Lashes to lashes, dust to dust

kuldip nayyar types...this one is for people like you who think india and pureland are in the same league...

Obama’s new strategy sours US-Pakistan ties
By Anwar Iqbal
US Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Mike Mullen and US envoy to Pakistan and Afghanistan, Richard Holbrooke hold talks with Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi in Islamabad.—AP

WASHINGTON: US President Barack Obama’s new strategy is causing serious differences between the United States and Pakistan over how to fight the militants hiding in the Pak-Afghan region.

US think-tanks and the media believe that the differences revolve around two major issues: India’s role in Afghanistan and the drone attacks at suspected terrorist targets inside Pakistan.

They acknowledge that India is using its overwhelming presence in Afghanistan to create problems for Pakistan in Balochistan and other places.

Some experts say that in recent meetings Pakistanis officials asked the United States to use its influence on India to stop its interference in Balochistan but the Americans are not willing to do so.

This, according to them, explains why Tuesday’s talks in Islamabad between Americans and Pakistani officials ended on a sour note, indicating clearly that the two sides have serious differences.

In a report distributed on Wednesday, the US Council on Foreign Relations noted that in their meetings with America’s special envoy Richard Holbrooke and Chairman of US Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen, Pakistani officials contended that Washington showed disproportionate support for India in its bilateral relations with Pakistan.

Also on Wednesday, the Foreign Policy magazine quoted James Traub as saying that ‘Pakistan feels as if it’s falling apart … (and) American policy has arguably made the situation even worse’.

Mr Traub, a US scholar who writes for the New Yorker magazine and The New York Times, noted that the Predator-drone attacks along the border, ‘though effective, drive the Taliban eastward, deeper into Pakistan. And the strategy has been only reinforcing hostility to the United States among ordinary Pakistanis’.

The council, which has produced several foreign policy leaders, noted that Pakistani officials were also criticising the parameters of Ambassador Holbrooke’s ‘Af-Pak’ mission, saying a more productive assignment would include mediation of the India-Pakistan conflict in Kashmir.

Many experts believed that the Kashmir dispute was ‘inextricably linked with problems of militancy in other parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan’, the council observed.

But the council pointed out that while talking to journalists in India, Mr Holbrooke denied that he was pushing for new peace dialogue between India and Pakistan.

The US think-tank reported that on Tuesday rifts emerged between Mr Holbrooke and his negotiating counterparts in Pakistan, as Islamabad flatly rejected a proposal for joint military operations in Pakistan’s tribal areas.

According to the report, Mr Holbrooke and Admiral Mullen also alleged that the Taliban’s senior leadership was currently hiding in Balochistan.

The Foreign Policy magazine noted that the US administration justified the drone attacks by claiming it would deny the militants a ‘safe haven’ in Pakistan.

‘This line of argument sounds persuasive, but it falls apart on closer examination. For starters, it is not clear that al Qaeda requires a safe haven to do damage, especially since the original organisation has metastasised into smaller groups of sympathisers.’

The magazine pointed out that only a large-scale invasion could eliminate al Qaeda from the region but such an invasion was impossible and therefore there was little reason to continue the drone attacks.

‘US military strikes in Pakistan —even limited ones —tend to undermine the Pakistani government and increase the risk that Pakistan will become a failed state,’ the report noted.

On differences between Pakistan and the US over India, the Wall Street Journal pointed out that Washington was finding it difficult to ‘pursue a cohesive strategy that eradicates militancy in Pakistan and Afghanistan but doesn’t heighten tensions among three countries whose shared history is rife with violence and mutual suspicion’.

The newspaper reported that US policy-makers initially considered including Kashmir as part of the US strategy but India balked.

‘US officials subsequently have taken discussion about Kashmir off the table, even though it remains a central flashpoint in tensions between India and Pakistan,’ the newspaper noted. ‘Pakistani officials have complained that the US needs to consider all conflicts in the region as it seeks to solve them.’

I seriously doubt that in 216 BC any city in the world could have a population greater that 2-3 thousand. It was impossible to support an infrstructure that could support a population more than that. Therefore, the story about ashok and Kalijar seems to be a fabrication of hindu mind who created the mythical stories like Ramayana and Mahabharat where millions of men, women, and innocent monkeys are killed. Women are kidnapped; monsters are burnt; and women self immolate to prove that they didn't do any hanky panky and thus a religion is born.

Tahmed sahib,

I have never heard of there being any greek women in Alexander's army. So, I assume (this thing about Asoka being quarter greek is another Made in India myth posing as history.

But if by any chance Seleucus had a Greek woman in his army, she wud have plumped for Guptaji on his own- the Greek men in his army wud have preferred boys anyways.

Regards

#146 Urstruly, the Old Testament and Koran are just as much fantasies as any of the Hindu religious texts. It's just that you choose to believe in some, and not the others. Don't fool yourself that one set is scientifically correct.
Re your assertion about the population of cities, there is no need to make a fool of yourself. In 200 BC, the population of the world was about 200 million. Changan in China had 400,000 people and Patna/ Patliputra had 350,000. Some sources put Alexandria's population at the time at around half a million. Contrary to rumours, the world did not begin somewhere in the seventh century CE.

Urstruly, further to what nb wrote, the pakistan's own city of mohenjo daro has been estimated to have had a population of about 50 thousand as early as 2500 BC. Harappa had another 30 k.

By the time 1st century BC rolled around, there were cities around the world, from Rome to China, with near a million people living in them, each, leading extremely complex lives.

The earliest reference to China is found in Mahabharata, wherein they are refered to as a bunch of barbarians. (probably everyone considered everyone else a barbarian in those days!).

Re: # 148
"the Old Testament and Koran are just as much fantasies"

The Old Testament figures are definitely manipulated!

Can you quote where the Qur'an does that?

Tahir, the existence of angels and revelations are all fantasies, (how many angels have come to you?) but people have the right to have their fantasies, so do you. All that I want is that people like you and Urstruly should let other people enjoy their own fantasies too.

tahmed...
what do you feel is proof?...Family album...or some record in Pakistani/Afghanistani mosque...?

#152, Tahmed would like to speak to a witness who was present at the wedding. Please arrange the needful.

nb/nkg: I see you two are having understanding what constitutes "proof". You are obviously not familiar with the concept, so I sympathize with your difficulty. Let me help.

First you have to get rid of the poor attitudes you were demonstrating in your posts below.

Lesson 1: Your saying something is a "fact" (as you were doing) does not make it a fact. No matter how many times you repeat it (as you were doing).

Lesson 2: Providing the title of some book or the name of some author (as you two did in response to my questioning the basis for your "fact"), does not make it "proof". You have to also read what the book actually says. Thus, I read what nkg's reference book had to say, and the book made clear the question of Chandragupta's greek soulmate (or at least bedmate) was a conjecture, nothing approaching "proof".

Once you have mastered Lessons 1 and 2, then you are ready to catch up with what Grade 6 students take for granted - understand what constitutes "reasonable proof" and what is a "fact". Thus, e.g., we know of the existence of Alexander because of contemporary chroniclers, cities named after him, artifacts found at excavation sites, coins struck with his likeness. And yet, any serious historian will readily admit to lacking proof of many important aspects of Alexander's life. And btw, Indian chroniclers dont even mention Alexander - the concept of a factual recording of history was unknown in India until the muslims introduced it (along with many other aspects of civilized life), and Al beruni's writings are proof of that. (the last part will no doubt get you angry - but I am an evil paki bedunoid old man. getting pious, morally pure, intellectually perfect, hindus angry is my schtick).
-

DM jee: welcome back to chowk. I have to check out this book by Besham sometime. btw, what exactly does he say on this issue in question of Chandragupta's loving greek, mythical or real, wife? nb named the book, but did not quote what it actually said.

Re: # 151

nb(how many angels have come to you?)

well ... if any of the 'manifestations' of your inerlocutor here (on chowk) are to go by then a few revelations a day (via the intermediary of the aforementioned) would be a safe guess

cheema genius: focus on what i wrote below. dont try to make me the issue by making up bakwas (sorry, but that accurately describes what you wrote) to misrepresent my religious views.

Re: # 157; tahmed sahib

I never meant you sir ... incidently I responded to nb's post No 151 ... as evident from my reply

though I am beginning to wonder ... hmmm

#158 yes you did sir. dont try to be cleverer than you are.

Re: # 159

i don't have to try ... is No 151 addressed to you??