune...

post 9/11, you told us the following things

1. Pakiland, having joined the war on terror, would now march economically ahead of india
2. Thanks to 1, pakiland could now afford to send jihadis into india and bleed india
3. Thanks to 2, kashmir would be azad in 10 years time..
4. Bush would be so grateful to pakis that he visited islamabad, he would stop for every tongawalla...

hamidm mian#: ".... so you are wrong, these people do not want to fight the americans in afghanistan, their main enemy are people like you and they will bring the fight home to you ......."

......trust me these guys want to fight americans, first and foremost.....when they cannot fight them, they fight whomever is in sight.....

there were no suicide bombings in pakistan, prior to 9/11...now pakistan has more than iraq.....much like the usa's defeat, this is also something i have been predicting on chowk for a long long time......

i think these guys are out to kill anyone who disagrees with them......and the americans are also out to kill any one who disagrees with them.....both have lost their minds....

......and at the moment, both are killing pakistanis......

so there is an easy solution.....let the two entities fight it out in some place outside pakistan......if pakistan doesn't do that, then both entities will continue bombing pakistan, asking pakistan to do more......

mullah umar and bush are both, equally, bad for pakistan's health........when two elephants fight, it's the grass that gets crushed......

....to extrapolate on your kashmir theory (in which you strangely forgot to mention that these guys are actually after pakistan and not kashmir)......let them go into afghanistan and fight the americans.......

on the other hand, if you think they are actually after pakistan, then your kashmir theory fails also.....as they would have no interest in kashmir.....

india is no longer the enemy of choice in pakistan......there was a survey, in pakistan, which relegated india to a distant second as a threat to pakistan.....no. 1 was the usa......taliban types are a big threat also.....

but once pakistan kicks out the usa, dealing with the taliban and kicking them out will become much easier.......much like it was prior to 9/11 - a time when marriotts were totally safe, and the tribal areas were a long distance from everything......

americans are going to be defeated in afghanistan, and will pack up, much like they are doing from iraq......there allies are already starting to pack up.....they have realized it is useless to hitch their boat with the idiots of the repbulican party......

.....they will dump off all their failures of this war - including the taliban - onto pakistan......

Hamidumdum Sahib,
I have a suggestion. Why doesn't Pakistan forcefully, unilaterally, and unconditionally impose total independence on FATA and any other areas that wish to join that cradle of freedom?

Perhaps this would be an incentive for India to consider similar sanity in its dealings with the oppressed Kashmiris.

Sincerely,
Salim

Hamidumdum Sahib,
What kind of stupid people comprise the dysfunctional unit known as GoP?
If this horrible massacre is the work of RAW, then our ISI should not be engaging in similar acts.
If this horrible massacre is the work of "Islamic" brothers from FATA, then the GoP should learn from history that no one has ever succeeded in subduing these warlike tribes - NO ONE - not Alexander, not the Mughals, not the Sikhs, not the British, and certainly not the Russians. If the Pak Army, with its illustrious history, wants to attempt to control these people on behalf of the Americans, I have some shares of Lehman Bros that you may want to buy.

Re: # 39

bj,

... i am sorry .... i have changed my mind since i saw tthe latest carnage in islamabad ..... now i am advocating a hammer and anvil approach with india from the east and america from the west to exterminate the vermin that infest pakiland - we cannot trust our own people to do it ........ there is no friggin way anyone can drive a truck loaded with a ton of explosives within a mile of the marriott unless the security forces are involved ..... now, i am asking for help ........ i have seen the real enemy and it is not the horrible hindoo and it is not the taleban - it is the taliban symapthizers like romair

Re: # 40

romair mian,

.... i just got off the phone with a family member who works at the marriott and he tells me that "they" are fighting the americans in islamabad .... another friend who works for a european multinational in islamabad told me that he received a fax the other day from the taliban asking him to fire the women staff in his office or else ...... the scary thing was that "they" had listed the names of all his female employees .... my brother-in-law who works for a pakistani company received a similar letter a couple of weeks ago regarding the two women in his office - he sent them on leave ......

.... so you are wrong, these people do not want to fight the americans in afghanistan, their main enemy are people like you and they will bring the fight home to you ....... you might start thinking of coming back to canada unless you are thinking of growing a beard and joining them .....

hamidm mian: "but i still don't understand why we can't divert the niswar-chewing, watwani-doing, charas-smoking, boy-molesting tribesmen to kashmir where they can let of some steam and indlulge in a little blood letting ......"

...there is a better solution....why not let them go where they actually want to go, and fight the people they actually want to fight....

....i.e. let them go into afghanistan and fight the americans....

....why in the world are we being holier than the pope, and becoming a frontline state and fighting these guys, on behalf of the americans.....the americans are bombing them, and they are bombing us......something isn't quite correct in this scenario....

if they americans are bombing them, shouldn't they be bombing the americans....why are we hell-bent on protecting people in detroit, at the cost of people in swat and islamabad.....

...there has been a huge explosion in marriott, islamabad....i hope your family is safe.....as i have been saying, it is about time, pakistan got out of this war, and let these guys fight it out with the americans in afghanistan.....instead of against pakistan in islamabad.....

Re: # 38
[ the reaction from the paki side would be just as strong]

Sure, react all you want but keep your jihadis on your side. And remember that Pakistan is a small country! You guys are srtuck with your limited size, your limited means, and your limited options!

Not to mention that Jinnahesque highly limited mindset!

Re: # 37

bj,

..... this was a controlled experiment and it worked ..... the intensity of your, and that indian house moslem's, response proves my point ...... the reaction from the paki side would be just as strong ... so, if we were to start something with india we can resolve the fata issue in a minute ...... that's all i was trying to say - nothing personal ..... nothing unites us pakis quicker than a confrontation with the horrible hindoo .... and the same is true for you guys, regardless of your sheepish smiles and obeisant sideways head shaking ......

Re: # 35
[tribesmen to kashmir where they can let of some steam and indlulge in a little blood letting]

You guys (the Pakistanis) have already tried every dirty trick in the book including sending in the jihadis, sending in the "academic" (my ass!) Chatterjis, sending in the Brooklyn-waasi Towns, and now sending in the "peaceful" (my ass!) Geelanis. Nothing worked and nothing will. That is so because the mindset that created Pakistan is inherently bigoted and racist!

It has always failed and it always will! The Kashmiri baby stays with India and you guys (Pakistanis) can merely covet from a distance and go "Uff Allah!"

She made her bed sixty years ago -- and she must sleep in it now and forever! WITH her Indian khasam!

Besides, your own Pakistani bed is rather crowded with the khakis, the mullahs, the Shia/Sunnis, the mohajirs/Sindhis and various other bed-waalis -- all trying to outdo each other with various exciting, mind-blowing acts (when they are not doing various exciting physically blowing up acts). I doubt you can successfully accommodate another damsel -- especially a naazo-makhreywaali Kashmiri one!

re:hamdim2 #35
I thought you guys have tried this strategy earlier and are suffering the blow back now. The real enemy is Paki's who never learn.

Regards,

Faruk

the real enemy


SR mian,

.... i am sure that that is exaclty what happened on the carrier, but i still don't understand why we can't divert the niswar-chewing, watwani-doing, charas-smoking, boy-molesting tribesmen to kashmir where they can let of some steam and indlulge in a little blood letting ...... instead of beheading undernourished chappal clad frontier corpsmen, let them behead pundits and other hindoo riff-raff in the valley ..... i say, let them build their towers of bodi skulls and drag around a saffron clad sadhu in a friendly game of buzkashi with their compatriots from tajikistan and uzbekistan ...... this way we can clear out fata and stop the americans from whining ..... maybe we can even get the americans to build a bowling alley and a kava bar for the few returning ghazis who might or might not come back from their jihad against our real enemy - the horrible hindoo .......

Noora kushti

Admiral Mullen greets General Kiyani as he steps out of the helicopter aboard the USS aircraft carrier in the Arabian Sea.

They chit chat, make the usual introductions and have some refreshments. Afterwards the two men sit down and discuss various topics of 'mutual interest' as Kiyani puffs on his Gold Leaf cigarette and Mullen takes sips from a bottle of Miller Light.

Mullen: Yes, general, I hear you. I agree that we must restore your army's image in the eyes of your people. But we've also got a presidential election going on at home and the administration cannot appear to be soft at this point. We've got to manage these conflicting "public image" requirements

Kiyani: We have an idea that might work.

Mullen: Great, let's hear it.

Kiyani: Next time your boys cross over and conduct an operation, we'll make a big noise about it. I'll announce that we shall not allow foreign troups (meaning Americans) to come even one inch inside our borders. Then on the next incusrion my boys shall open fire and your boys will withdraw. After that you have to help us locate and destroy one of your drones, because by God we can't even see them coming. You tell us when oneis coming and we'll send our jets to the general area and then you order the drone back so we can claim a victory. This will not hurt your domestic image but it will really help ours.

Mullen: I like it so far. Please go on.

Kiyani: Okay after this it will have to get a bit serious. You will help us to locate and destroy one of your drones. You can use one of your obsolete models for that flight. We'll do this after one of your missile attacks. That will really sit well with our people. But it might makes things hard for your folks at home. As compensation, you can make an air raid on one of our check posts. We'll probably lose a young captain and a dozen of his company men. This will do two things. It will appease your red-necks at home, boost your administration' image and it will give us a few shaheeds.

Mullen: A few what, sorry?

Kiyani: A Shaheed is someone who is martyr in the cause Allah. You know about Allah, don't you.

Mullen: Oh, yes, yes, sure. But we haven't met personally.

Kiyani looks a bit akward and continues: Okay, so we have an understanding then. We'll have a war of words and after we've made speeches at the funerals of our shaheeds we can both tone down the rhetoric and have some intermediary come in and patch things up between us. A Turkish diplomat or maybe a Saudi.

It will makes things easier for both of our sides with our respective publics.

Mullen's Aid comes in and salutes: Admiral, sir, the chopper is ready to take the general back and there is a storm coming so we've got a narrow time window.

Mullen: Okay general, you better run along now, that storm is approaching. I think we understand what our roles are and let's see how well we can play them out.

Kiyani: Thank you very much for your generous hospitality, admiral. And yes, can I take this place mat from your cabin as a souvenier?

Mullen: Sure general, help yourself.

:+:+:+:

Hear Hamid Mir's report on FATA --- from location ... check out the following:

http://pkpolitics.com/2008/09/19/hamid-mir-on-fata-situation/

a very superficial and pedantic view has been presented

pakistans civilian government has come as part of a secret deal brokered by the USA by its principal dog catcher Musharraf who passed on the baton of the relay race to the civilian democratically elected government .Now the facts:--

1-The Defence Minister has no clue about defence matters other than maintaining good relations with the army because his home town was close to the military cantonment at Kharian.

2-The Foreign Minister has no exprience in foreign policy matters.His statement the other day that there is no coordinatio between US civil and military displays his ignorance.The assurance was given by US Joint Chiefs about not doing any more attacks.While the violation he referred to was again done by the US military in Afghanistan.So where does the lack of coordination between civil and military come in.

3-Pakistan is already sold totally since 9/11 and its leaders are only rubber stamps.

4-The army has already lost the moral ascendancy and any new compromise which Pakistan's politicians are going to make or have already secretly made by giving USA a base near Islamabad will further reduce the armys crdibility.

A hard long bloody civil war is going to commence with no end in sight.

read my post on this thread, I said yesterday that the pakistanis didn't know of the Waziristan attack that occurred during the so-called talks, dawn reported the same today!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Realistically, an equitable treatment of each other in foreign relations is possible only among nations which are comparable to each other in economic and political clout. Our Pakistani friends (no matter how much bravado gets projected) are comparable in neither – when it comes to our American friends.

Actually, the same is true in comparing Pakistan versus China, or versus Russia, or versus many others. Most of those other (larger) countries do not really care for what the Pakistanis do or think – except when they can put the Pakistanis to use and further some foreign policy goals of their own – usually minor ones. Once their immediate aims are satisfied – one should expect nothing more!

It is nothing personal – it is simply a fact of life.

Of course, there are countless small countries out there which, like Pakistan, are less than perfect – and are still left alone by the world community. The main difference from Pakistan is – the problems of those small countries are self contained and those countries are not actively involved in the affairs of other countries of the world. So they are left alone as long as they leave others alone.

Mutual respect and understanding with others are not possible until our Pakistani friends start displaying some of those same characteristics (mutual respect and understanding) versus other countries – instead of displaying contempt and trying to become the wannabe leaders of a mythical Ummah convinced of its inherent superiority!

The news story, courtesy of Tahmed Sahib, from Chowk UP.

My Good Deed to Support the War on Terrorism:

http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displayStory.cfm?source=hp textfeature&st ory_id=12267391

In Lakki Marwat, home to Pakistan’s second-biggest Pushtun clan, a florid-faced hereditary ruler called Anwar Kamal has maintained a firm and secular grip. By way of explanation, he said: “I told the Taliban, in traditional language, that the next time I see a Talib on my land I am going to screw him as hard I can.�


Dear Khan Anwar Kamal Khan Sahib,

I don't know if you are already aware of this fact, but a financial genius who calls himself Amit Sharma aka Chaltahi aka Create_Alpha is actually a Talib.

Just thought that you might find this information useful.

Respectfully submitted,

Salim Ahmed Khan Chauhan

Re: # 18
Arjun....
Like Advani and other Home Ministers claim that India will not tolerate terrorism ( islamic barbarism)...
It is the matter of capability, rather than words, that matters....
Bill Clinton was the most effective communicator in that way....
Anyhow, Pakistan have to pay for double crossing. That may not confine within Talibans of FATA and NWFP alone. Some part of Pak armed forces have to sacrifice life (the way they have done that for China after 1998 bomb blast- Kargil episode)...

madhavi writes "I guess it is essential to comprehend the subtle style of narration rather than merely skimming through the article."

Wrong answer, you give yourself away in what you wrote, read it yourself again and see what it means:"The U.S. has tirelessly sought to promote the cause of democracy across the world".

You forgot the word "pretended" in there, "The U.S. has pretended to tirelessly seek to promote the cause of democracy across the world"; without that minor adjustment your statement is BS of the highest caliber. If the US had "tirelessly worked for it", it would have got it, at least in its own country for starters. Throwing out chomsky's name does nothing to absolve you. SC sahib, it is much more than FOBs. Thank you kindly

_arjun22 #18 {"pakis!!! stop embarrassing yourselves...everyday we hear your PM or president or COAS say stuff like violation of pakiland's sovereignty will not be tolerated...we know you can't do diddly squad about it..and every day, to prove that, another pakiwhacker whackers another bunch of pakis...

so STFU and stop making bigger fools of yourselves... "}

Arjun,
While your style of posting is crude, rude, and rather unprofessional, most of what you say is true. These fools, and Mushy before them, have made a mockery out of Pakistan, its institutions, and its image. Even Mukhtaran Mai put up a more convincing resistance to her ordeal. Shame!

Madhavi Bhasin,
All in all a factual report on what has been covered in the media as the ongoing soap opera of the symbiotic, or rather parisitic, relationship between the US and Pakistan unfolds. You have presented the perplexing situation quite capably.

The great hoopla regarding democracy, feigned by the current administration, is about as sincere as its resolve to rectify the comedy of elections in Florida and Ohio, the safeguarding of individual liberties guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, or the due diligence in regulation of corporate greed.

I rarely agree with Masadi Sahib, but one must concede that there is no push for democracy, no desire to respect anyone's sovereignty, and no real war on terrorism - it's all about profits for the FOBs - Friends of Bush.

I guess the comment "The U.S. has tirelessly sought to promote the cause of democracy across the world" in the context of the article needs some clarification.
No where in the article has it been mentioned that the U.S. HAS promoted democracy, It has 'sought to'. The use of quote marks in phases “Make the world safe for democracy� and George W. Bush’s ‘Democracy campaign’ reflect the need to look beyond the evident.
The submission that 'When the U.S. brings democracy to a nation, they are in a position to regulate the flow of sovereign authority to the new regime; when internal changes lead to democratic transformation, the U.S. gains no leverage for regulating the nation’s exercise of sovereignty...' reflects that the article is in no way appreciating the role palyed the U.S.

I guess it is essential to comprehend the subtle style of narration rather than merely skimming through the article.
By the way I have read and understood Noam since long!

Libya To Help U.S.
Spread Democracy

Libya says it will work with the United States to spread democracy. What do you think?

Michael Daloway,
Cable Installer
"If we really want Libya to help spread democracy, we’d better give them their weapons back.

Randy Schwartz,
Baker
"Libya might seem like an unlikely partner, but, given our current international standing, every partner is an unlikely partner."

Sara Palin,
next in Command
"The same thing happened with my boyfriend and me, sort of. As soon as I agreed to give up my virginity, he agreed to remove me from his personal list of state-sponsors of terrorism."

Bush Elected President Of Iraq

BAGHDAD—In a vast outpouring of gratitude to the man they call "Our Great Savior From The West," the people of Iraq flooded the polls during yesterday's first free elections, voting overwhelmingly for President George W. Bush as their first democratically elected leader.

Bush, who spent nearly half a trillion dollars of U.S. taxpayer money on his campaign, received a concession call from Abu Musaiya at 11:30 EST last night.

After the Bush landslide was announced on Al-Jazeera, ecstatic crowds chanted in the streets throughout the recently liberated nation: "Hail George Bush, the president of Iraq!"

"May Allah bless him and his children to the seventh generation!" shouted free Iraqi citizen Abdullah al-Hallasid, firing his gun into the air repeatedly and injuring seven U.S. soldiers. "At last, we are free!"

Bush, who surged in the polls after all of the other candidates were killed by either coalition forces or insurgents in the final week leading up to the election, characterized his victory as the dawn of democracy in the Middle East, and proof that the system works.

He will take over Iraqi Presidency on Jan 21, 2009. in the final phase of democracy in Iraq.

Iraq War Recommendations

The Baker Study Group released their report on new Iraq strategies. Here are the some of the other options for Iraq currently on the table:

Implement phased withdrawal of all media access

Rapidly train Iraqi security forces in use of butterfly knives

Try to meet insurgents halfway by burning own effigies of Bush

Promote Smithfield Ham–sponsored "Hey, America, What's Your Exit Strategy?" contest

Spend a weekend researching the customs and history of the Iraqi people

Stop half-assing USO shows

Teach Iraqis about ultimate futility of sectarian violence by pointing out that, Shiite or Sunni, they all look alike anyway

Move operations over to another country that will embrace democracy more readily

Confusion of the lambs
Islamabad diary

Friday, September 19, 2008
Ayaz Amir

The United States has us in a vice and we are not even yelping. A dog in our position would yelp. Even a goat would bleat. But the Islamic Republic, with the sixth or seventh largest army in the world, possessor of umpteen nuclear bombs, is smitten by nameless fears and, consequently, reduced to the silence of the lambs.

The Yanks may not be triumphant in Afghanistan but, by God, they feel triumphant when they have to deal with our officials who have turned prostration into a superior art form. The Yanks have us in a double whammy. Our army, now more at home running defence housing authorities than in doing anything remotely connected with warfare, has been prodded and pushed into carrying out the most sustained operation yet undertaken in the tribal areas, the focus of this operation the Bajaur agency. Tens of thousands of people have been displaced from their homes, the 'collateral' baggage of a blind and indiscriminate war.

Yet even as the Pakistan army, helpless against American pressure, is carrying out this operation---very much in line with an American-dictated agenda---the Americans have taken to carrying out missile strikes from Predator drones against targets in the tribal areas. Osama bin Laden may be the leading symbol of terror for the US. But for the embattled people of FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) the leading symbol of terror is the Predator drone and the Hellfire missiles streaming from its side.

This is a strange war we are caught in. The US is losing in Afghanistan and the Taliban, as all the evidence suggests, are getting stronger by the day. What happened to the Soviet army in the 1980s is what is happening to the US military 20 odd years later. Yet instead of doing a rethink about how it is fighting its Afghan war, the US is taking its anger out on Pakistan. Two hundred years of history have made the Afghans into a tough target. Our birth 61 years ago and our subsequent history have condemned us to be a soft target. Perhaps it is safe to predict that the more the going gets tough for the Americans in Afghanistan, the more they will take their ire out on Pakistan.

Amidst this growing chaos some comic relief is provided---although the humour involved is bitter and grim---by steady references to our sovereignty and the imperatives of seeing that it is not violated. Even as the Yanks go about violating what remains of our sovereignty, Pakistani officials, from the prime minister downwards, say that sovereignty will be defended at all costs, a chant that no citizen of Pakistan, however ill-informed, no longer believes.

Pity the army, caught on the horns of a dilemma: not in a position to really defy the US---the army since its first defence treaty with the US in the early 1950s not genetically programmed to hoe an independent line---but also aware of growing public anger at US aggression in FATA. So in an attempt to resolve this dilemma it settles on a half-measure: a statement by the army chief, endorsed by the corps commanders, that US operations will not be allowed this side of the border.

By which, presumably, the top brass means that the US has no authorization to carry out ground assaults this side of the Durand Line, like the helicopter assault near Angoor Adda early September. A nation demoralized and confused because of lack of leadership and near-total silence on the part of the PPP government, is reduced to a position where it is ready to be comforted by any crumbs of comfort thrown its way. So General Ashfaq Kayani's statement is hailed as an act of near-Churchillian defiance.

Two days after this act of defiance, the US carries out another missile strike in Waziristan. Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman US Joint Chiefs of Staff, arrives in Islamabad on a hurried visit, presumably to assuage ruffled Pakistani feathers. A statement by the US embassy has him reiterating the US commitment to "respect" Pakistan's sovereignty. A few hours after his departure from Islamabad there is another missile strike on a house in South Waziristan.

Constant provider of comic relief is Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani who to the mantra of no one being allowed to violate Pakistani sovereignty brings in a rather different-sounding variation: that Pakistan is in no position to fight the US. Where did this brainwave come from? Who's talking of fighting? Makhdoom Yusuf Raza Gilani as the articulator of the national interest is not the least of the wonders happening to emerge on the national scene these days.

Defiance and resistance can take many forms. Even in our diminished position we still have some cards up our sleeve. We can tell the Americans that if missile attacks on FATA continue the Pakistan army will cease its current operations in that area. This will be a real threat because with the Americans over-extended in Afghanistan sending US troops into FATA is easier said than done.

American and NATO supplies move through Pakistan. We have the option of cutting this umbilical cord. But this will need heart and spirit and at the moment the Pakistani leadership has neither.

Amidst all these turbulent events anyone would have expected President Asif Zardari to stay at home. But only a few days after his election he is off on a "private visit" to Dubai, where he has a home, and from there to London. Perhaps to justify his UK trip he holds talks with Prime Minister Gordon Brown whom no one takes seriously any more in the UK but whose intercession President Zardari seeks to ask the US not to violate that old chestnut: Pakistan's sovereignty.

President Zardari says (in answer to a question from media people) that the UK understands the subcontinent better than any other country, so it is in a better position to convey Pakistani concerns to the outside world. This is breathtaking stuff but it sheds a lurid if sad light on the sum of leadership currently available in Pakistan.

About Garibaldi, hero of Italian unity, I was reading the other day that shortly before his death, when all his triumphs were behind him, he wrote, "It was a very different Italy which I spent my life dreaming of, not the impoverished and humiliated country which we now see ruled by the dregs of the nation."

"Impoverished and humiliated country…" and then "…ruled by the dregs of the nation": says it all, doesn't it? For lack of leadership and no other reason Pakistan is demoralized, a nation psychologically drained and on its way to being psychologically traumatized.

Pervez Musharraf was an American pawn and satellite, selling Pakistan cheaply in Sep 2001 when the US, bent on vengeance, had decided to attack Afghanistan. As long as he remained a potent satellite, ready and able to deliver what the Americans wanted, he was feted and lionised by Washington. When he became a stricken figure, his weakening starting---and let us never forget this---by the lawyers' movement, Washington felt persuaded to shuffle the Pakistani deck to make way for a fresh leadership better able to serve American interests.

The people of Pakistan thought they were voting for change on Feb 18. How could they have known they were voting for an illusion? Liberation has not come Pakistan's way. It has been given a fresh set of chains which binds it more strongly than ever to America's war chariot---the same chariot Musharraf clambered aboard in 2001, to sell Pakistan cheaply and ensure his own survival in power.

This war will be the death of us for we are becoming its cannon fodder. If only the Taliban in Afghanistan were to fade away all would be well with us. But with their resistance growing stronger by the day---and for the Afghans this is as much a struggle against foreign occupation as their 'jihad' in the 1980s was a struggle against Soviet occupation---the US will force Pakistan and its army and air force more and more into this war, in order to lighten the burden of conflict for the US.

American financial markets are in turmoil. Russia, reversing the decline of the Yeltsin years, is beginning to reassert itself as a world power. China continues its upward climb. Yet we remain tied to the old forms, "ruled by the dregs of the nation", too psychologically broken to see the outlines of the new world order emerging in the distance.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

New Fox Reality Show To ELECT Ruler Of Iraq

LOS ANGELES–Fox executives Monday unveiled their latest reality-TV venture, Appointed By America, a new series in which contestants vie for the top spot in Iraq's post-war government.



Some of the Appointed By America hopefuls vying for the presidency of Iraq.

"Get ready, America, because you're about to choose the man–or woman–who will lead Iraq into an exciting democratic future," said Fox reality-programming chief Mike Darnell, introducing the show at a press conference. "Will it be Ahmed Chalabi, leader of the exiled Iraqi National Congress? Or General Tommy Franks, commander of the allied forces? Or maybe Roshumba Williams, the Macon, GA, waitress with big dreams and an even bigger voice? Tune in Tuesdays at 9 to see."

Describing the new show as "American Idol meets the reconstruction of Afghanistan," Darnell said Appointed By America will feature contestants squaring off in a variety of challenges, including a democracy quiz, a talent competition, and nation-building activities that will demonstrate their ability to lead a bombed-out, war-ravaged Mideast country.

A panel of celebrity judges will help eliminate two contestants each week, leaving one lucky winner the undisputed leader of Iraq at the end of the season. Viewers can participate by casting phone-in votes, although Darnell noted that voting is restricted to calls originating from within the continental U.S.

U.S. General Jay Garner (Ret.) will host the show under the auspices of the Pentagon. The three celebrity judges, Darnell said, will be choreographer and former Chrysalis recording artist Toni Basil, internationally renowned hairstylist Vidal Sassoon, and television star Kevin Sorbo.

Audience members eagerly await the start of a live taping of Appointed By America.

"They really get into it," Darnell said. "Just wait until you see the fur fly between Sassoon and Basil."

Fox entertainment president Gail Berman said the network was inspired to create the show after witnessing its news division's ratings success over the past few months.

"Fox did such huge numbers with its war coverage, we figured, 'Why not find a way to keep this good thing going?'" Berman said. "I'm confident that our loyal Fox News viewers will find that reconstruction can be just as thrilling as destruction."

The first episode has already been taped in front of a live studio audience, though results will remain classified until airtime. The winner of Appointed By America will be sworn in as president of Iraq on June 24 in a gala two-hour season finale broadcast live from Baghdad.

According to Berman, Fox received more than 3,000 applicants for the show during an open casting call. While most of the hopefuls were American or Iraqi, some 600 aspiring rulers from more than 100 nations auditioned for the coveted 20 finalist spots. Contestants included a San Diego interior decorator, a Philadelphia inner-city schoolteacher, and a peshmerga fighter from the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan.

Contestant Kymbyrley Lake, a cashier from Garland, TX, said she has a "good feeling" about her chances.

"I just really believe I am going to win this show," Lake said. "I feel it in my heart that Jesus is going to grant me the chance to help all these people. Ever since I was a little girl, I've dreamed of doing something to help bring about a more peaceful world."

Lake just might get her chance. Inside sources say she was among the top five vote-getters in the first episode, with Kurdistan Democratic Party official Fawzi Hariri and pre-Saddam Iraqi minister Adnan al-Pachachi–both early odds-on favorites–scoring low points for stage presence.

At a Pentagon briefing Monday, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz gave his blessing to Appointed By America.

"It is great that Fox will play a vital role in post-war Iraq," Wolfowitz said. "Heck, we didn't really know what we were going to do."

137 More Oil Wells Liberated For Democracy


RUMAILAH OIL FIELDS, IRAQ–The U.S. continued to make progress in its fight against totalitarianism Tuesday, when 137 more oil wells were liberated for democracy.



The U.S. flag flies high atop a newly liberated oil well.

"For decades, these oil wells have suffered untold misery under Saddam Hussein's tyrannical rule," said U.S. Commander General Tommy Franks, speaking from southern Iraq's Rumailah oil fields, the site of the liberation. "With this victory, these long-oppressed wells will soon pump their first barrels of crude as free and equal wells in the global petroleum marketplace. They will join the ranks of the world's liberated oil wells, enjoying the same rights as their democratic brethren around the globe."

The Rumailah wells are the latest of nearly 900 to be freed from the yoke of oppression by coalition forces. As U.S. troops continue to advance deeper into Iraq–armed with constant standing orders to "Secure the oil wells; repeat, secure the oil wells"–an estimated 1,500 more wells are expected to be liberated in the coming weeks.

For months, U.S. officials have gone to great lengths to assure the public, both in America and abroad, that the Iraq invasion is not motivated by oil interests–a sentiment echoed by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld during a press conference Monday.

"This war is not about oil," Rumsfeld said. "Our decision to intercede against this dictator and not against the dozens of other ruthless dictators in the world is not about oil. France and Russia's opposition to this war is not about the purely coincidental fact that both countries have lucrative, pre-existing oil contracts with Iraq. Furthermore, the interest of many U.S. corporations in the war has nothing to do with oil, either. This war is about liberty. Oil wells deserve liberty, too."

Continued Rumsfeld: "These oppressed Iraqi oil wells deserve the right to pump oil as freely as any other oil well on God's Earth–be it in Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, or an Alaskan wildlife refuge. It is crass and cynical to view this operation as being motivated by greed, profit, or the second-largest oil reserves in the Middle East. This war is motivated by one thing: democracy. Our military action is meant to provide all of Iraq's oil wells–be they big or small, staggeringly lucrative or merely very lucrative–with their God-given right to pump under a democratic system of self-governance."

In the weeks leading up to the war, the U.S. sought to make its intentions clear by air-dropping hundreds of thousands of pamphlets over Iraq assuring its people that the U.S. was not launching a war against them, but against Saddam Hussein. The pamphlets also gave Iraqi soldiers instructions on how to surrender properly, as well as a promise that they would be treated well if they did so. Most importantly, though, they included a stern admonition to all Iraqis not to burn any oil wells, warning that they would be hunted down and prosecuted as war criminals if they did.

U.S. officials hope that the pamphlets' message, especially the part about the oil wells, gets through.

"These valuable natural resources belong to the Iraqi people, who rely on their output for desperately needed food and medicine under the U.N.'s Oil-For-Food Program," Franks said. "But ultimately, we need to remember that these oil wells do not really belong to anybody. They, like any other free oil well, have the basic, inalienable right to independent representational government and self-determination under their own rule. Every oil well deserves to choose how and when it wishes to produce oil, and for whose economic benefit."

Aiding the wells in their transition to democracy will be Texaco, Mobil, and other U.S. businesses, each of which bring years of expertise in dealing with the problems and challenges that oil wells face in a free society. These private companies will be well-equipped to help manage the oil wells as they make the difficult adjustment to producing oil in freedom.

Despite the apparent inevitability of victory in Iraq, White House sources stress that the battle for oil-well liberty is far from over.

"We must remember that there are many, many oil wells living under oppression all across the world, not just in Iraq," White House press secretary Ari Fleischer said. "Until every oil well enjoys the fruits of democracy, no oil well is truly free."

In response to #14 the White House issued the following:

New Anti-Terrorism Strategy

The White House released an updated version of its anti-terrorism strategy, "National Strategy For Combating Terrorism." Here are its main new components:

Setting up decoy "pro-terrorism centers" around nation to capture terrorists

Staging, foiling series of attacks

Ignoring terrorists so they get frustrated and go away

Introducing new slogan: "If you see, hear, feel, smell, or taste something, say something"

Holding all Americans until they feel safe again

Increasing national wait times

Allocating $1.2 trillion for development of terror-seeking missiles

Stopping terrorism for real this time

Al Qaida- The SWISH Report
September 13th, 2008


An eighth report from the South Waziristan Institute of Strategic Hermeneutics to the al-Qaida Strategic Planning Cell (SPC) on the progress of the campaign

Thank you for inviting us to deliver another report on the progress of your movement. You will recall that our work for your planning cell commenced with an initial assessment in July 2004, a follow-up in January 2005 and further reports in February 2006 and September 2006 and (in light of political developments in the United States) December 2006.

The next analysis was presented in November 2007; but the pace of events in Iraq, Pakistan and Afghanistan – in the context of the evolving United States presidential-election campaign – led to the request for the next report only three months later, in February 2008. This last document clearly signaled to you that this might be the final occasion when our services might be required.

We are then particularly pleased that – even though our February 2008 assessment was somewhat blunt in terms of your movement’s overall prospect – you have invited us to deliver one more report. We understand that on this occasion you require a brief updating of our analysis on your main theaters of operation, together with an analysis of the impact of the possible outcomes of the US residential election in November 2008.

Pakistan and Afghanistan

In our last briefing we made three judgments about Pakistan. First. that the country’s then general-president Pervez Musharraf had been much weakened by the result of the country’s just-held parliamentary election, and that we were not convinced he would survive. Second, that it was doubtful that a stable parliamentary coalition would emerge. Third, that there would be we increased United States military activity within western Pakistan. In all three respects our analysis was accurate: Pervez Musharraf has gone, the domestic governing coalition is in disarray, and the US military is now conducting special-forces operations across the border with Afghanistan.

The assumption of the presidency by Asif Ali Zardari is also an indication that the feudal pattern of Pakistani politics is thriving; though civil-society elements and the legal profession may cause problems for the government. It is likely that President Zardari will be supportive of increased US military action, but this may cause deep unease in sections of the Pakistani military, as well as increasing the more general anti-American mood.

While our predictions seven months ago for Pakistan were reassuringly accurate, we must confess we were less effective in our analysis concerning Afghanistan. There, we were doubtful that the revitalized Taliban would extend their activities to major assaults on coalition forces – in the face of overwhelming firepower we instead expected to see an intense concentration on roadside bombs and martyr attacks. While these have indeed been increased, we also note the effective move towards the targeting of supply-routes, and a willingness, on occasions, to conduct substantial military operations. These have included a successful assault on the main prison in Kandahar and lethal attacks on US and French units.

One outcome of these developments is that the US military now puts a much greater emphasis on the war in Afghanistan and is looking to increase its own military deployments while seeking to persuade its Nato partners to be more supportive.

Iraq

In our February 2008 report, we anticipated that the George W Bush administration, along with neo-conservative commentators, would develop an overall narrative centred on a “probability of victory� in Iraq which would downgrade the significance of the war in that country during the latter months of the presidential campaign. This has indeed been what has happened, with the framers of the narrative placing a great emphasis on Iraq’s increased security. It is interesting in this context, however, that the United States military leadership is deeply reluctant to withdraw combat-troops to a level much below that of the pre-surge (that is, pre-February 2007) deployments. In spite of the pressing need for troops in Afghanistan, it now looks as though just one of the fifteen remaining US combat-brigades will be withdrawn in the September 2008 – March 2009 period.

We strongly suspect that many of the more astute military analysts in US Central Command (Centcom) and the Pentagon believe that security in Iraq is far more problematic than their political masters would like their citizens to believe. This is partly due to the hard line now being taken by the Nouri al-Maliki government, especially towards the integration of Sunni militias into the security forces, but also relates to strains in Shi’a / Kurdish relations and the growing influence of Iran.

The al-Maliki government claims to want a total United States military withdrawal by 2010 or 2011, but oil geopolitics makes this nonsensical – the US is in Iraq for the long term. While your associates in Iraq have had major reversals, we suspect these are short-term. We stand by our assessment of seven months ago:

“Although circumstances will not always be as favorable as 2006-07, rest assured that your paramilitary combat-training zone in Iraq will remain viable and of great use to you for the foreseeable future.�

In this context, we note recent reports that some of your paramilitary associates from Iraq are now active in Somalia.

The American election campaign

In our last report to you it had become clear that John McCain was likely to be the Republican candidate and that Barack Obama might defeat Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. Our overall view was that:

“What is best for you is that the United States remains resolute in its support for Israel, Saudi Arabia and Egypt; fully addicted to oil and therefore determined to remain dominant in the Persian Gulf; and prepared to continue to pursue its war against you with the utmost vigor. In other words, eight more years for George W Bush would have been ideal. Sadly for your movement, that cannot be.�

As a whole, we considered McCain to be a far better prospect from your perspective; though we had some concerns that such rightwing incumbents can, on occasions, opt successfully for radical change.

Today, with the Obama/McCain contest fully underway, we indeed believe that a McCain presidency is – by a considerable margin – the more favorable to your movement; not least because the Republican ticket is now supplemented by a vice-presidential nominee who is a Christian fundamentalist as well as a climate-change skeptic from an oil-rich state.

It remains the case that if elected, Barack Obama could be very limited in his security options. His speech to the leading American pro-Israel organization AIPAC in June 2008 was markedly hardline; he supports military reinforcements for Afghanistan; and he has implied that he would be willing to order more direct US military action in Pakistan. Even so, part of the reason for taking such positions relates simply to the realities of electoral politics. What he says now and what he would do in office may be very different, especially if the Democrats have convincing majorities in both houses of Congress.

In any case, whatever his actual policies, we most certainly would expect under an Obama presidency a marked change in style towards a more listening, cooperative and multilaterally-engaged America. That must be of deep concern to you. A more “acceptable� America in global terms is the last thing you want.

In one sense, however, we can reassure you about the outcome; for our associates in our Washington office believe that John McCain will win by a relatively small margin, although Congress is likely to remain Democrat-controlled. Their assessment is based on a prediction that while polls may well give Obama a small margin even up to election-day, a small but significant portion of those voting will be sufficiently influenced by residual prejudice to opt for McCain in the privacy of the polling booth. Their point is that even if only one in fifty voters behaves in this manner, that should help ensure a victory for McCain.

We acknowledge that this is very tentative, and that American politics are currently volatile and unpredictable; and that, after all, our assessment in November 2007 was made in the context of a likely Rudy Giuliani / Hillary Clinton contest!

Your concern must still be with the prospect of an Obama victory, and a key question is whether you should engineer a major attack against US interests shortly before the election. We would advise against this. Whether or not you have the resources to mount a major attack (and we understand why you will not take us into your confidence), the result could be unpredictable.

In the immediate wake of a 9/11-scale attack within the continental United States, Obama’s advisers would know that this would benefit their opponent strongly. They might well then take the risk of going on the offensive against McCain, pointing to the folly of George W Bush’s policies and the manner in which they have made the United States unsafe. It would be a risky strategy but these would be desperate times for the Obama campaign and it might just come off. The risk to you is too great and for this reason alone we do not advocate such an attack.

Instead, we stand by our recommendation in February 2008 that you seek, in the weeks before the election, to make it known that you favor Barack Obama and believe he would be a president with whom you could do business. This would be combined with strong statements to the effect that you believe a John McCain presidency would be a disaster for the United States and that he would be a leader unto darkness and death. Such a strategy, we believe, would go a long way to ensure he was elected, this being the outcome you should most earnestly desire.

Wana

South Waziristan

10 September 2008

The author writes "the United States has tirelessly sought to promote the cause of democracy across the world"


hahahahahahahahhaah....ahahahahahahhaha

that reminds me of this song:

political science by Randy Newman

No one likes us-I don't know why
We may not be perfect, but heaven knows we try
But all around, even our old friends put us down
Let's drop the big one and see what happens

We give them money-but are they grateful?
No, they're spiteful and they're hateful
They don't respect us-so let's surprise them
We'll drop the big one and pulverize them

Asia's crowded and Europe's too old
Africa is far too hot
And Canada's too cold
And South America stole our name
Let's drop the big one
There'll be no one left to blame us

We'll save Australia
Don't wanna hurt no kangaroo
We'll build an All American amusement park there
They got surfin', too

Boom goes London and boom Paris
More room for you and more room for me
And every city the whole world round
Will just be another American town
Oh, how peaceful it will be
We'll set everybody free
You'll wear a Japanese kimono
And there'll be Italian shoes for me

They all hate us anyhow
So let's drop the big one now
Let's drop the big one now


with much respect,
thinking storm

lethal injection or electrocution

The author writes "the United States has tirelessly sought to promote the cause of democracy across the world"

Which land are you living in? The land of OZ. The US elite are not concerned about democracy and have done everything in their power to ensure that the only thing democratic that remains in the world, including their own country (remember the patriot act) is their often used though meaningless slogan.

At home they ensure that a strict vetting process determines which candidate goes to the top, that the party system is reduced to Tweedledee (democrats) and Tweedledumb (republicans)camp (not much different from a one party dictatorship), that money determines campaigns, that issues are preselected and coverage pushed through the major corporate media and all alternative anti-system voices are shut out, and the easy flow of the corporate elite into the political directorate, not to mention the military elite into top corporate jobs and then their floating into the state and so on determines that the anti democratic structure of relationships where the people don't matter at all (except for voting on the method through which they will be deprived, lethal injection of electrocution). This is not how democracy works or can work. Regarding Pakistan we know how they hobnob with dictators, and then bring the civilians after a thorough vetting process into the power equation, when the people get too restless with the military.

The Kiyani statement was for public consumption in Pakistan, for the masses who are sick and tired of US bs in the region. Kiyani knows very well where he fits in the hierarchy of worth, even as he was talking with the US commander, a drone was killing more civilians in Waziristan with as they say Pakistani help (another coverup excuse, the Pakistanis had no clue about the drone).

The purpose of the US is to escalate the WOT and Pakistan is the next point of unconnected escalation, and then to surround Iran, that way the war will go well into the next decade. It is called planning to perpetuate a war decade to decade, one decade is coming to an end after having achieved nothing for either peace or democracy but having achieved quite a bit as far as corporate profits go, the next decade preparations are underway to trash a few other countires and kill their people by the hundreds of thousands (as is the best tradition of the US~ the only thing it works relentlessly towards) and rescue the crisis it capitalism goes through every now and then, while lining the pockets of its super rich....

Have a nice day, and keep it moral, though you CIA types will not understand what that means....

TNI Masadi

US supports everything that gives it money and help remain it in controlling position. They don't have fixed ideas, they are neither for democracy nor against it.

So if a dictator is not helping them they will support democracy, if democracy is not helping them they will support dictator.

very naive article by a naif! the US only supports democracy when it suits its own strategic and geopolitical interests otherwise it doesn't give a damn about it. Its record in the Mid East and in Pakistan is proof of that. This is not some rabid conspiracy theory. Just read Chomsky or watch John Pilger's War on Democracy or read something other than by right-wing conservatives or watch something other than Fox News!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xhy6BR8Hb38

Folks,

Can someone tell me how to embed a youtube news clip?

Thanks in advance

[youtube]Xhy6BR8Hb38[/youtube][/quote]

Pakistan: US did not warn of missile strike
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Filed at 9:23 a.m. ET

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan (AP) -- Pakistan said Thursday it was not warned about a suspected U.S. missile strike in its northwest that came the same day a top American official assured Pakistani leaders of U.S. respect for the Muslim nation's sovereignty.

The reported attack Wednesday will likely fuel anger in Pakistan over a surge in cross-border operations by U.S. forces -- including a Sept. 3 ground assault -- that has strained the countries' seven-year anti-terror alliance.

Pakistan's prime minister on Thursday reiterated Pakistan's stand against the incursions. But while denying prior knowledge of the reported strike, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi indicated Pakistan's civilian leaders want to defuse tensions through diplomacy.

The Setting: large ornate ball room at the Pakistani Presidential House.

Players: gilani, kiyani, Zardari (pakistani)....Adm. Mullen, low level embassy staffer. (American)


Gilani: how was your trip?

Mullen: Oh..islamabad is close Mr. PM, it's in our viewfinder.

Zardari: I got Bilawal a viewfinder when he was 10. It had pictures of the seven wonders of the world.

Mullen: that's nice

Gilani motions to a young staffer: "thoRay keemay kay samosay ley aao..aur chai"

Kiyani: Adm. Mullen, our two countries have a long standing history of cooperation. It is distressing to see our people targetted by the US forces.

Zardari: I also had bought Bilawal a snowglobe once...it was very cute..with all the landmarks of Paris. Admiral sahib, have you ever been to Paris? You must...it is too good...toooo good


Adm Mullen: Err..yes I have Mr. President.
(looking at Kiyani)..General, we would like nothing better than to work with the Pakistani Gov't and the Military to stamp out the islamists that are operating within your territory and killing people in Afghanistan and other parts of the world. But we have gone down this road before...spent $10 billion to facilitate this with little success. We also now believe that your institutions have been fomenting jihadi activities while paying lip service to us.

Gilani: these samosay have too much oil...Zardari sahib...you should not take any...with Bibi gone...I am fearful of ur health...nawaz sahib said that to me the other day. He said.."Aisa na ho kay Zardari ko kuch bibi ki tarah ho jaye"...

(Pointing to the help) zardari sahib kay samosay meri plate mein daaldo.

Zardari: Admiral, we pakistanis just love snowglobes.just like the west. But there are some people in the tribal areas who don't like snowglobes. I don't think they have been to Paris either. Have you been there Admiral Mullen. I love Paris...I got my son bilawal a snow globe with all the landmarks of Paris in it. Did you know that Admiral.

Mullen: err..yes I did learn of that recently.

Kiyani: Admiral we are meat eating people, we will defend our honor and our sovereignty. We cannot have the US military encroach on our sovereignty! We will not stand for it. We are Pakistanis...do you even know what Pakistani means? It means we are Pure People. I have given orders to fire upon any american misadventure unto Pakistani soil.

Mullen: General we belive in the bravery of the Pakistani people and their desire to root out this evil of jihjad from among them. This means working together.

Gilani:(seeing that the general is a bit hot under the collar) Admiral, Gen Kiyani said "Pure people"...not "Brave people"...I think we should all be calm. (Points to the staffer)....thora roohafzah ley aao!!

Zardari: Yes Yes..let's not lose sight of the big picture. I am 10% sure that we can all get what we want. (winking at Kiyani)

Kiyani: Admiral, we need a solemn pleadge that we will be informed before any and all military incursions into our country. And our prior approval would be sought. All operations will be handled by the Paksitani military and the cost will be borne by you.

Admiral Mullen: General, we are committed to working with you to get this done.

(all of a sudden someone's cell phone rings. Everyone pulls theirs out...Gilani can he heard shouting "Haaallo....Haaaallo")

Admiral Mullen: It's mine gentlemen. Can I have some privacy. (He is ushered to a quiet corner of the room. )

Kiyani: Zardari Sahib, appki medications kahan hai?

Zardari: (now sitting without his shirt cross legged on the chair) I wish I could live inside the snowglobe...and have rooh afzah flavored ice cream from bertillon.

Gilani: Kiyani sahib, do you think the keema juice will comeout of my sherwani?

Admiral Mullen: Gentlemen, i just spoke to the President...and..

Zardari: (now making circles with the front strands of his hair..) I am a president..yes I am..oh yes I am...

Admiral Mullen: ..and he said that we should invide President Zardari to the White House along with you both to chart out a new course for our relationship.

Kiyani: That is all we were hoping for Admiral. So we have your assurance that there will be no strikes in Pakistan from US forces.

Admiral Mullen; We will work with you General

Gilani: this is fantastic...can we have some cake?

Admiral Mullen: Gentlemen thanks for you hospitality, But I have to be going. (Picks up his cell phone and says "Go")

Zardari, Kiyani and Gilani are visibily elated at the bounties that are about to rain from the sky.

Kiyani: Scotch gentlemen?

Gilani: cna we add some rooh af zah?

Zardari: I like Pizza


Twenty minutes later...Kiyanis aide comes rushing in..."the americans have bombed Bajaur again sir"

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Nothing much will change. Kiyani is new to the army chief's post and the US is yet to get a handle on him. Once that happens, things will be back to normal. The Predators will continue to prowl and US forces will continue to chase their targets across the Durand Line into Pakistan's tribal areas.

Madhvi,
You must have watched Indian movies, where some sub-villains will get paid by hero to do his duty, but actualy the villain will do harm to his employer by collaborating with hero's enemy ( main villain)...

Pakistani armed forces is now working as sub-villain in this entire drama. Now, as the drama unfolds, most probably Paki armed forces will receive more injuries than the Talibans/Jihadis/Islamists....
In another article, Mike was pointing to a report. While US Tomahawks were pounding Jihadi hideouts, it was found that some ISI officers also sacrificed their life with islamists (they must be now enjoying 72....)...