Emerging Pakistan-U.S. relations

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....)...

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.

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

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"

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.

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

Folks,

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

Thanks in advance

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

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!

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.

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

lethal injection or electrocution

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

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

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

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."