GHQ Attack-Serious Questions

Re: # 265

Progressive as in Benazir setting up the Taliban???

Tahmed please enlighten us as to who are the progressive forces and any progressive act they have done.

Sanatani

Re: # 270 nkg says: "contrary to the believe that, civilian govt. in Pakistan is far more useless than Military Govt....
The Civilian Govt. has to keep anti-india sentiments alive to garner vote, but not the military one.... "

Nkg your view is complete contrast to the view expressed by Pew#266. I do not have any specific views on the Pak govt to be democratic or militry based, as it is for the Pakis to decide.

It does not matter who is in control, as long as the Pak decision making is driven by the zero sum game with India. All I am interested is that the Pak ideas engine that fires up ideas such as 93Mumbai, 99Kargil, 99Kandhar, 2001Parliament, Mumbai26/11, how that can be stopped.

Re: # 271 tahmed32:

We have gone thru this blow-hot-blow-cold ewlationship before. No different this time also.

"How, e.g., do you propose "nip in the bud" evil plots being brewed by the Pakistani state?"
- Please re-read my statement. It talks about "Ensuring" (strengthen - first stage), this capability, but not "executing" (protection/defend - second stage). There is a difference. I am in no way suggesting that India go ahead and "pro-actively (attack - stage three)" do what the Pak state/non-state actors are doing currently. Currently India is always reacting/defending (stage - zero), from a position of ill-equipped/ill-prepared to face the threats knowing fully well how much love the Pakis have for them.
- Pak encroched into Kargil, India only defended and pushed back the encrochers to the LOC. India has never done nor do I suggest India do a Kargil onto Pak. All I meant was that Indian security should have been foolproof enought, not to let Pak get such ideas. Simple.

"I dont see any Pakistani equivalent of an arjun or a jay (i.e. someone obsessing 24/7 about how India is evil)"
- Ahhh...that is the gem of self-praising. There are enough numbers of persons of this category from both countries. You probably do not feel the presence of such Pakis, probably because you are also one of them and cannot make the distiction. The ideas of "nuclear wasteland", "fight in panipat", "redirect the talibans to kashmir" are all very pious thoughts made by the Pakis for which the Indians must be greatful. But do you notice these Indians can only express empty threats on the net, but your average Kasabs really get fired by such passions and make an unsuccessful attempt to achieve it. The 93Mumbai, 99kargil, 99Kandhar, 2001Parliament, Mumbai26/11, etc. are not very old. You cannot find equivalent of them done by the Indians.
- Secondly you conveniently remain silent on India's main concerns i.e. how you/Pak plans to stop future such events.
- In fact if an educated Paki (of 3rd category - as you defined) like you can get so agitated so easily and make such threats, how do you convince me with the past events looming so large, that the average Pakis are different and peace loving, friendship seeking with India etc. In fact I should be complianing to you for the problems created to India, rather you are complaining for showing you your real position.

"And of course the difference between a democratic government vs a dictatorship totally escapes you."
- You are fully right. Are you referring to the differences between:
(a) India (democratic) and Pakistan (dictatorship) or
(b) Pak democratic govt and Pak dictatorship govt.
- But why should I worry about these differences. You be what you want to be and I have always maintained that is none of my business. So why should I ever worry about the differences. Why are you dragging me into this matter, when I want to be completely away. I have my opinions on this matter but like I said earlier also that I donot gain any satisfaction, win, lose feeling expressing them.
- But do you realise when some Indians like you mentioned, get too much involved into the nitty-gritties and do talk about such Indo/Pak differences and want to show India look better and Pak look poor, most Pakis/you dislike them. But now you are having a problem even for the "non-interferrence though process" that I follow. I dont know if you have realised by now my basic thought process of - "Pak's past/present/future is fully in the hands of Pakis and India/Indians have no/little influence on it's govt/image/problems/solutions etc." But frankly speaking many times I find the Pakis themselves not living upto the good image that I hold for them.

"If the Pakistani state really wanted, it could turn India into a nuclear wasteland in a matter of a few minutes. So get real, man!"
- I presume you must be regretting for making this statement and showing your true colors and intentions. Now I dont know which facet of your to believe "Pak friendship hand" or the above one. The time taken to move from one end to another has been pretty short.

(As for "image" - what kind of an "image" do you think India has? That of "India shining" as you imply, or "India the poverty-stricken" whose current economic growth looks good only compared to its miserable performance earlier.)
- I am in full agreement of your statements above. Your statements show your frustration rather than a mature respose. I have never commented about Pak's image as good or bad, all I have said it is in your hands and the events happening in your country. The same statement is fully true for India/Indians also. Again you are dragging me into a complete non-issue from my side.

So how do feel now....

SPY #268 Your basic point seems to be that "India the dosiers were definitely much cheaper way of putting Pak in the dock", that Pakistan has a poor "image", and that the Pakistani people "Pak society and Tahmed know exactly what is their society the root cause for churning terrorist (LeT)". That I have "have conveniently built a whole castle on the foundation that a strong civil govt in Pakistan is good for India and the Indo-Pak relationship." and that "India's security is strong enough to "detect and nip in the bud" any potential sinister effort of the Pak state or non-state actors. "

I cant imagine a more unrealistic, and frankly absurd, set of statements.

How, e.g., do you propose "nip in the bud" evil plots being brewed by the Pakistani state? If the Pakistani state really wanted, it could turn India into a nuclear wasteland in a matter of a few minutes. So get real, man!

Working backwards from their - as for what the two populations think, I dont see any Pakistani equivalent of an arjun or a jay (i.e. someone obsessing 24/7 about how India is evil).

As for "image" - what kind of an "image" do you think India has? That of "India shining" as you imply, or "India the poverty-stricken" whose current economic growth looks good only compared to its miserable performance earlier.

And of course the difference between a democratic government vs a dictatorship totally escapes you.

I could go on - but your post is so absurd that I would rather do something more useful.

Ciao.

PS: Thanks for not abusing.

SPY...
contrary to the believe that, civilian govt. in Pakistan is far more useless than Military Govt....
The Civilian Govt. has to keep anti-india sentiments alive to garner vote, but not the military one....

Re: # 267 Krishna

1. Terrorism
2. Trade
3. Kashmir/Siachin
4. People to people links/cultural exchanges

Re: # 266 Pew / Tahmed32: Good you people enlightened me about some of the World courts and their scope etc. Although interesting but you people digressed too much.

Coming back where it all started - "strained Indo/Pak relationship: its past and future", I see this time to be no different from the earlier times. Although the path travelled (war-mongering vs dialog) is different, but the relative positions are same (i.e. each country is at opposite ends), so the end result is the same. But yes for India the dosiers were definitely much cheaper way of putting Pak in the dock, than the militry build up done last time. For Pak the continued stalling of the action against mumbai conspirators is seen as victory, without realising the depth to which their nation's image has fallen. (tahmed - besides the weekly blasts, the mumbai 26/11 and saeed proceedings are some events that paint your country's image and not the bigotted hindus).

Secondly you people are mixing two very different issues: a strong Indo-pak relationship and strong Democratic govt in Pakistan. You have conveniently built a whole castle on the foundation that a strong civil govt in Pakistan is good for India and the Indo-Pak relationship. All these are independent of each other.

The presence of strong or weak, democratic or militry ruled govt in Pakistan, it is entirely in the hands of Pak people. India can be a rallying point for the Pak masses for a short duration during Indo-pak conflict, but not a decisive factor of Pak govt making. Maybe the USA and Saudi have some remote controls but definitely not India. It is false pat on the Indian back for strengthening the Pak civil govt, when no tangible results are coming out. Nobody in Pak cares about these Indian efforts.

From India's point of view, what can be controled to ensure that India's interests are secured and maintained:
a) Ensure India's security is strong enough to "detect and nip in the bud" any potential sinister effort of the Pak state or non-state actors.
b) Indian accepts Pak hand of friendship/dialog or continues to stay cool as presently
c) Presence of strong/weak, civil/militry govt in Pakistan, with or without Indian govt help.

None of these options is 100% foolproof or would work in isolation, but when it comes to putting my money, I would go with option (a). I would like to know where Pew would like to put his money.

As for Pak, it is said in our society that a wife knows exactly (99.9%) the fidelity of her husband or a parent knows the doings (well behaved or going astray) of a teenage child. Applying the same logic, I am sure the Pak society and Tahmed know exactly what is their society, the root cause for churning terrorist (LeT) and how it can be resolved/fixed. That does not require any Indian support to Pak govt or friendship hand or Indo/Pak talks etc.

As one of the British minister said that resolving Kashmir issue would not resolve the Indo-Pak conflicts. The LeT would not start driving taxis after the kashmir issue is resolved. Tahmed finds it hard to have a look at his society that generates LeT or find ways to put a stop to it altogether, but cannot overlook the stumbling block in India's refusal to have dialog. The first option requires introspection and self-correction, while the second is conditional and requires action from the other party (India). Very convenient.

Despite all your polite discussions on the net, the bottomline remains "On the ground it is still a zero sum game". Untill the realistic issues/problems are not identified head on and resolved, the Indo / Pak relationship would remain the same.

#266 Pew_Research

[I agree with you that the civilian government in Pakistan needs to be strengthened, and India should do whatever it can to do so.]

Since Tahmed is finding it inconvenient to answer, maybe YOU can tell me. WHAT IS IT India should be having a "dialogue" with Pakistan about? What is it India should be doing? Or not doing?

Re: # 265 Tahmed

I agree with you that the civilian government in Pakistan needs to be strengthened, and India should do whatever it can to do so.

PewResearch #263 We can go on this subject till the cows come home. The bottom line that remains is - the Zardari government is asking for a dialogue with the Indian government with a improving relations. And the Indian government is refusing to go down this path. And this at a time when the progressive forces in Pakistan are stronger than they have ever been in a long time.

You may or may not disagree with me when I say that the Indian government is merely using mumbai as a pretext. And even if you disagree on this point - it does not change the basic point I was making - i.e. that instead of treating Pakistan as a monolith ruled by some kind of an Inner Chamber in the ISI, the Indian government would serve the interests of India better if it distinguished between the progressive vs retrogressive forces in Pakistan. This is simply smart politics.

#262 Pew_Research

[As I mentioned earlier, India can't go to court (ICJ) alone under the rules of the ICJ - the parties in dispute have to both ask the court for settling the matter. Presuming India takes the matter to the ICJ, the first thing that the court will want to hear is if both India and Pakistan agree to the matter being tried in the ICJ. If Pakistan refuses, end of story - ICJ will send the matter back. If Pakistan agrees, then the court will want to know why the Mumbai terror attacks is a dispute between states, and not an ordinary criminal conspiracy for which the laws of either state can apply. Pakistan will then have to say that it is party to the matter because India is accusing Paksitan of the terror attacks because Sayeed/LeT are agents of the Pakistani state (hence Pakistan is a party to the issue). Will Pakistan admit to the fact that they are agents of the Pakistani state? If Pakistan does not admit, then the ICJ will angrily ask why is the ICJ even hearing the matter - it is a matter between a state and a private party. If Pakistan admits, then that will be an entirely new public admission by Pakistan on this matter on its relationship with Sayeed/LeT.]

Give Tahmed some time to cook something up. He knows he has two options now:

1) Try to change his reasoning ONCE MORE to suit the newly-encountered set of facts,

or, do what he usually does -

2) disappear from THIS article interacts, only to surface again when he thinks that the coast is clear.

Re: # 259 Tahmed

Not sure that Manmohan Singh issued a threat to Pakistan. It is quite unlike him to do so.

Re: # 259 Tahmed

Not sure that you share my understanding of this issue.

As I mentioned earlier, India can't go to court (ICJ) alone under the rules of the ICJ - the parties in dispute have to both ask the court for settling the matter. Presuming India takes the matter to the ICJ, the first thing that the court will want to hear is if both India and Pakistan agree to the matter being tried in the ICJ. If Pakistan refuses, end of story - ICJ will send the matter back. If Pakistan agrees, then the court will want to know why the Mumbai terror attacks is a dispute between states, and not an ordinary criminal conspiracy for which the laws of either state can apply. Pakistan will then have to say that it is party to the matter because India is accusing Paksitan of the terror attacks because Sayeed/LeT are agents of the Pakistani state (hence Pakistan is a party to the issue). Will Pakistan admit to the fact that they are agents of the Pakistani state? If Pakistan does not admit, then the ICJ will angrily ask why is the ICJ even hearing the matter - it is a matter between a state and a private party. If Pakistan admits, then that will be an entirely new public admission by Pakistan on this matter on its relationship with Sayeed/LeT.

I hope this clarifies the jurisdiction of the ICJ.

#259 tahmed32

[PewResearch #256 Assuming Pakistan would refuse to settle in court, then that would vindicate India's position IF India had the evidence. So that should be all the more reason for India to go to court. Instead, the Indian PM/FM have chosen to simply issue threats to Pakistan - threats which they know they cant back with military action.]

Well, Pakistan has lost every war it has fought with India. The disproportionate strength of the Indian Army vis-a-vis the Pakistani army has only grown since then. What makes you think India cannot carry out their threat? Talking about Nuclear weapons as a "deterrant" is good for the bruised national ego, but I don't think Pakistan would commit national suicide by lobbing a nuclear warhead if confronted by conventional forces from India. I suggest that that would be very unlikely. Not everyone in the pak establishment thinks like a suicide bomber, and I suggest Gilani & co. would much rather face defeat and humiliation (yet once again) rather than be vaporized along with everybody else in Pakistan.

The interior minister of Pakistan was answering questions today, which included one on Sayeed. His response was that the Pakistan police had brought 4 (5?) individuals to court on charges of mumbai conspiracy - and that the Indian government should wait to see the outcome of this process. When asked about Sayeed - his response was that there was no proper evidence against him and the Pakistan government was not going to punish an innocent man simply to make the Indian government happy

Based on known facts and the one surviving terrorist's testimony it is absurd to believe that the entire operation was planned and executed by 4 (or 5) people. It needed finances, training and logistics. Now it is certainly possible that any one individual is innocent but for the Pakistan government to keep insisting that India should somehow conduct a remote investigation, identify specific culprits and hand over evidence that will lead to conviction is not just absurd but in itself an admission of an inability or unwillingness to address this incident.

None of this is very surprising. What is worrying is that well-meaning Pakistanis are buying their government's story so easily without asking hard questions.

PewResearch #256 Assuming Pakistan would refuse to settle in court, then that would vindicate India's position IF India had the evidence. So that should be all the more reason for India to go to court. Instead, the Indian PM/FM have chosen to simply issue threats to Pakistan - threats which they know they cant back with military action. Seems very much to me they are merely singing the tune they think will prevent BJP from painting them as "soft". Hell of a way to run a foreign policy!!

Re: # 257
chalta....
All these terrorist organizations run under the cover of charity ( Like Missionaries of Charity or R K Mission) mission and jihad/violence is so much integrated with Pakistani/Islamic thought, it will be difficult for Pakistan to prosecute him...

The conspirator was in Pakistan; India can not hand over proof as, they have no evidence with them....Now, Pakistan has to investigate, collect proof and do everything...It is very difficult for Pakistan, either to swallow or throw out...

In the list of killed people, there were lot of jews and americans. any delay/lapse from Pakistani side, GoI will put pressure on USA and if Indians are desparate enough they can put media campaign in USA that, USA is aiding Pakistani establishment, who are responsible for killing their own citizen.......Part of Pakistani establishment were involved in this and I feel, India allowed this to happen, fully knowing that, it will bring Pakistan into backfoot again....Now, India is not able to push for something drastic in Govt. level. So, it will be good for Pakistan to at least capture these maulanas and other islamic scholars....

What stupidity. Is LeT a terrorist organization? Yes or no? Who runs it? Sayeed..)Es or no?

The wholw quom is terrorist...or terrorist sympathizers...what else is new? LOL!

Re: # 255 Tahmed

ICJ will hear the case only if Pakistan agrees to its jurisdiction. Presumably, India will be charging Pakistan (it can't charge Sayeed), and if Pakistan agrees, then it will be admitting that Sayeed is its agent. Will that ever happen? NO.

So, what's the point in taking it to ICJ?

#247 Pew Research: The World Court I am referring to is obviously the ICJ - and the case is not India vs Sayeed (as you say, and thus place it outside the jurisdiction of the ICJ), but quite obviously that of India vs Pakistan. That is between two states. So the point I made remains - the Indian government lacks the evidence to back its demands about Sayeed.


The interior minister of Pakistan was answering questions today, which included one on Sayeed. His response was that the Pakistan police had brought 4 (5?) individuals to court on charges of mumbai conspiracy - and that the Indian government should wait to see the outcome of this process. When asked about Sayeed - his response was that there was no proper evidence against him and the Pakistan government was not going to punish an innocent man simply to make the Indian government happy. Another asked him about the Indian PM and FMs threats against Pakistan - his response was loud and clear. Namely that the Indian government should not see the requests for a dialogue by his government to improve relations as a sign of weakness, and that that he could issue bigger threats to India if that is all Indians were interested in.

When asked about the Indian PMs warning of a terrorist attack on India - his response was that if India has evidence of a credible threat from parties within Pakistan then it should share it with the Pakistan government so we could help prevent it if possible.

This is consistent with what I have been saying - the Indian government is using mumbai because it is afraid to appear "soft" to the BJP nutcases, and in the process losing something that common sense would say is in the larger interest of India. Namely, taking the opportunity provided by a peace-minded civilian government in Pakistan to improve relations, rather than forcing this civilian government to point out the kind of obvious things about Pakistan being militarily capable of responding to any level of threat from India that the interior minister above ended up saying.

Re: # 251 Ellora

Right. I went to the same Wikipedia source as you did:). Yes, there is nothing like it in India for criminal law, but Wikipedia does not state this, but I believe it to be true that Shariat courts are not trial courts for crimes (except in Hudood cases). Courts of trial and appeal for crimes in Paksitan still follow English common law.

Re: # 244 Tahmed32 says: "rather than playing political games the practical course of action would clearly be to seek the cooperation of the Pakistan government in conducting investigative work in Pakistan".

I think you are getting too technical here to miss the real situation / happening.

The Indian govt has adopted a tough stance this time as there is a clear pattern of events to be missed out:
- Pak actors (State or non-state) commit an attack on India India (93 mumbai blasts - ISI/Dawood, 99 Kargil attack, 2001 Parliament attack, Mumbai 26/11)
- Pak govt takes no action against such perpetors. In fact it is seen hand-in-glove with them.
- After some time the Indian tempers cool down and Pak actors are ready with their next sinister action.

This is an all too familiar path that the Indians have traversed many times, each time with renewed hope but the same end results. This has made the Indians to think hard:
- What has India ever gained by showing its patience. While the motivated jihadis (foot soldiers) get killed in action in India, the conspirators of all such crimes are scott free in Pakistan. Dawood or Saeed. The foot soldier loss to Pakistan is too minimal, but the damage to India is enormous. The Pak army having lost 3 direct wars is always one-up on India through indirect ways and still continue the old policy of Thousand cuts.
- The India army did a remarkable job to reply in the same coin to Pak army's efforts in Kargill.
- Your statement "Pakistan's hand of friendship" comes as rude awakening for India from the sweet dreams when faced with hard reality (killings due the Pakis).
- The Indian govt stance is not going to make much of difference in the relationship that goes through a cycle of blow-hot-blow-cold after every few years.
- Past is past, are you convinced that there will be no more repeat of such terrorist attacks.
- If you are convinced about no more attacks, than I would go along with your "friendship hand**".

**Terms and conditions: Offer valid only till the next Pak terrorist attack on Indian interests.

You see the ball is in your court.

Re: # 244
bedu32...
Kashmir as a political problem, was creation of Pakistan and Pakistan has kept this problem alive....
Who prohibited Jinnah from Including Kashmir as part of TNT?
Which civilised country sends non military people to invade and then rape and plunder civilians....

#250: Pakistan has a federal sharia court. It has revisional jurisdition over criminal courts. Three of its judges are required to be Ulema. Pakistan has a blasphemy law and a Hudood ordinance.

None of this sounds like any Indian court.

Re: # 249 Krishna

For most practical purposes, criminal law is the same in both India and Pakistan (with a few exceptions). Both countries use the penal code handed down by the British, and used in most former English colonies.

Your cut and paste does not contradict the fact that the judiciary is independent of the prosecution. That is the point that I had made.

#240 Pew_Research

[Let's make sure that your understanding of how the criminal prosecution system works in Pakistan (same as in India under English common law):

The prosecutor is an executive office, and the judiciary is an independent body. The prosecutor does not (and cannot work) for the judiciary, otherwise there are obvious conflicts of interest. The judge has to be impartial to both sides (prosecution and defense) ]

From http://www.article2.org/mainfile.php/0704/329/?print=yes


Though the office of the public prosecutor seems to have the features of the executive, the judiciary does not appear to treat it so, because it does not approve of the appointment of police officers as public prosecutors.
.......
It seems that the office of the public prosecutor belongs to the executive. However, it is strongly felt that it is in fact not purely of the executive. As explained by the Supreme Court in the Shamsher Singh, it takes on judicial character and as such assumes a lot of importance in a democracy. The very establishment of this office presupposes the understanding that we cannot afford to permit private prosecution as it may result in utter chaos, particularly in the present political set up. However, while we adopt this office in the place of private prosecution, we cannot forget the interests of the victim. The public prosecutor may not share the concerns of the victim, or safeguard the victim¡¦s interests. The Indian CrPC therefore permits pleaders appointed by private persons to represent the interests of victims. However, the courts insist that they should work under the directions of the public prosecutor. This shows that the court gives more importance to the public interest.
The public prosecutor in India does not seem to be an advocate of the state in the sense that the prosecutor has to seek conviction at any cost. The prosecutor has to be impartial, fair and truthful, not only as a public executive but also because the prosecutor belongs to the honourable profession of law, the ethics of which demand these qualities.


The purpose of me posting this is that, the public prosecutor's office, in Common Law countries such as India and Pakistan, is not strictly executive in nature. Therefore, in a "vibrant democracy" with a supposed free and unfettered judiciary, the public prosecutor's office is supposed to be judicial and therefore impartial. But they were not in Pakistan in the case of this Sayeed character. Therefore Pakistan does not have a free and unfettered judiciary. It is as simple as that.

#242 Pew_Research

[Tahmed's point is to strengthen the hands of the civil government....
When you think of Pakistan's India policy - you have to recognize the divide power structure there. ]

How can I recognize the "divided power structure", and recognize Tahmed's "vibrant democracy" at the same time?

Re: # 244 Tahmed

Yes, Zardari and Gilani never offered to extradite Sayeed, and I don't think that would be necessary. The Govt. of India is expecting that he be tried under Pakistani law in Pakistan, as the civil government has promised. To answer your questions:

1. I think that the extradition treaty would be a great idea, but even without one, countries can extradite on a case-by-case basis. Although, in this case, I don't think that India wants extradition - just shutting down LeT for good would be good enough. Even Sayeed's fate is less important than the continued activities of his organization

2. Which 'World Court' are you referring to: (i) International Court of Justice (ICJ), or to the new (ii) International Criminal Court (ICC)?

(i) applies only when both parties mutually consent to its jurisdiction. This court derives its authority from the UN. Will Pakistan subject Sayeed to this court when it has flouted the UN on this particular entity (i.e. LeT)? Further, for 'contentious issues' only states can be parties to the proceedings. In the case of Sayeed, the dispute is between a state (India or Pakistan - whoever gets to prosecute) and an individual/organization (Sayeed/LeT). The ICJ does not have jurisdiction over such cases. If one of the two states (India) decides to sue the other (Pakistan) at ICJ, and both agree to submit to the ICJ, then Pakistan will essentially be admitting that in defending Sayeed, it is acting to protect its agent (i.e. Sayeed). Thus, his matter is a dispute between states. What are the chances of Pakistan admitting to the ICJ that Sayeed is its agent?

(ii) The ICC prosecutes individuals for genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, and the crime of aggression. Terrorism and Sayeed do not fall in this category.

I am not aware of any other 'World Court'. Are you?

You wrote, "the only reasonable conclusion I can draw is that the Indian government is playing games with mumbai".

India has apparently provided more than half a dozen dossiers on Sayeed and the Mumbai attacks to Pakistan. It is up to Pakistan to pursue the investigation on its territory.

What about the other reasonable conclusion that the Pakistan military/ISI is trying to protect Sayeed? Do you think that the UN proscribed his organization for no reason? Why the secrecy over his trial? And what about the miliatary/ISI's past - do they really seek friendly ties with India?

Krishna is my other nick, in case you did not realize.

#239 tahmed32

[Before mumbai there were 60 years to resolve the Kashmir dispute. Granted the Pakistan governments made no effort to resolve them. Did Indian governments do any better?

If the Pakistan government is now calling for a political dialogue that may well lead to some resolution that basically brings peace, and which in turn also takes away from militarists in Pakistan the one excuse they have had for maintaining a vast conventional military, what is stopping the Indian government for responding??]

If I steal 5 dollars from your pocket, and keep terrorizing you and your family to have a "dialogue" with me about the remaining 5 dollars in your pocket, would you be willing to sit down to a "dialogue" with me about the remaining 5 dollars?

#243 Pew Research: I dont think the civilian politicians ever promised to hand over Sayeed without going through due process. As I recall, Zardari said publicly from day one after mumbai that no extradition would take place (Pakistan does not have an extradition treaty with India), and instead the accused would be investigated and if appropriate brought before a Pakistani court.

This begs two questions:

1. why is their no extradition treaty between the two countries? the answer of course is the same as before - poor state of Pakistan/India relations.

2. If the indian government has the necessary evidence, why doesnt it take the case to the World Court? or even make this evidence public? the only reasonable answer is - because the evidence isnt there.

If the indian government was serious about bringing the culprits of mumbai to court, rather than playing political games the practical course of action would clearly be to seek the cooperation of the Pakistan government in conducting investigative work in Pakistan. And you get cooperation by improving relations first - which is exactly what the Zardari government has been asking for the past few months (as I was saying).

So - the only reasonable conclusion I can draw is that the Indian government is playing games with mumbai, letting political expediency trump not just good relations with Pakistan but also the bringing to court of the culprits behind mumbai.

Re: # 241 Addendum to previous to Tahmed

I might add that the civilian politician's of Pakistan are eager to mend ties and make promises that they believe that are appropriate, but they hit the stonewall of the military/ISI. Gilani promised to send the head of the ISI to India, but the military later had that offer retracted. Gilani also at one time tried to put the ISI under the control of the civilians, but failed. They did, however, manage to shut down the 'political affairs' cell of the ISI that in all likelihood interefered in domestic Pakistan politics.

Re: # 232 Krishna

The answer to your questions is two fold:

a) Pak civil govt.: cannot, because
b) ISI/Military: will not

Tahmed's point is to strengthen the hands of the civil government. I agree that the military hawks will damage Pakistan even more as they have done serious damage to its polity over the last several decades. The troubles in Pakistan today can be traced to the military setting its foreign policy.

When you think of Pakistan's India policy - you have to recognize the divide power structure there.

Re: # 231 Tahmed

That raises a question:

a) What comes first - the chicken (friendship) or the egg (removal of irritants)?

This case further confirms that the civil government of Pakistan has little or no influence on the prosecution of Hafiz Sayed (and the broader India policy) because its actions do not match its oft repeated promises. If friendly ties are not desired, then why even make promises that cannot be kept? Perhaps, that would be a better outcome since unkept promises degrade one's credibility. The fact that the trial is being held in secret, and the proceedings are not open, raises questions on what the prosecutor has to hide. Since Sayed is an ISI (read govt.) asset, the prosecutor's independence on this matter is to be questioned.

Unless the civil government is able to wield influence on its India policy (on issues far beyond the fate of Sayed), this dichotomy of power structures will leave things unchanged with the military having control over the strings of power.

Re: # 232 Krishna

Let's make sure that your understanding of how the criminal prosecution system works in Pakistan (same as in India under English common law):

The prosecutor is an executive office, and the judiciary is an independent body. The prosecutor does not (and cannot work) for the judiciary, otherwise there are obvious conflicts of interest. The judge has to be impartial to both sides (prosecution and defense)

#236 Krishna: Fair enough.

Before mumbai there were 60 years to resolve the Kashmir dispute. Granted the Pakistan governments made no effort to resolve them. Did Indian governments do any better?

If the Pakistan government is now calling for a political dialogue that may well lead to some resolution that basically brings peace, and which in turn also takes away from militarists in Pakistan the one excuse they have had for maintaining a vast conventional military, what is stopping the Indian government for responding?? I already gave the answer to this in my earlier posts to Pew. If you have a better answer (a logical, plausible, one), I shall be much obliged to hear it.

#235 krishna: does the legal system in india meet the bar you have set for the Pakistan democracy?

Correction to 236

I meant the Mumbai massacre of 26/11, not the Mumbai blasts (which is another story in itself).

#234 tahmed32

[What India can start doing is - if it has the proof about mumbai - to take it to the World Court. And if it doesnt have the proof to back it up - it can stop using hollow accusations as substitute for police and detective work.]

Okay. So you are saying that Indian accusations are "hollow", i.e., lacking merit. So they do not have any credible evidence, in your opinion, that Sayeed is guilty of involvement in the Mumbai blasts.

Okay. Even assuming that you are correct, are you saying that before Mumbai, there was NO NEED for India to be having a "dialogue" with Pakistan about anything?

So let me target my questions for the period of time BEFORE the Mumbai massacre.

BEFORE MUMBAI, was

a) India not doing something it should have been doing?

or was

b) India doing something that is should not have been doing.

"India was not being friendly enough" does not cut it - I need concrete examples of what India should or should not have been doing.

#231 tahmed32

[Pew/Krishna: It is plausible that the Pakistan government did not persue the prosecution with the same alacrity as it would have under different circumstances - namely, if Pakistan-India relations were better. ]

A second question. Please don't forget to answer the first question because of this question.

If the Pakistani government is a "vibrant democracy", then is it not within their own interest (forgetting about Indian interests for a moment here), as well as a moral obligation to themselves as well as the Islamic principles they represent (which, it goes without saying, sets the bar very high indeed), to prosecute Sayeed as per the abundant evidence they have in their possession?

#233 Krishna: What India can start doing is - if it has the proof about mumbai - to take it to the World Court. And if it doesnt have the proof to back it up - it can stop using hollow accusations as substitute for police and detective work.

#231 tahmed32

[Pew/Krishna: It is plausible that the Pakistan government did not persue the prosecution with the same alacrity as it would have under different circumstances - namely, if Pakistan-India relations were better.

Krishna: This also answers your question to me about why the Indian government should take up the Pakistani offer of a dialogue geared to improve relations.]

I would like to repeat my question:

It is not clear to me, as well as to a lot of educated Indians I talk to (unlike Mr. Pew_Research), WHAT EXACTLY there is to be resolved by "political dialogue" between India and Pakistan. To my knowledge, from all available credible sources (I am not talking about Islamic types who "know" India is doing this or that), I don't see what it is that India IS DOING that it should stop doing, or BEGIN TO DO that it is not doing. India and Pakistan are sovereign countries, and until someone produces some evidence along these lines that SHOWS INDIAN CULPABILITY, WHAT IS IT THERE to "dialogue" about?

So, to put it in a numbered format for your convenience:

Is

a) India is not something it should be doing? or
b) India is doing something that is should not be doing.

"India is not being friendly enough" does not cut it - I need concrete examples of what India should or should not be doing.

#230 Pew_Research

[The blame for this lies not with the judiciary but with the prosecution who have not followed investigative leads, and have filed weak charges that they knew would not stand up in court. ]

The Public Prosecutor's Office is an integral part of the Judicial System. I am not sure what you are talking about.

[The federal government never charged Sayed, and more importantly, the charges never included Mumbai terror conspiracy. ]

Why did they not - is it because:

1) They CANNOT, or

2) They WILL NOT

And if it is 2), then is it because:

a) India is not something it should be doing? or

b) India is doing something that is should not be doing.

"India is not being friendly enough" does not cut it - I need concrete examples of what India should or should not be doing.

Pew/Krishna: It is plausible that the Pakistan government did not persue the prosecution with the same alacrity as it would have under different circumstances - namely, if Pakistan-India relations were better.

Krishna: This also answers your question to me about why the Indian government should take up the Pakistani offer of a dialogue geared to improve relations.

Of course you can pretend to be too elevated to engage in a dialogue with what many Indians wish to see as a failed state. And impress no one other than yourself.

Re: # 229 Krisha:

"...WHY did your and Tahmed's "independent and people-powered" judiciary let the LeT leader go scot free without even the PRETENSE of a trial?..."

The blame for this lies not with the judiciary but with the prosecution who have not followed investigative leads, and have filed weak charges that they knew would not stand up in court. This way, they were able to make a pretense of prosecution, and could take cover under a judge's order when any judge would have thrown the charges out.

Take for example, the latest charge against Hafiz Sayeed. He was charged with leading a UN-proscribed organization under the laws of the province of Punjab. First, the UN resolution does not call for Sayed's arrest, and second, he was let off on a technicality that the provincial government had not banned the LeT, but the federal government had. The federal government never charged Sayed, and more importantly, the charges never included Mumbai terror conspiracy. The judge has no option but to let the man off.

These are the games the federal authorities in Pakistan play that rightly evoke skepticism.

#227 Pew_Research

[I agree that the driving force behind democracy in Pakistan this time are its people, and the grassroots movement to reinstate the Chief Justice. This is a unique, welcome development that provides hope for the future, and should be nurtured from within and outside. It has earned legitimacy and respect for the judiciary. For the first time, a single individual faced off a powerful Army chief and succeeded.]

Okay, this invites the question (the same question that Shashi Tharoor was asking the other day on GPS) - WHY did your and Tahmed's "independent and people-powered" judiciary let the LeT leader go scot free without even the PRETENSE of a trial?

Have you done any research on this?

#226 tahmed32

[More significantly, once you take this into account, then the implications for India become very clear indeed - if the goal is the welfare of the Indian people (as opposed to nationalist ambitions), then clearly the way to go is to support the progressive, democratic forces in Pakistan rather than use mumbai as the pretext to disengage political dialogue.]

It is not clear to me, as well as to a lot of educated Indians I talk to (unlike Mr. Pew_Research), WHAT EXACTLY there is to be resolved by "political dialogue" between India and Pakistan. To my knowledge, from all available credible sources (I am not talking about Islamic types who "know" India is doing this or that), I don't see what it is that India IS DOING that it should stop doing, or BEGIN TO DO that it is not doing. India and Pakistan are sovereign countries, and until someone produces some evidence along these lines that SHOWS INDIAN CULPABILITY, WHAT IS IT THERE to "dialogue" about?


[Certainly China has chosen to stay neutral in political setups inside Pakistan the past 40 years - and simply focussed on building up infrastructural and military ties consistent with its geo-strategic interests. The potential for broader based ties between India and Pakistan are much greater given history, geography and culture.]

If India just chooses to stay disengaged, WHY IS THAT A CRIME? Why should India have to THINK about Pakistan at all, other than be polite and indifferent? I have lived next to neighbors who I have been indifferent to, and who have been indifferent towards me, and we never had a problem. Why does India have to be different?

Re: # 226 Tahmed

I agree that the driving force behind democracy in Pakistan this time are its people, and the grassroots movement to reinstate the Chief Justice. This is a unique, welcome development that provides hope for the future, and should be nurtured from within and outside. It has earned legitimacy and respect for the judiciary. For the first time, a single individual faced off a powerful Army chief and succeeded. The civil society of Pakistan deserves to be supported to exercise control over its military. Even wars are too important to be left only to the generals.
The jury is still out as to whether the civilians will be able to bell the cat that is the Army. When they do, I am quite certain that Pakistan's relations with all its neighbors will improve.
Up until the 1970s (before the Soviet Afghan war) one could buy a bus ticket from London to Delhi on an overland route, via Pakistan and Afghanistan. Perhaps, this will become possible again in the future.

#225 Pew Research: I agree with what I basically read you as saying, namely that democracy and the rule of law in Pakistan are in everyone's interest.

The important thing I would draw your attention to is that the driving force behind the democracy movement in Pakistan was the Pakistani people - not the US. Musharraf left for the same reason Ayub and Yahya left - when the generals told him his time was up - they could not have the troops killing demonstrators to keep him in power.

This is an important point. Once you take this into account, then "carrot and stick" of the US that you refer to becomes a secondary factor at most. Thus, this "you are with us or against us" was part of Musharraf's double game of fooling Pakistanis by painting this as "America's War" and fooling Bush by painting himself as the "enlightened moderate". But if it was America's war when the US invaded Afghanistan in response to the 9/11 atrocity, it became Pakistan's war the day the writ of the Pakistani state was ignored by these parties - namely, the day they entered Pakistan illegally, with weapons, and established strongholds that were offlimits to the government of Pakistan. This obvious fact was papered over by Musharraf.

More significantly, once you take this into account, then the implications for India become very clear indeed - if the goal is the welfare of the Indian people (as opposed to nationalist ambitions), then clearly the way to go is to support the progressive, democratic forces in Pakistan rather than use mumbai as the pretext to disengage political dialogue. As I mentioned earlier - this is the way the US has chosen to go with the KL bill and as the Chinese have been doing.

While the Chinese have a somewhat different political model (i.e. one party rule) than the democratic model now in effect in Pakistan - I think it is a self-serving model of the communist party which is controversial even within China, and they are not interested in exporting it. Certainly China has chosen to stay neutral in political setups inside Pakistan the past 40 years - and simply focussed on building up infrastructural and military ties consistent with its geo-strategic interests. The potential for broader based ties between India and Pakistan are much greater given history, geography and culture.

Re: # Tahmed 219, #220

If you recall, general elections in India were held this summer in the wake of the Mumbai attacks. The terrorists chose their time (just before elections) and the scale of attacks with a very specific intent. I think that the Manmohan Singh government gave space to the Pakistan military for action in FATA, while still addressing the outrage in India in light of the looming elections. No government anywhere could have continued with business as usual following such attacks. Had the Pakistan authorities followed the investigative leads to their logical ends within Pakistan, I have little doubt that Manmohan Singh would have responded with two steps for one Pakistani step (in fact, he went on the record to state just that).

As long as we agree that Pakistan puts an end to all such groups, it matters little in the end whether it is through carrots (Kerry Lugar law) or sticks. Carrots, of course, are better and are there for Indians and Pakistanis to see – improved cooperation on terror, water resources, culture, trade, Iran gas pipeline, etc. I hope and believe that the Kerry Lugar law will set the stage for eventual rapprochement. I agree with you that India should work in consort with the US in eventually creating conditions that lead to peace in the region.

I never suggested that the Buner action was in response to US pressure. (I believe that that was the case for the Battle of Bajaur). The beating of the woman who would not marry a Taliban against her will did indeed finally sway public opinion in Pakistan and made the military action easier to sell. However, there are ample cases where the military/ISI has been accused by the US (not to mention India, China, Afghanistan and Iran for various other groups) of harboring, financing and providing logistical support to Taliban, when such an obvious outrage did not compel the military to act on its own accord. To be sure, the US has pursued a carrot (Kerry-Lugar) and sticks policy (Colin Powell – ‘with us or against us’ or not-so-veiled threats to put US troops on the ground in FATA/Baluchistan against the Taliban Shura in Quetta). It will be in everyone’s interest if the military moved against such groups on its own accord.

The current action in FATA is welcome, and along with the Kerry Lugar law, it should eventually establish the primacy of civil authorities over the military in Pakistan. I know that many in Pakistan are skeptical about the quality of civilian leaders, but elections in which governments are allowed to finish their full terms will enforce accountability to the electorate and gradually improve the quality of leadership. That is what has worked everywhere else, and it should be no different in Pakistan. Pakistan has a real chance to emerge from this morass as a democracy. The alternatives are horrendous to contemplate.
The situation with regards to China is different – China is agnostic about democracy in Pakistan (just as they are in Myanmar). China is on the opposite side of many issues when it comes to human rights and causes that Nobel Peace Prize winners champion (Aung Sang Syuu Ki, Dalai Lama, to name a few). Their relationship with Pakistan is not defined by what’s best for the ordinary Pakistani – but rather by regional- and geo-strategic calculations.

#223 they were stopped at the gate, genius.

Few good point raised. In simple words it is beyond logic how few armed ppl can take over a military headquarters. I dont want to go into conspiracy theories but if a military cant defend its own headquarters how can it defend a country ? It is simply embarrassing.

#221 still without a job?

Why should India engage in political discourse with a country that has terrorism as one of it's stated tactics against India?

Secondly, the concept of "civilian government" is comical....the gov't is a puppet of the US after discussions with Saudis. One lifting of the eyebrow in the US will cause it to fall. Anyway, benazir (thank allah for her belated death) also had a "thousand cuts policy of jihad.so it doesn't matter who is in charge. The entire pakistani quom is inflicted with terrorism.

Last we saw, LeT JeM camps are still running in Pakistan. Why not shut them down? Sala, every other some terrorist around the world is either a paki or trained in pakistan.

Now Tahmed mian claims that "taliban gave no choice"....as if one should give bhav to terrorists.all this natak is to show why a paki is worth $8/yr. When the largest contributer to ur economy is terrorism....there not much you got going for yourself.

So here is to this natak. Hopefully for the next 5 years of the KL disbursements, paki army and taliban kill each other....I would even recommend putting another 5 years term to KL....10 years of who is a martyr and who is a terrorist should be great fun to watch.

Because whoever is killed is a martyr to their lot....such is the beauty of islam LOL!

further to #219: and btw, your saying that the the pakistan reaction to the take over of buner by taliban was prompted by "US pressure" flies in the face of all facts - i.e. the Swat deal, the famous video of the girl being brutally beaten by the supposedly "pious men" that opened millions of eyes in Pakistan and swayed public opinion against the taliban, the march into buner despite being handed Swat to them accompanied by the mass public rally by sufi muhammed calling Swat a first step towards the takeover of the rest of Pakistan by islamists.

All facts point to the obvious - the taliban left Pakistan with no choice except to take the "rah-i-nijaat" that is now underway.

Pew Research #215 There may well be such consensus, but the consensus has not translated into action - India continues to refuse calls for political engagement by the civilian government in Pakistan. No doubt though the Indian military has not done anything to make it harder for the Pakistani military to deal with the threat alongside the "western borders". But that is hardly enough to qualify as India seeing "every crisis as an opportunity" (to use the Obama-ites famous phrase) to promote what is clearly in its own long term interests, i.e. aligning itself with the progressive forces in Pakistan in their struggle against the regressive forces.

What I see holding back the Indian government from persuing this course is its own internal weaknesses - 1. fear of being painted as "soft" by hindu extremists; 2. a convenient way to divert focus from its own shortcomings in dealing with the mumbai attack (e.g., it is clear there were local collaborators in the attack who are still running lose in India - but pointing to Pakistan diverts attention from this aspect).

No one in Pakistan is denying that the mumbai attacks were planned by groups inside Pakistan. And I totally agree (and, more important, even the Pakistan interior minister made this point yesterday) it is Pakistan's responsibility to put an end to all such groups. What I am saying is that the Indian government seems less interested in supporting Pakistan in these efforts and more interested in covering itself from internal attacks by political opponents.

Interestingly, after the massive suicide bombing in iran - claimed by a sunni group - the Ahmedinijad's government just got into this act of pointing fingers across the border as well to Pakistan. This is the same approach of political expediency (as opposed to statesmanlike) approach as that of the Indian government.

The Kerry-Lugar bill represents, which you rightly support, in fact represents a 180 degree different approach in dealing with the elected government than the one that the Indian government (and now the Ahmedinijad government) have followed.

KL takes the approach that China has long undertaken - act as a friend and a partner that shares the goal of a progressive pakistan. Not as a hostile nation that points fingers to Pakistan in order to overcome its own internal weaknesses.

#217 SPY: OK SPY. You are the winner of this discussion.

tahmed32: you wanted to compare the Pak army effort in the GHQ to the Indian army effort in 26/11, and prove the Pak army had done better.

I still hold that such comparisons are meaningless and disgusting to count the deads, numbers saved, faster time to reach the site etc. to be done by the civilians like you and me.

Do you realise that the cumulative deaths in the last 2 weeks of terrorist attacks in Pakistan has reached the figure of 170, the same number that died in the mumbai. While India after mumbai has been able to prevent repeats (at least till now), Pakistan is not so lucky.

The Pak army may have been winner based on some metrics, but the Pak country is loosing on the overall count of its citizens (innocent, army, terrorists - after all they are also Pak citizens).

Re: # 214 Ellora: I agree to the essence of your post.

Wheter pakistan govt is monolithic or mosaic or something else, that is none of our concern.

I would be more interested in whether the Pak govt takes action against the 26/11 perpetors and would prevent such actions in future. Sadly I dont see any seriousness or action from the Pak govt that gives comfort or allay our fears.

I fully agree to your statement "by refusing to take any action against the Mumbai attack planners the Pakistani army and govt. are indicating they are part of the same structure as the perpetrators."

Re: # 213 Tahmed

You may be surprised to hear this, but there is a consensus within major political parties in India that civilian-led Pakistani governments are indeed more friendly towards India, and that this friendliness needs to be reciprocated. When Zardari, soon after his elevation to the Presidency, talked about smoothing ties with India, this was welcomed in India. I’ll soon come to what happened next.

The most important foreign policy agenda of Pakistan is its India policy (i.e. Kashmir), and the Pak Army/ISI jealously guards its control over India policy. No civilian government has been able to wrest control of Pakistan’s India policy for as long as I can remember. There is a dichotomy within Pakistan’s power structures when it comes to India – the Army is hawkish, and in control of policy, the civilians are doves, but cede control. Do you agree?

Each time there has been hope for détente between civilian leaders, the Army has intervened and the civilian leadership has been booted out (Rajiv Gandhi visit to Pakistan Bhutto booted out; Vajpayee visit to Lahore  Kargil; ZardariMumbai). I once posted a link to an article for Dost-Mittar’s benefit that the Army/ISI has indicated to their Indian counterparts to not leave them out when discussing India-Pakistan relations (you can read it here: “ISI chief to India: talk to us, we make policy too” http://www.hindu.com/2009/07/23/stories/2009072350080100.htm)

The Mumbai attacks came when Pakistan Army was under US pressure to launch operations in NWFP/FATA (Battle of Bajaur, I believe). The Pakistan Army was reluctant to undertake this operation and one of the motivations of the Mumbai attacks, it is believed, was to goad India into some kind of a military response to provide the Pakistan Army a pretext to move troops from the West to the East. You may recall, a number of statements were issued by the military, vice civilian, leadership to move these troops even though there was zero evidence of any Indian moves (unlike after Kargil or the Parliament attacks). (“The Dawn quoted sources as saying that Pakistani commanders have made it clear that the war on terror would not be Pakistans top priority if there was any unusual military build-up by India along the borders.

Read more: http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/india-news/mumbai-attacks-pak-tells-mullen-i t-will-move-troops-if-india-heightens-aggression_100127007.html#ixzz0UIoZ4fTG ). You can also read more about the strategic motivation for the Mumbai attacks here (excellent reading): http://teeth.com.pk/blog/2008/12/02/strategic-motivations-for-the-mumbai-attack.

Some notable observations from the second link:
- The United States recently has demanded increased Pakistani cooperation along the Afghan border. Meanwhile, President-elect Barack Obama has stated his intention to focus on Afghanistan and pressure the Pakistanis. Therefore, one of Islamabad’s first responses to the new Indo-Pakistani crisis was to announce that if the Indians increased their forces along Pakistan’s eastern border, Pakistan would be forced to withdraw 100,000 troops from its western border with Afghanistan. In other words, threats from India would cause Pakistan to dramatically reduce its cooperation with the United States in the Afghan war.
-- As one might expect, public opinion in India is shifting from stunned to furious…The Indian government cannot chance inaction. It probably would fall if it did.
--Strategically, the attack on Mumbai was a precise blow struck to achieve uncertain but favorable political outcomes for the Islamists (in Pakistan).

That India did not (i) make any military provocative moves was intended to keep the Pakistan Army focused on NWFP/FATA (as they rightly should) and (ii) did nothing to weaken Zardari and the Gilani government should give you an idea of how India calibrated its response to strengthen the civilian government, and at the same time placate public opinion in India.

The real challenge (and I think that you will agree) is bringing the Pakistan military under full civilian control. Since no Pakistan elected government has ever finished office without a coup, is one of the biggest problems bedeviling relations with India. The Kerry Lugar law directly targets this issue. I believe that this is the best way – to reward the civilian governments, directly benefit the people, and ensure that the chain of command goes from the military to the elected civilian leadership. This has not happened so far, but all hopes are pinned on this happening in the future.

BTW, without an Internet blog, it would be virtually impossible to have a nuanced discussion like the one above.

...by treating Pakistan as a monolith, ignoring appeals to improve relations by the civilian government using mumbai as pretext, the Indian government may be serving some Indian interest - but I dont know what it is.

Maybe it is recognition that by refusing to take any action against the Mumbai attack planners the Pakistani army and govt. are indicating they are part of the same structure as the perpetrators.

Now whether this structure is a 'monolith' or a 'mosaic' or some other architectural wonder we don't know.

Pew_Research #208 chowk just banned me (rightly, i must admit) so just using this "reserve parachute" to respond to your post - after which I shall hold my peace until chowk reinstates me.

You wrote:
So, even as you agree with me that Pakistan should not allow anti-China activities to maintain friendly relations (and vice versa), should the same not apply viz a viz India? Am I missing something?"

Yes sir, you missed the point I tried to make. So let me restate the point directly - Pakistan/India relations are not the same as Pakistan/China relations, and so it is not surprising that different rules apply.

If (and this is a big if) a country is serious about improving relations with another country, then the standard rule of thumb is to distinguish between like-minded parties vs conflict-minded parties in the other nation. And my contention is that by treating Pakistan as a monolith, ignoring appeals to improve relations by the civilian government using mumbai as pretext, the Indian government may be serving some Indian interest - but I dont know what it is.

Anyway, good chatting with you. ciao (till I get my regular nick back).

Ahmad sahib I understand clearly what you write, you have unconditional support for the US GWOT which is a disaster and a human tragedy for Pakistan and indeed the rest of the developing world. How can anyone misrepresent your views when you are so explicit in your support of imperialism and its thuggish wars? Have some shame

TNITC masadi

Re: # 209

hamidm2

Another fine example of Social engineering in Pakistan, MQM (middle class) being promoted as the alternative ideology.

By Rahim Hunzai for Hunzatimes

Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM), Rabita Committee has issued the lists of candidates fielded by MQM-backed Haq Parast Group (HPG) to contest the elections of the Gilgit-Baltistan Legislative Assembly (GBLA). MQM Chief Altaf Hussain has also approved the names of the HPG candidates as final names of total 19 of them were announced while names of two more candidates will be announced later, said a statement issued by the MQM here on Wednesday.
The HPG has fielded for 19 constituencies

http://www.hunzatimes.com/archives/3101/comment-page-1

Pakistani Army needs to control and punish fanatic religious elements in some parts of Punjab(South) and so called religious schools who are making money by killing innocent people.

.... now that the operation has started in waziristan, we should open another front inside occupied kashmir using local insurgents to make sure the horrible hindoos don't make any mischief for us ... as part of this operation we should also take out some of the 'consultes' on the other side of the border ....... we must not forget the real enemy ...... sooner or later the local jihadis will be defeated or bought off (these pederasts will sell their own sons for a few bucks) and we will have to face this dhoti clad enemy who is growing cockier by the day .....

......... let's hope the boys from dha and fauji foundation can pull this off ...... it is difficult for real estate agents and middle managers to take up soldiering ...... let's also lock up nawaz sharif, imran khan and the mullahs of mansoora in attock and send hameed gul to guantanamo before the pansy in the white house shuts it down ......

Re: # 201 Tahmed

I understand your position, except for the one on hindu extremists. While I do not sympathize with their cause or methods, they are not engaging in cross border interference in the internal affairs of Pakistan. This is in stark contrast to the activities of LeT and JuD. So, even as you agree with me that Pakistan should not allow anti-China activities to maintain friendly relations (and vice versa), should the same not apply viz a viz India? Am I missing something?

I am not able to understand your statement, 'the self-defeating policy of the Indian government, in pandering to hindu naitonalists, of refusing the outstretched hand of the elected government of Pakistan'. You can be sure that had Pakistan not been cooperating with China on Uighurs (or vice versa as you pointed out), it would have been perceived as an unfriendly act (whether the govt. in power is elected or not). The outstretched hand would not have been viewed as being friendly at all. The crux of the matter is not the legitimacy of the government in power, but its tolerance of entities that are intent on cross border terror.

Perhaps, you are implying some action by the Manmohan Singh government as 'pandering to Hindu extremists'. If so, what is it that amounts to interfering in the internal affairs of Pakistan and, more to the point, in killing innocent Pakistanis? (I am speculating here, and am out on a limb, but can't make sense of this statement that you made. I am trying to surmise what it is that you are implying).

In my opinion, this is the essential difference, isn't it?

Re: # 204 Former president General Musharaff knows better, he has said NS is protaliban and is in contact and have taken money from mr.OBL also he is very good with king of KSA who is ultimate prop of OBL. NS is keeping good relations and not saying word aginst TTP as an insurance. He is created by army. So whatever happns army wins war or looses NS will will be winner as "defender of faith". Please note he has come from india and baniyagiri is his reflex action.

Re: # 190

hamidm2 sahib

Well said, problem is not concentrated in poor old Wazirastan but spread across Pakistan, the command and control centers in the form of religious seminaries.

Pakistan is passing through a transition period, trying to wean itself from its misguided policies of the past and move towards a civil society acceptable to its people and neighbor. Success is not an option because Pakistan's survival is dependent on the end result, we cannot ignore the international players in the region and their interests.

Pakistan does not have cojones to rock the chinese boat on uighiri moslems despite seeing them (chinese moslems) killed ruthlessly by chinese forces.


On Monday September 8th, The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/09/world/asia/09china.html?partner=rssnyt&em c=rss) reported on the imposition of restrictions on Chinese Muslims during Ramadan. Among the measures announced were:
banning teachers and students from observing Ramadan (fasting/praying)
prohibiting retired government officials from entering mosques
requiring men to shave off beards
banning women from wearing the hijab
banning restaurants from closing during Ramadan
Communist Party members, civil servants and retired officials cannot fast, enter mosques or take part in any religious activities during the month.

That the Chinese government is putting in place onerous conditions on Muslims, and persecuting/harassing them is not a surprise. This has been going on for many years.

Uyghurs in East Turkestan and Xinjiang face oppression on a daily basis including imprisonment, forced relocation, job discrimination and murder. Amnesty International's report on China for 2008 states "Uighur individuals were the only known group in China to be sentenced to death and executed for political crimes, such as "separatist activities". The Chinese government even destroyed a mosque that refused to put up an Olympics sign (http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSPEK18996820080623).

More than 5000 Muslims in China have been murdered by the government. As with Tibet , China relocates millions of ethnic Han Chinese into Xinjiang and other Muslim areas, and suppresses local identity, culture and language.

hamidm: also, i wouldnt read too much into NS's absence - Shahbaz Sharif represented PMLN there, and also issued a statement afterwards in support of the SWA operation. NS may be hedging his bets, so he can get off the fence if the SWA operation results in unintended consequences. what is more intriguing is Zardari's absence - even though he had chaired previous briefings.

The problem i have with NS is what i think is his cynical opposition to the KL bill.

hamidm #190 the SWA operation is now underway it seems - so let us pray for the safety of our troops and may they dispatch to hell of these arab/central asian invaders and their lackeys.

While I agree with you that success of the SWA operation (and success is never guaranteed in war, with carefully prepared plans not lasting beyond the first shots) is not going to be the end of the war against Urstruly's people - it will help. And that is putting it mildly - there are anywhere upto 20,000 or so of these thugs, along with perhaps the "hidden hand" (i.e. their al qaeda boss, Zawahiri and co).

While agreeing with you that the government shold clean out muridke and other nests of these vermin as well - but I dont think that is about to happen. They are hiding behind the mask of "Islam" (like the SWA did), and unfortunately our people are easily fooled by it. So - they will have to die a natural death, namely as a result of increasing education and job opportunities that drains the swamp that feeds these vermin.

masadi: see an eye-doctor and re-read what i wrote. (unless you are deliberately twisting what i wrote - as is your habit).

PewResearch: Good post, and yes - it is factual and not emotional/fictional. Here are my comments:

a. OK. That is fine.

b. Your point illustrates what I was saying earlier about the Indian government pandering to the primitive vision of the hindu extremists rather than taking a broader view of the national interest of India.

That is: Pakistan has indeed, as you point out, not allowed Uighurs to use Pakistan as a base to attack China. And if it has returned Uighurs to China, as per the report you cite, then that is consistent with this policy. And rightly so. China is a friend - why should Pakistan turn a friend into an enemy by providing separatists sanctuary on its soil? After all, the friendship would not last long if the reverse happened and China encouraged separatist movements in Pakistan (e.g. like the tribal rulers of baluchistan). You see how this illustrates my point about the self-defeating policy of the Indian government, in pandering to hindu naitonalists, of refusing the outstretched hand of the elected government of Pakistan - and thus merely strengthening the hands of militarists in Pakistan.

btw, leaving the above aside, why would Pakistan conceivably want to provide refuge to Uighur "muslim brothers" given the dismal record of other Uzbek and Arab "muslim brothers" in abusing Pakistani hospitality when they fled to fata areas after the post 9/11 US attack on these crooks - there are 1500 of them in SWA by current estimates who form the core of the terrorist actitivities being conducted inside Pakistan and whom our troops are now going after in the SWA campaign now underway.

3. Khalid Sheikh Muhammed is an Iraqi national as I recall reading - although his parents seem to have migrated from Pakistan. But that is beside the point - while no doubt the letter of the law was not followed in handing him over to the US, there is ample proof it seems (including what he has always claimed) that he was the key planner of 9/11. Which is the same as Kansi. As they say - khas kam, jahan pak. The only other Pakistani I have heard of is Afya Siddiqui, married to KSM's brother - and she is being tried in a civilian court in the US with the Pakistan government provided full access as is normal in such cases. All this hardly amounts to renditions of Pakistanis the way your earlier post indicated.

Re: # 198 Mr.Arjun NY Times is Jewish newspapeer.

hey prophetboy

In fact, many Pakistanis do not see the jihadi groups as the enemy, said Farrukh Saleem, the executive director for the Center for Research and Security Studies in Islamabad. “They feel America is in the region and the Pakistani Army is fighting for an American army and the jihadis have a right to retaliate,” he said.

The senior personnel in the security forces seem to understand the gravity of the militants’ strength and the durability of their network, Mr. Saleem said. But they cannot bring themselves to say publicly that those whom they created are coming back to bite them, he said.

lookie here...pandit hates take over the new york times..

roses are red, violets are blue
the jihadis you create, are now killing you


Pakistan Attacks Show Tighter Militant Links
By JANE PERLEZ

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A wave of attacks against top security installations over the last several days demonstrated that the Taliban, Al Qaeda and militant groups once nurtured by the government are tightening an alliance aimed at bringing down the Pakistani state, government officials and analysts said.

More than 30 people were killed Thursday in Lahore, the second largest city in Pakistan, as three teams of militants assaulted two police training centers and a federal investigations building. The dead included 19 police officers and at least 11 militants, police officials said.

Nine others were killed in two attacks at a police station in Kohat, in the northwest, and a residential complex in Peshawar, capital of North-West Frontier Province.

The assaults in Lahore, coming after a 20-hour siege at the army headquarters in Rawalpindi last weekend, showed the deepening reach of the militant network, as well as its rising sophistication and inside knowledge of the security forces, officials and analysts said.

The umbrella group for the Pakistani Taliban, Tehrik-e-Taliban, claimed responsibility for the attacks in Lahore, the independent television news channel Geo reported on its Web site.

But the style of the attacks also revealed the closer ties between the Taliban and Al Qaeda and what are known as jihadi groups, which operate out of southern Punjab, the country’s largest province, analysts said. The cooperation has made the militant threat to Pakistan more potent and insidious than ever, they said.

The government has tolerated the Punjabi groups, including Jaish-e-Muhammad and Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, for years, and many Pakistanis consider them allies in just causes, including fighting India, the United States and Shiite Muslims. But they have become entwined with the Taliban and Al Qaeda, and have increasingly turned on the state.

Re: # 195 Tahmed

addendum to #195

"...Regarding your desire to see Pakistan's rendition of Uighurs to China..."

should be

"...Regarding your desire to see evidence of Pakistan's rendition of Uighurs to China..."


Also, I want to be clear: I am not implying that friendly relations of Pakistan with US/China are based solely on Pakistan's cooperation in stopping individuals and organizations in Pakistan from conducting acts hostile towards these countries. This is not the sufficient, but rather a necessary condition.

pew "but that it should shut down permanently LeT and JuD to signal its intent (in other words, match words with deeds, in extending a hand of friendship)."

I think Pakistan needs to take care of its hunger, infant mortality, health care, women's rights and other issues long before it bother with BS issues like the Let and Waziristan and other nonsense....

Re: # 149 Tahmed

Before I proceed, I wish to clarify the following:

a) I never implied a secondary role (Pak to China/US). I don't know why you assume that

b) Regarding your desire to see Pakistan's rendition of Uighurs to China, please visit the following link to see how well Pakistan has cooperated with China in addressing concerns that they have about Uighurs: "Uighurs as well as Uzbeks and Tajiks who sympathised with their pan-Turkic movement, were hunted down (by Musharraf). From the late 1990s to 2003, Uighurs were expelled from madressahs and their businesses were shut down. In October 2004, Pakistani troops also killed ETIM leader Hasan Mahsum in South Waziristan. This aggressive stance against the Uighurs made Islamabad’s allegiance to Beijing on the Xinjiang issue clear. It also set aside any concerns that Pakistanis would want to extend a helping hand to their Muslim brothers and sisters in China. A similar level of commitment will be required of the Zardari government to keep Sino-Pakistan relations intact." (visit http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/16-effe cts-of-uighur-unrest-hs-06) It goes without saying that nothing of this kind is being done against the LeT and JuD by Pakistan authorities. Do you see the difference? Please pay special attention to the last sentence from the passage that I quoted By the same token, you can be sure that Pakistan-China relations will be severely damaged, as the author correctly points out, if Pakistan turns a blind eye towards Chinese concerns about Pakistan-based Uighurs creating trouble in China.

c) Regarding Kansi, I provided only one example. There have been many others that Pakistan rendered to the US (including Pakistani citizens, extra-judicially that I might add. I believe that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is a Pakistani citizen). The point that I am making is not that Pakistan should render its citizens to India (as it has been doing for the US) or turning over Uighurs to China, but that it should shut down permanently LeT and JuD to signal its intent (in other words, match words with deeds, in extending a hand of friendship).

d) I am not interested in emotional comfort, as you say it - but rather determine if there is a meeting of the minds on material issues (like the ones that I pointed out). Clearly, you see the above issues differently. I am presenting you hard facts (not some emotional wishes), and curious to see how you respond.

I believe that I have addressed each of the points that you raised.

all of Arnold Toybnee's study of history volumes combined....

CIA people please take note of the top secrets that masadi has divulged in #192, surely his file must be the length of all of Arnold Toybnee's study of history combined....

TNITC masadi

tahmed writes "#182 replaces #181."

Ahmad sahib your people (The US thugs) met with hamid's people (the COAS) many times in the past in order for him to tell his people (the so called elected politicians) that they need to get their act straight or they will be looking at the barrel of another army takeover. Then your people (The US thugs) drafted a bill and passed it to the Army's people (the so called elected politicians) with deliberate nonsense so that hamid's people (the army) would feign sovereignty's lost, in order to turn hamid's people (the army) against the army's people (the so called elected politicians) so that your people (the US thugs) could keep the country on the brink of disaster and promote their farce on terror on which they have spent (i.e. given to their corporations) over $900 billion in addition to their discretionary spending on the military which is around $700 billion a year, yet your people (the US thugs) want a debate on whether they should provide healthcare to the same people whose future generations they are enslaving through debt which is then handed to the corporations.

Have some shame, and have a nice day

TNITC masadi

Re: # 190 the task is actually well within reach but with FULL committment to the cause ..... and not the half-hearted effort so far .... a dithering president hussain is not doing anyone any favours, least of all the very pakistanis/Muslims he is trying to appease

Re: # 181

tahmed mian,

.... i wish it was that easy .... the arabs and their lackeys are not in waziristan ... they are in mansoora, akora khattack , the madrassas in islamabad and karachi, muridke, uch sharif, rahimyar khan, dik, dera ghazi khan, multan, dhok ratta, jhang and also in raiwind ...... right now the guys in raiwind are perhaps the most dangerous ..... did you notice that nawaz sharif did not show up for the security brieifing by your pm and my coas today? ... he was probably talking to mullah omar on his satellite phone

#188
typo correction:

[On February 25, 2000, the Indian army killed 14 civilians in Lonjot village in Pakistan-administered Kashmir after commandos had crossed the Line of Control (LoC) that separates the two Kashmirs. They returned to the Indian side with abducted Pakistani girls, and threw the severed heads of three of them at Pakistani soldiers.]

This chittagong character illustrates pretty well how these jihadis are everywhere - and infiltrating into India from Bangladesh - to add to the ones already there.

And this Syed Saleem Shahzad illustrates how ALL Muslims are potential jihadis - regardless of education or background. The ease with which he says that the Indian soldiers killed 14 "civilians" (terrorists caught are always "civilians"), and then beheaded 3 abducted women tells you about Pakis and Muslims in general.

Of all the players in the region, the Indians have the best intelligence. The Indian army could crush these mfs ruthlessly, but are prevented from doing so by NATO and China's geopolitical interests. But if there ever is a spectacular strike in India, like this low-class one-eyed piece of garbage mentioned, Congress WILL act - otherwise it is goodbye to their rule.

#187 Posted by chittagong

[On February 25, 2000, the Indian army killed 14 civilians in Lonjot village in Pakistan-administered Kashmir after commandos had crossed the Line of Control (LoC) that separates the two Kashmirs. They returned to the Indian side with abducted Pakistani girls, and threw the severed heads of three of them at Pakistani soldiers.]

This chittagong character illustrates pretty well how these jihadis are everywhere - and infiltrating into India from Bangladesh - to add to the ones already there.

And this Syed Saleem Shahzad illustrates how ALL Muslims are potential jihadis - regardless of education or background. The ease with which he says that the Indian soldiers killed 14 "civilians" (terrorists caught are always "civilians"), and then beheaded 3 abducted women tells you about Pakis and Muslims in general.

Of all the players in the region, the Indians have the best intelligence. The Indian could crush these mfs ruthlessly, but are prevented from doing so by NATO and China's geopolitical interests. But if there ever is a spectacular strike in India, like this low-class one-eyed piece of garbage mentioned, Congress WILL act - otherwise it is goodbye to their rule.

ANGORADA, South Waziristan, at the crossroads with Afghanistan - A high-level meeting on October 9 at the presidential palace between Pakistan's civil and military leaders endorsed a military operation against the Pakistani Taliban and al-Qaeda in the South Waziristan tribal area - termed by analysts as the mother of all regional conflicts.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KJ15Df03.html

At the same time, al-Qaeda is implementing its game plan in the South Asian war theater as a part of its broader campaign against American global hegemony that began with the attacks in the United States of September 11, 2001.

Al-Qaeda's target remains the United States and its allies, such as Europe, Israel and India, and it does not envisage diluting this strategy by embracing Muslim resistances on narrow parameters. In this context, militant activity in Pakistan is seen as a complexity rather than as a part of al-Qaeda's strategy.

Militants have been particularly active over the past few days. Last Thursday, a car loaded with explosives rammed into the compound wall of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, Afghanistan's capital, killing at least 17 people. Then on Saturday, militants staged an audacious attack on the the Pakistani military headquarters in Rawalpindi, the twin city of the capital, Islamabad. On Monday, a suicide bomber detonated a bomb in market town in the Swat Valley region, killing 41 people and injuring 45 others.

Pakistan is at critical juncture, with the armed forces gathered in their largest-ever numbers (almost a corps, as many as 60,000 troops) around South Waziristan to flush out the Pakistan Tehrik-e-Taliban (PTT), al-Qaeda and their allies from the Pakistani tribal areas.

In these tense times, Mohammad Ilyas Kashmiri, an al-Qaeda leader who, according to American intelligence is al-Qaeda's head of military operations and whose death they wrongly confirmed in a recent US Predator drone attack in North Waziristan, spoke to Asia Times Online.

He invited this correspondent to a secret hideout in the South Waziristan-Afghanistan border area, where drones regularly fly overhead.

This is Ilyas' first-ever media interaction since he joined al-Qaeda in 2005. He is a veteran commander from the struggle with India over divided Kashmir.

In the past few months, the militants have appeared to be on the back foot. A number of leading figures have been killed in drone attacks in Pakistan, including Osama al-Kini, a Kenyan national and al-Qaeda's external operations chief; Khalid Habib, the commander of the Lashkar al-Zil or the Shadow Army, al-Qaeda's fighting force; Tahir Yuldashev, leader of the al-Qaeda-linked Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan; PTT leader Baitullah Mehsud, and several others.

The Pakistani Taliban have also been given a bloody nose by the military in tribal and urban areas. Negotiations were also underway to strike peace deals with some Taliban commanders in various Afghan provinces.

Then last week at least nine US troops along with several dozen Afghan National Army (ANA) personnel were killed in a raid on an outpost in Nuristan province, besides the abduction of over 30 ANA officers and soldiers by the Taliban.

This attack was complemented by a series of other attacks on North Atlantic Treaty Organization bases across the southeastern provinces of Khost, Paktia and Paktika, forcing top US General Stanley McChrystal to pull out all troops from isolated posts in remote areas in these provinces to relocate them in population centers.

This created immense space for the Taliban to operate freely, meaning that if Pakistan conducted operations in South Waziristan, the militants could easily move across the border to find sanctuary.

The attacks over the past few days have also shown that the militants are still capable of striking important targets almost at will. They also mean a redesign of the war theater in which Pakistan will have to relocate its troops from the eastern front (India) to the western front (Afghanistan), as the Taliban are now the number one enemy.

Washington plans to send at least another 40,000 troops to Afghanistan while India will complement these efforts with its intelligence and military expertise against the common enemy - Muslim militant groups.

The upcoming battle
Ilyas Kashmiri gave his views on what the upcoming battle will look like, what its targets will be, and how it will impact the West in relation to the destabilization of a Muslim state such as Pakistan.

The contact with Asia Times Online began with a call from the militants on October 6, inviting this correspondent to the town of Mir Ali in North Waziristan. No reason was given. The next day, I traveled to Mir Ali, a town that has been heavily attacked by drones over the past year. After over seven hours of continuous traveling, I was received by a group of armed men who transferred me to a house belonging to a local tribesman.

"The commander [Ilyas Kashmiri] is alive. You know that the commander has never spoken to the media before, but since everybody is sure of his death as a result of a drone attack [in September], al-Qaeda's shura [council] decided to make a denial of this news through an interview by him to an independent newspaper, and therefore the shura agreed on you," a person whom I knew as the key person in Ilyas' famous 313 Brigade told me as soon as I reached the safe house. The brigade, a collection of jihadi groups, fought for many years against India in India-administered Kashmir.

"You will have to stay in this room until we inform you of the next plan. You can hear the voices of drones above your head, therefore you will not leave the room. The area is full of Taliban, but also of informers whose information on the presence of strangers in a house could lead to a drone attack," the man said.

The next day, I was transferred to another house at an unknown location, about three hours away. During this time I was accompanied at all times by an armed escort. I was not allowed to speak to them, and they could not communicate with me. This is al-Qaeda's internal world. Finally, in the early morning of October 9, a few armed men arrived in a white car.

"Please leave all your electronic gadgets here. No cell phone, no camera, nothing. We will provide you pen and paper to write the interview," I was instructed. After several hours of a very uncomfortable journey, passing down muddy tracks and through mountain passes, we reached a room where Ilyas was supposed to meet us.

After a couple of hours, suddenly the sound of a powerful vehicle broke the silence. My escort and the men already present in the room rapidly took up positions. They all wore bullet pouches and carried AK-47s.

Ilyas made his entrance. He cut a striking figure, about six feet tall (1.83 meters), wearing a cream-colored turban and white qameez shalwar (traditional shirt and pants), carrying an AK-47 on his shoulder and a wooden stick in one hand, and flanked by commandos of his famous diehard 313 Brigade.

Ilyas now sports a long white beard dyed with reddish henna. At the age of 45 he remains strongly built, although he carries the scars of war - he has lost an eye and an index figure. When we shook hands, his grip was powerful.

The host immediately served lunch, and we sat on the floor to eat.
"So, you have survived a third drone strike ... why is the Central Intelligence Agency [CIA] sniffing around you so much? I asked.

The question was somewhat rhetorical. He is one of the most high-profile al-Qaeda commanders, with a Pakistani bounty of 50 million rupees (US$600,000) on his head. His position is defined differently by various intelligence and media organizations. Some say he is commander-in-chief of al-Qaeda's global operations, while others say he is chief of al-Qaeda's military wing.

If today al-Qaeda is divided into three spheres, Osama bin Laden is undoubtedly the symbol of the movement and his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri defines al-Qaeda's ideology and broader strategic vision. Ilyas, with his unmatched guerrilla expertise, turns the strategic vision into reality, provides the resources and gets targets achieved, but he chooses to remain in the background and very low key.

His bases and activities have always remained shrouded in secrecy. However, the arrest of five of his men in Pakistan earlier this year and their subsequent grilling helped lift the veil. Their information resulted in CIA drone strikes against him, the first in May and then again on September 7, when he was pronounced dead by Pakistani intelligence, and finally on September 14, after which the CIA said he was dead and called it a great success in the "war on terror".

"They are right in their pursuit. They know their enemy well. They know what I am really up to," Ilyas proudly replied.

Born in Bimbur (old Mirpur) in the Samhani Valley of Pakistan-administered Kashmir on February 10, 1964, Ilyas passed the first year of a mass communication degree at Allama Iqbal Open University, Islamabad. He did not continue due to his heavy involvement in jihadi activities.

The Kashmir Freedom Movement was his first exposure in the field of militancy, then the Harkat-ul Jihad-i-Islami (HUJI) and ultimately his legendary 313 Brigade. This grew into the most powerful group in South Asia and its network is strongly knitted in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Kashmir, India, Nepal and Bangladesh. According to some CIA dispatches, the footprints of 313 Brigade are now in Europe and capable of the type of attack that saw a handful of militants terrorize the Indian city of Mumbai last November.

Little is documented of Ilyas' life, and what has been reported is often contradictory. However, he is invariably described, certainly by world intelligence agencies, as the most effective, dangerous and successful guerrilla leader in the world.

He left the Kashmir region in 2005 after his second release from detention by Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and headed for North Waziristan. He had previously been arrested by Indian forces, but he broke out of jail and escaped. He was then detained by the ISI as the suspected mastermind of an attack on then-president Pervez Musharraf, in 2003, but was cleared and released. The ISI then picked Ilyas up again in 2005 after he refused to close down his operations in Kashmir.

His relocation to the troubled border areas sent a chill down spines in Washington as they realized that with his vast experience, he could turn unsophisticated battle patterns in Afghanistan into audacious modern guerrilla warfare.

Ilyas' track record spoke for itself. In 1994, he launched the al-Hadid operation in the Indian capital, New Delhi, to get some of his jihadi comrades released. His group of 25 people included Sheikh Omar Saeed (the abductor of US reporter Daniel Pearl in Karachi in 2002) as his deputy. The group abducted several foreigners, including American, Israeli and British tourists and took them to Ghaziabad near Delhi. They then demanded that the Indian authorities release their colleagues, but instead they attacked the hideout. Sheikh Omar was injured and arrested. (He was later released in a swap for the passengers of a hijacked Indian aircraft). Ilyas escaped unhurt.

On February 25, 2000, the Indian army killed 14 civilians in Lonjot village in Pakistan-administered Kashmir after commandos had crossed the Line of Control (LoC) that separates the two Kashmirs. They returned to the Indian side with abducted Pakistani girls, and threw the severed heads of three of them at Pakistani soldiers.

The very next day, Ilyas conducted a guerilla operation against the Indian army in Nakyal sector after crossing the LoC with 25 fighters of 313 Brigade. They kidnapped an Indian army officer who was later beheaded - his head was paraded in the bazaars of Kotli back in Pakistani territory.

However, the most significant operation of Ilyas was in Aknor

massacre of Muslims in the Indian city of Gujarat in 2002. In cleverly planned attacks involving 313 Brigade divided into two groups, Indian generals, brigadiers and other senior officials were lured to the scene of the first attack. Two generals were injured (the Pakistan army could not injure a single Indian general in three wars) and several brigadiers and colonels were killed. This was one of the most telling setbacks for India in the long-running Kashmiri insurgency.

Despite what some reports claim, Ilyas was never a part of Pakistan's special forces, nor even of the army. Nearly 30 years ago when he joined the Afghan jihad against the Soviets from the platform of the HUJI, he developed expertise in guerrilla warfare and explosives.

Within just months of arriving in the Afghan war theater in 2005, Kashmiri redefined the Taliban-led insurgency based on legendary Vietnamese General Vo Nguyen Giap's three-pronged guerrilla warfare strategy. For the Taliban, the main emphasis was to be placed on cutting NATO's supply lines from all four sides of Afghanistan, and carrying out special operations similar to the Mumbai attack in Afghanistan.

Over the years, Ilyas has deliberately adopted a low key presence in the militants' hierarchy. His attacks are just the opposite, although he never issues statements or claims responsibility for any operation.

His 313 Brigade is believed to be the main catalyst of high-profile operations such as the one in Mumbai and others in Afghanistan, as well as al-Qaeda's operations in Somalia and to some extent in Iraq.

"Do you believe that the upcoming South Waziristan operation will be the 'mother of all operations' in the region, as some analysts say," I asked after we had finished lunch and I was alone with Ilyas and his trusted confidant.

"I don't know how to play with words during an interview," Ilyas responded. "I have always been a field commander and I know the language of battlefields. I will try to answer your questions in the language I am familiar with. (Ilyas spoke mostly in Urdu, mixed with some Punjabi.)

"Saleem! I will draw your attention to the basics of the present war theater and use that to explain the whole strategy of the upcoming battles. Those who planned this battle actually aimed to bring the world's biggest Satan [US] and its allies into this trap and swamp [Afghanistan]. Afghanistan is a unique place in the world where the hunter has all sorts of traps to choose from.

"It might be deserts, rivers, mountains and the urban centers as well. This was the thinking of the planners of this war who were sick and tired of the great Satan's global intrigues and they aim for its demise to make this world a place of peace and justice. However, the great Satan was full of arrogance of its superiority and thought of Afghans as helpless statues who would be hit from all four sides by its war machines, and they would not have the power and capacity to retaliate.

"This was the illusion on which a great alliance of world powers came to Afghanistan, but due to their misplaced conceptions they gradually became trapped in Afghanistan. Today, NATO does not have any significance or relevance. They have lost the war in Afghanistan. Now, when they realized their defeat, they developed an emphasis that this entire battle is being fought from outside of Afghanistan, that is, the two Waziristans. To me, this military thesis is a mirage which has created a complex situation in the region and created reactions and counter-reactions. I would not like to go into the details, to me that was nothing but deviation. As a military commander, the reality is that the trap of Afghanistan is successful and the basic military targets on the ground have been achieved," Ilyas said.

I responded that the relocation of 313 Brigade from Kashmir was itself proof that foreign hands were involved in Afghanistan.

"The entire basis of your argument is wrong, that this war is being fought from outside of Afghanistan. This is just an out-of-context understanding of the whole situation. If you discuss myself and 313 Brigade, I decided to join the Afghan resistance as an individual and I had quite a reason for that. Everybody knows that only a decade ago I was fighting a war of liberation for my homeland Kashmir.

"However, I realized that decades of armed and political struggles could not help to inch forward a resolution of this issue. Nevertheless, East Timor's issue was resolved without losing much time. Why? Because the entire game was in the hands of the great Satan, the USA. Organs like the UN and countries like India and Israel were simply the extension of its resources and that's why there was a failure to resolve the Palestinian issue, the Kashmir issue and the plight of Afghanistan.

"So I and many people all across the world realized that analyzing the situation in any narrow regional political perspective was an incorrect approach. This is a different ball game altogether for which a unified strategy is compulsory. The defeat of American global hegemony is a must if I want the liberation of my homeland Kashmir, and therefore it provided the reasoning for my presence in this war theater.

Ilyas continued, "When I came here I found my step justified; how the world regional powers operate under the umbrella of the great Satan and how they are supportive of its great plans. This can be seen here in Afghanistan." He added that al-Qaeda's regional war strategy, in which they have hit Indian targets, is actually to chop off American strength.

"The RAW [India's Research and Analysis Wing] has detachment command centers in the Afghan provinces of Kunar, Jalalabad, Khost, Argun, Helmand and Kandahar. The cover operations are road construction companies. For instance, the road construction contract from Khost city to the Tanai tribe area is handled by a contractor who is actually a current Indian army colonel. In Gardez, telecommunication companies are the cover for Indian intelligence operations. Mostly, their men operate with Muslim names, but actually the employees are Hindus."

"So should the world expect more Mumbai-like attacks?" I asked.

"That was nothing compared to what has already been planned for the future," Ilyas replied.

"Even against Israel and the USA?" I asked.

"Saleem, I am not a traditional jihadi cleric who is involved in sloganeering. As a military commander, I would say every target has a specific time and reasons, and the responses will be forthcoming accordingly," Ilyas said.

As I noted Kashmiri's answers, I thought of how several years back he was the darling of the Pakistani armed forces, their pride. The highest military officers were proud to meet him at his base in Kashmir, they spent time with him and listened to the legends of his war games. Today, I had a different person in front of me - a man condemned as a terrorist by the Pakistani military establishment and their biggest wish is his death.

"What impressed you to join al-Qaeda?" I asked.

"We were both victims of the same tyrant. Today, the entire Muslim world is sick of Americans and that's why they are agreeing with Sheikh Osama. If all of the Muslim world is asked to elect their leader, their choice would be either [Taliban leader] Mullah Omar or Sheikh Osama," Ilyas said.

"If it is so, why are a section of militants bent on war on Muslim states like Pakistan? Do you think this is correct?"

"Our battle cannot be against Muslims and believers. As I have mentioned earlier, what is happening at the moment in the Muslim world is a complexity due to American power games which have resulted into reactions and counter-reactions. This is a totally different debate and might deviate me from the real topic. The real game is the fight against the great Satan and its adherents," Ilyas said.

"What turned you from the most-beloved friend to the most-hated foe in the eyes of the Pakistani military establishment?" I asked.

"Pakistan is my beloved country and the people who live there are our brothers, sisters and relatives. I cannot even think of going against its interests. It was never the Pakistan army that was against me, but certain elements who branded me as an enemy to cover up their weaknesses and to appease their masters," Ilyas said.

"What is 313 Brigade?" I asked.

"I cannot tell you, except war is all tactics and this is all 313 Brigade is about; reading the enemy's mind and reacting accordingly. The world thought that Prophet Mohammad only left women behind. They forgot there were real men also who did not know what defeat was all about. The world is only familiar with those so-called Muslims who only follow the direction of the air and who don't have their own will. They do not have their own minds or dimensions of their own. The world has yet to see real Muslims. They have so far only seen Osama and Mullah Omar, while there are thousands of others. Wolves only respect a lion's iron slap; lions do not impress with the logic of a sheep," Ilyas said.

As the shadows of darkness emerged, the conversation ended. The next day, a curfew was to be imposed in North Waziristan in preparation for the grand operation in the region, and I had to leave the area. Ilyas also needed to move to a new destination, as he does on a regular basis to hide from the eyes of Predator drones.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com

Ayesha Siddiqa on infiltrations and denials. The frequent involvement of retired army/security personnel in terrorism may explain both how the attack on GHQ may have been planned and why some people may have been spared.

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-new spaper/columnists/ayesha-siddiqa-on-different-wavelengths-609+

in the zia era a propaganda campaign was started that the soviet intelligence was smashing heads of people disguised as hathora group.This was 1981-82.actually in a country like pakistan anything is possible.i had asked one very intelligent intelligence bureau official (then dismissed) now in a senior position , what is the job of IB , he replied to make one tribe fight another,one sect fight another,one group fight another.the brits in CID were doing the same in 1930s and 1940s throwing carcasses of calves in temples and dead pigs in mosques.anything is possible.however one thing is clear .the test tube babies created for the dollar jihad now want to kill their fathers.HA HA HA
Agha Amin

#182 Posted by tahmed32

[#178 hamidm: i dont think Pakistan needs the US to take care of the maulvis.]

Pakistan does not need the US to take care of the maulvis. But it needs the US boot in it's rear to do it.

#182 replaces #181.

Sorry - screwed by #178. The typo-free version is below:

#178 hamidm: i dont think Pakistan needs the US to take care of the maulvis.

Even as we speak my people (the elected political leaders), are meeting your people (the appointed army officers) in Islamabad to discuss when (not if) they are going to knock off Urstruly's people (the arab invaders and their domestic lackeys) in Waziristan

#178 hamidm: i dont think Pakistan needs the US to take care of the maulvis.

Even as we speak (the elected political leaders), my people are meeting your people (the appointed army officers) in Islamabad to discuss when (not if) they are going to knock off Urstruly's people (the arab invaders and their domestic lackeys) in Waziristan.

#177 I'll drink tea to that!! (i.e. your comparing chowk time to tea time in NY).

Re: # 171
Agha sahib
"the billion dollar question is why the attackers did not kill any senior officer which they could have ?"

Is that true?
Why did they not kill senior officers?
a) Attackers want to pressure army to stop military action.
b) Attacks were intended to urge the army for action in Waziristan.
Could you kindly comment. Thanks.

Re: # 169

dost-mittar ji,

.... i am sure you are aware of the current debate over 'good' and 'bad' taliban in the us ...... even the us government is talking to haqqani (and maybe hekmatyar) to see if he can be cajoled into joining the 'process' ..... both these guys might have a fifty million dollar price on their head with drones hunting for their sorry behinds, but not long ago they were darlings of the american administration ............... so there is nothing wrong with the paki government hedging its bets and talking to them, because who knows what might happen tomorrow .... with hussein obama waffling in the white house it is quite possible that america will give up on afghanistan any minute and pakistan will be left holding the manure bag again ......

re: tahmed32#173
I never said the opinions expressed here mattered.

If you are ever in New York go to the eateries frequented by Pakistani taxi drivers. These people are the most passionate Pakistanis you can find. They solve all problems faced by Pakistan everyday and start over the next day.


opinions on Chowk matter as much as the New York cab drivers.


Regards,

Faruk

#173 Posted by tahmed32

[Faruk: What you indians think, fortunately, matters less to Pakistan than what a little wart on the nose of mullah al-fazloo thinks.]

Is that the reason for all this exhortation to India to grab Pakiland's outstretched "hand of friendship"?

Yours is a country involved in thuggish activities like giving shelter to the Dawood Ibrahims and the Osamas and the LeT - a fundamentalist Islamic country with a Sharia-compliant constitution with jihadis having widespread support amongst the unwashed masses as well as many very well-washed masses. India is unfortunate to have such thugs next to us. India has been suffering for a thousand years. Why can't you guys just disappear? What a curse!

Re: # 172

Your opinions regarding pak military sounds plausible. I just hope that with the unprecedented freedom of press enjoyed within Puristan, the military does not take a very long time just to clean up it's own mess within it's own ranks.

#164 that i will agree with. The Pakistan Army created this mess, and the Pakistan Army needs to clean up this mess.

Faruk: What you indians think, fortunately, matters less to Pakistan than what a little wart on the nose of mullah al-fazloo thinks.

Agha mian,
I think this is a show put on by the Pakistani Army to get more aid and reestablish military rule. The few causalities are acceptable but you cant go overboard.

Regards,

Faruk

the billion dollar question is why the attackers did not kill any senior officer which they could have ?
is it that they did not want to do incalculable harm that would burn all bridges or some other.readers should read the article carefully.i am not loyal to any state but to history thats why i am regarded as iconoclastic,some regard me as anti establishment.my interest is the true picture.
Agha Amin

Re: # 166
SPY...
A Jihadi is a Jihadi and is good for no civilised people, even for couple of those left in Pakistan...USA is learning it's lessons and it will take far more time than single 9/11 attack...US is doing business worldwide, and in any african and middle eastern nation they are vulnerable...The best they are doing is creating huge bases, where their strategic interest is big. Their military strength in that country is bigger than the local govt. This gives them the ability to threaten local govt. to comply with them...If Saudi Govt. is gradualy outsourcing their jihadi stuff to their pet aninmals in Pakistan, it is mostly under pressure from USA. The day USA will setup huge base in Pakistan and will control every Pakistani military operation, including nuke stuff, good/bad all type of jihadis will vanish...This may include the carrot policy of settling with India in the matter of Kashmir...I am sure, India will like to settle at any cost, except ceeeding territory....
Pakistan is proven liar and cheat, they have even cheated USA. Look for next couple of years. Pakistan, the beacon of ummah will be next big base for USA to crush Iran from both the side....
The side effect, India can concentrate China....
The only hindrance in this entire game will come from Russia...

Re: # 167:

"while a bad jihadi (Taliban, Al-quaida) is one that is fighting the Pak army or America in Afghanistan."

The first part is true but not the second. Pakistan is a supporter of the Gulbudin Hekmetyar faction fighting the Americans - this is the faction that has bombed Indian embassy in Kabul twice. It is also harbouring Mulla Omar and his Quetta Shurra.

re: #160

"the issue is very serious and naieve layman here dont know the gravity of the matter.the brigadier killed was no ordinary man.the army is not police , pakistani police or FIA more hated by pakistanis than indian army.The Pakistan Army is Pakistan.The attackers have attacked Pakistans centre of gravity.A ruthless response is needed even if it requires military rule."

That's the game. Reestablish military rule in Pakistan. Create enough trouble to convince the average Pakistani that civilian rule just does not work.

Regards,

Faruk

#166 Posted by SPY

Precisely.

[The USA used to turn a blind eye to India's protests against Pak's use of terrorism. India was regularly advised to show restraint or use the dialog / talks with Pak to resolve matters. The US double standards came out in open when the US itself got hurt in 9/11 and did no dialong with Al-quaida.]

The erstwhile British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, gave a speech in Brazil a couple of years ago - where he said - I am paraphrasing here - "We used to think that the Indian Government was at fault in Kashmir, but NOW we realize that it is the terrorists to blame...". Now this is a COMPLETE lie - they knew all along, but OIL made these countries do what they did (and continues to - look at how the Libyan bomber got RELEASED!!! Yes, RELEASED!!!. However, there is KARMA - there is ALWAYS a price to pay, ALWAYS. Look at how many British and Americans have been killed/hurt since 9/11. And continue to be killed. UNTIL they change their self-serving ways, and NOT reward the Army/ISI/jihadis with money in order to kill the "BAD" jihadis, and instead go after the WHOLE evil nexus - the jihadis - BOTH the "good" and the "bad", the Army and the ISI, until that time, the situation will continue to fester.

So, a couple of small corrections:

[The USA is not going to fight India's war against the Pak terrorism. It has nothing to gain by fighting India's war.]

I would suggest that UNTIL the day the USA does so, her problems will continue to fester.

[Each nation has its own axe to grind and has its own interests. Unfortunately the good for one country is bad for the other.]

This is like saying that each person has his own axe to grind - the Policeman, the axe-murderer, and the bystander. I suggest that they are all living in ONE society, and what is bad for the bystander is ALSO bad for the policeman. Similarly, all nations are living on ONE planet, and what is bad for India is ALSO bad for USA or England.

Until the day when these western countries understand this, the problem will not go away.

Re: # 130 Chaltahai says : "The US is not going to allow...I repeat..ALLOW..good jihadi/bad jihadi scenario anymore".

Things are not that straight forward. A good jihadi (e.g. LeT) for pakistan is one who fights India, while a bad jihadi (Taliban, Al-quaida) is one that is fighting the Pak army or America in Afghanistan. In fact at one time the bad jihadi was also a good jihadi, as it was also Pak army's creations for use against the Soviets (1st stage in 80s), for suppressing Afghanistan (2nd stage in 90s) and later for use against India (3rd stage after 2000 onwards). But the Al-quaida upset the Pak applecart / plan by doing the 9/11 and America stepped into the region, the rest is history.

The USA used to turn a blind eye to India's protests against Pak's use of terrorism. India was regularly advised to show restraint or use the dialog / talks with Pak to resolve matters. The US double standards came out in open when the US itself got hurt in 9/11 and did no dialong with Al-quaida. The USA has come to Afghanistan with a limited agenda to neutralise Al-quaida to prevent future attacks on American interests. The USA is not going to fight India's war against the Pak terrorism. It has nothing to gain by fighting India's war. In fact it does not want to arm-twist Pakistan lest Pakistan finds all its eastern and western stakes lost, and stop co-operationg with US in its GWOT. Both USA and Pak need each other. Pak needs the aid while the USA needs the supply routes to Afghanistan through Pakistan. Hence there is a tacit understanding between the USA and Pak to go after the bad Jihadi, while allowing Pakistan to retain / use the good Jihadi against India. That is why Kansi (bad jihadi, attacked US interests) gets hanged but Saeed (good Jihadi, does not harm US, only harms India) is set free.

India is no USA, to follow the same path after the 26/11 as what the USA did after 9/11. India has to settle with whatever good comes as a side effect of the American involvement in the region. It is in India's inerest that there is some action on the Pak's western border keeping the Pak army engaged there. This was evident recently when Baitullah Mehsud was killed and there was lull in the Taliban activity / western front. It provided the required time to the Pak army to focus on the easter border, real enemy (India). The Kabul Indian embassy blast, increase of Kashmir terrorism, giving option to captured Talibans of Jail or go to Kashmir etc. are a direct result of the peace on the western border.

Each nation has its own axe to grind and has its own interests. Unfortunately the good for one country is bad for the other.

Re: # 156
ahmedmadani....
The fact is Pakistan depends on USA in far bigger scale than India...We do have bigger business and people to people contact with USA compared to Pakistan...But, again, Indians are always nice to others, even if they are treated unfairly...So, in the long run Indians win...
As Sarada maa told "je shoi she roi"...
Those who can tolerate, can survive....

the militants network and nexus are far bigger than anyone can imagine and needs serious actions.the pakistan army is the only force that can turn the tide.this is my assessment.
Agha Amin

Re: # 159
ahmedmadani...
If life goes on as usual, then why your PM and President has to rush to USA for dole?

Re: # 160
pavo...
Pakistani military establishment is now under scanner (of US establishment). US is not trusting Pakistani military. So, I feel this is stage managed by Pak military to earn sympathy.

#160 Posted by pavocavalry on October 15, 2009 9:45:13 pm

What's your opinion on the fact that your security establishment still back the taliban/jihadis.

the issue is very serious and naieve layman here dont know the gravity of the matter.the brigadier killed was no ordinary man.the army is not police , pakistani police or FIA more hated by pakistanis than indian army.The Pakistan Army is Pakistan.The attackers have attacked Pakistans centre of gravity.A ruthless response is needed even if it requires military rule.
Agha Amin

Re: # 158 Sidhu Maharaj ... you have no sense , all this going on is not big thing for pakistanis it's life as usual and there is tomorrow. But this is big thing to American, Pakistan is their problem for Americans , pakistani awam gives damn to american worries and american problems.
Pakistani Nation ans pakistani people always go ahead

Re: # 156
ahmedmadani...
is it good for Pakistan to get negative approval ratinngs from a country, which you look to during crisis?

Re: # 123
hamidm2...
your brother jaheerullaa was trying to present the drama in that way (jew, hindoo, christian conspiracy on pakistan) in one of the Pakistani toilet papers.....

BTW, we all have enjoyed the drama set in the background of kerry lugar bill...the worst sufferrer is Sobha Kapoor and her K TV serials....

Re: # 153 Fine point.
Arjunsahib Indiaans are dependent on USA usa so need certificate so is Good for India.

Pakistan does not need certificate from anybody specially from USA,India or Israel. Pakistan growing stronger and stronger with time despite Americans hate guts of Pakistani people and nation. Americans need good wishes from Pakistani army or life line of arms, arms and fuel can come to halt and War on Terroe will be over

Re: # 114
dana kattu...
RSS contributed positively to shape Indian culture...

Everybody is interested to see the drama (the recent attacks on armed forces by their jihadi brothers) in "bedunistic jamoohiriat of Pakistan". This is more interesting soap opera than K series from Shobha Kappor...This is most probably stage managed show to gain sympathy from US (we are victim of terrorism too and please throw your alms without any pre-conditions).....

now bang your head and shout in arabic...ahlaa hooooooooooooooo

looks prophetboy(pbuysrr)..the canadian are now pandit haters too...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/the-taliban-faction-pakistan -wont-target-concerns-canada-most/article1325610/

But many of those inside the Canadian government who deal with Pakistan and Afghanistan issues still harbour suspicions that Pakistan's army, the country's dominant institution, is allowing the Taliban safe haven in Balochistan, even while it fights them elsewhere.

prophet tahmed(pbuysrr): You can bury your head as deep down your ass as you want...won't change reality...which explains why only 12% of americans have a positive opinion of pakiland while 59% have a positive opinion of India...

India: Too many women dying at childbirth

http://www.hrw.org/en/node/85957

Human Rights Watch

Let us compare these to the FARCE of the GWOT and the BS about the Mumbai and GHQ attacks

#150 Did I interrupt your arab worshipping??

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

Pew Research #124 While it is comforting for an indian to think of Pakistan as playing a "secondary role" to China or the US, the facts are not with you. You talk of "rendition" by Pakistan to China - where did you pick that up???

The fact, my friend, is that China and Pakistan have a mutually beneficial relationship at a far more substantive level. Here is a test: can you think of what they are??

Again, with the US, ignoring Musharraf's shenanigans (where he used to brag about 800 terrorists his government captured), the renditions when they have taken place have been of well-known individuals - with Kansi being the only Pakistani among them. And Kansi was given a fair trial in a US court and his murders proved beyond any doubt. Pakistan's relationship with the US, as with China, is at a far more substantive level. And that is why it has stood the test of 50 years.

So - you can either seek emotional comfort like the rest of the Indians on chowk by putting down Pakistan - or you can get real.

On second thoughts, given that you are not a policy-maker, you dont need to sacrifice your emotional comfort. So carry on... :-)

Hamidm #123 I think you ignore the obvious - it is Al Qaeda behind this terrorism in Pakistan. Not India.

The "arab brothers" are repaying the hospitality shown to them by tribals to further their ambitions of taking over Pakistan. The evidence is obvious:

1. The careful planning, an Al Qaeda trademark from the pre-9/11 attack on the USS Cole and then 9/11 that is obvious from the attacks on Pakistan.

2. Al Qaeda leadership, parked inside Pakistan now, which clearly has aspirations of taking over Pakistan. Zawahiri regularly declares war on pakistan.

3. Arab funds that have made Al Qaeda the kingmaker for Taliban. Thus Baitullah was appointed head by Zawahiri, and the meeting to chose his successor was also attended by arabs who, with their check book, clearly served as kingmakers. There is big money involved in all this - baitullahs successor controls vast resources.

4. The suicide bombers are typically young boys bought by arab money.

So - screw kashmir and india. if you want to see Pakistan put an end to terrorist attacks - get the arabs hiding in waziristan and hang them.

#146 monkey-man from india speakee speakee: "but no cigar". very good US slang Amreekan Tax Payer monkey!!! Now runee upee thee coconut tree making sure lungee stay on!!

#115 Posted by tahmed32 on October 15, 2009 10:28:17 am


iron mask: and what i have been saying on chowk? that terrorists dont exist, dont need to be crushed with full force??


Nice try prophetboy...but no cigar...

The terrorists are actually jihadis created and supported by your security establishment even now...did you read the McC report? Or the report on how phone intercepts by americans show the ISI is supporting terrorists?

Now why would americans and afghans blame the paki security establishment for supporting terrorism?

are they pandit hates too?

INTERVIEW - Pakistan spies stoke violence - Afghan advisor

By William Maclean

LONDON (Reuters) - A Pakistani spy agency is helping anti-Western militants mount attacks including suicide bombings in Afghanistan, a reality the West lacks the resolve to confront, an advisor to the Afghan government said on Thursday.

Davood Moradian, senior policy advisor to Foreign Minister Rangeen Dadfar Spanta, told Reuters the motive of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency was to arouse Western concern for stability in neighbouring nuclear-armed Pakistan and use it to obtain financial support for Islamabad.

Asked in an interview to provide concrete evidence of ISI involvement, he replied that the agency had been involved in a suicide bombing of the Indian embassy in Kabul in July 2008 that killed dozens of people including two Indian diplomats.

Pakistan strongly condemned the Kabul bombings at the time and said it had nothing to do with it.

"We produced such proof in respect of the Indian embassy bombing in Kabul last year. There were telephone records of the ISI officers directing, and we shared that information with the intelligence community," Moradian said.

"The intelligence community in Washington and London agree (with the allegations) but they are not in a position to make policy," said Moradian, speaking on the sidelines of a seminar at Britain's International Institute for Strategic Studies.

ca#130:

"I mean, nothing good has come of that place anyway"

I protest! What are Manmohan Singh, hamidm and yours truly - chopped liver?

Re: # 123 Posted by hamidm2 on October 15, 2009 11:40:52 am

Hamid mian,

{...by redirecting these suicidal jihadis towards kashmir ....}

I think, generally your concept of deflecting this menace away from the civilized pakis is correct. But, in these politically hard times, you need to come up with a better foreign policy strategy. Let me suggest some options to you for consideration...

The Maoists were referred to as the "Red Taliban".

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KJ16Df02.html

Maharan, Iron Mask:

I also think US will not enter (S2) the scene OPENLY due to resource limitations, bad Iraq experience and people are just tired of the open ended commitments.

However americans will protect their interests covertly by supporting the appropriate team as long as feasible.

I think Army needs to succeed quickly to keep its credibility. However, if this Taliban challenge drags on, lower ranking Army personnel will perceive that ship is sinking and they will start shifting their loyalties for their own survival.

So my sense is - in short term Army and Taliban will keep going after each other, but if mission is not accomplished in reasonable time, USA will have to issue lots of visas to top generals and civilian leaders.

sala, yeh sab bakwaas hai. Natak hain. Ab yeh padiye tum sab

Rewind to the past
Thursday, October 15, 2009
In times of crisis governments need to demonstrate courage and show they possess a backbone. But days after the dramatic siege of the GHQ which stunned a nation, we learn that the prime minister has set off on a six-day trip to China, that the Cabinet Defence Committee, where the three service chiefs are represented, has not met and that no inquiry into the attack on one of our most sensitive buildings has been ordered. There have been suggestions from insiders that the reasons for this are buried in history. The example of the Junejo government, dismissed after it ordered a probe into the Ojhri Camp disaster of 1988 are being cited. According to a report in this paper, the government is afraid of a similar fate should it make an attempt to seek out what happened or question our agencies on failures that may have led up to the siege. Simple survival cannot be enough reason for any government to stay in office. It is important to do the right thing. By doing so the late Mohammad Khan Junejo, rather unexpectedly, won for himself a place in history and in the hearts of the people. The value of such respect should not be ignored. In the longer term, elected governments inevitably weaken if they cannot command trust and loyalty from the people.

The timid approach taken by the government will act simply to weaken civilian institutions and add to the problems we face as a state. At a time when a fierce debate rages about the military's role in the country, the government needs to make its own presence felt and show that it is capable of leadership. People have a desire, and indeed a right, to know what happened at the GHQ. This is also important to prevent future lapses along similar lines. We expect the government to show its recognition of this and emulate examples of determination and integrity shown in the past rather than constantly running away from challenges.


http://thenews.com.pk/daily_detail.asp?id=203191

Sala if it was so critical, these guys would be seen to be doing something. BUt they are acting as if this is something which was planned. :D :D

Re: # 125
Dost sahib:

You are giving more significance to "spilling the beans" factor. You can have comfort that CIA knew AQ Khan network, and looked the other way. I am certain the same is true with the other two characters you mention. These skeletons may have some CIA skeletons, as ISI worked with CIA in a subordinate role. KLB factors these "officially" unknown secrets.

Re: # 139 The population does not support any such venture.

you are suggesting that the current situation has the support of the population?

Pardesi,

We need to add one more scenario:
Scenario3: Army and buddy taliban join to rout the bad talibans. They anyways don't care about the civilians.

In the process of scenario 3, after routing the bad guys,the army and taliban both gain credibility again and get back to status quo. Pakistan has a history of repeating the same scenarios over an over again with one thing constant, the army.

Now coming to the odds, Scenario one is more likely than scenario 2 anytime. The civilan gov. does not have the balls to take on army with anyone's help. The population does not support any such venture.

Scenario 2 is most likely - since this would be acceptabel; to the civvies and to many of the top brass of the army

#135 Maharana

OK agreed. Civilians do not have the Guns or God. But right now the Army and Taliban are not exactly flirting with each other.

Scenario 1 - Army and Taliban ignore the civilians as if they dont exist and keep going after each other. Civilians suffer but watch 'innocently' these two parties as they loose credibility and power.

Scenario 2 - US comes in at the 'invitation' of civilians and now Army and Taliban join forces.

What are the odds of each scenario?

The jihadi instinct will never leave the Muslim psyche permanently. It might go down for a while, depending on country and circumstances, but will always be lurking. Regardless of affluence, education or perceived injustices from some external group, country, entity, this jihadi mindset sits at the core of the Islamic attitude. The world will always be susceptible to this, as long as there is Islam.

Only two powers have Guns and God on their side. Which third power will go is quite clear. The powers with Guns and God had been flirting with each other for a long time.

Dost, you posted an editorial from the China People Daily. If you read it carefully, (IMHO) it is asking India to talk to Pakistan (making freinds far away and ignoring close one etc etc etc). They are not willing to directly say talk, but indirectly.

These five explosions and terror events seem to be causing more than a few eye brows to be raised and is causing many to wonder if the powers that be in Pakistan have control on the country and are unwilling to control it, or are unable to control it. The taliban seem to have struck just a few miles from the Wagah border. It will be not before long these guys strike in say Amritsar. This is what the pakistani's having been warning (if you recall Shah Mahmood's threat to India to face the consequences of not handing over K-State) which is leading many to wonder if this is just another case of upping the ante.

Third power center (Taliban) is being ignored in the discussion. Judging by its success it is indeed the new emerging power in the game.

It's quite clear that the three powers in Pakistan do not like each other. Question is which two will join forces to get the third one?

Re: # 128 Dost

Actually, there have been instances when the Pak Army/ISI sent unmistakable signals to their Indian counterparts that India should not make the mistake of talking only to the Pak civil government.

Days before Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his Pakistani counterpart Yusuf Raza Gilani met in Egypt, the head of the Inter-Services Intelligence floated a suggestion that India deal not just with Pakistan’s civilian government but also directly with its Army and intelligence agency. Lt. Gen. Shuja Pasha made the out-of-the-box overture during a meeting earlier this month with the three Indian defence advisers representing the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force attached to the Indian High Commission in Islamabad

http://www.thehindu.com/2009/07/23/stories/2009072350080100.htm

I think that India made the right decision to strengthen the Pak civil government by turning down this offer, but you can sense that the ISI wants to be seen as the real power broker.

DM Sahib, you are acting like there is an on/off button here. The US is not going to allow...I repeat..ALLOW..good jihadi/bad jihadi scenario anymore. Particularly when the aid is given as a grant with recourse. there will be an increasing frequency of these attacks in pakistan because a) they (pakistanis) deserve it b) they can't decide anymore who is a good jihadi or bad jihadi. (frankly any dead jihadi is a good jihadi but nevertheless....)

I mean, nothing good has come of that place anyway...that can be considering an addition to human wisdom or knowledge. All powers that be be should focus on pakis killing each other, it is like the mantra of keeping the fight over there rather than having these unwashed deranged mullashs sullying the rest of the world. Michigan is far too gone...I am afraid...with no auto industry and considering the implosion of the bullpen of the tigers, it is ripe for a nuking.

Re: # 128 thanks for the reply. What say is interesting, in that the generally accepted branches are Legislative, Executive, and Judiciary (okay they are the arms of the state, but for the purposes of this discussion we can take them to mean the govt.). This is the case in all Democratic or non-democratic states (including China and the former USSR). The Army, Police etc are instruments of the State/Govt. This is the accepted view.

The Indians are doing the right thing, IMHO. And it seems that theya re following Tahmed32's desire

iron_mask#126:

I had asked the same question on UP. To me it is clear that the civilian govt. controls the govt. but the army calls the shots in all matters concerning Pakistan's internal and external security.

And the elected leaders cannot expect outsiders to strengthen democracy in Pakistan when they are themselves not prepared to stand up to the army. Three items immediately come to mind:

1. The army objecting to the civilian govt. putting the ISI under a civilian ministry and the govt. buckled under immediately;
2. The army objecting to the ISI chief going to India after the FM announced this and the FM retracting forthwith;and now
3. The army opposing the civilian govt's approval of the Kerry Lugar govt. and FM rushing to Washington to seek changes in the Bill.

I think that the Indians have been quite scrupulous in talking only to the govt. in charge and not to the military leaders or maybe it is just that the army is not interested in talking to the Indians.

Re: # 125 Dost

I agree with you. I was only trying to clarify for Tahmed32's benefit what the essential difference is between Pakistan's relations with India, vice US/China. And since the objectives are so different and well understood by all concerned in these cases, that signals that communicate a change in intent become very important. Words have less meaning when not accompanied with appropriate actions.

Re: # 125 What you say is very true. But Dost, can you clarify a few matters here. Who do you think is the government in Pakistan? And which branch is the most powerful?

Pew_Research#124:

It is the Pakistan govt. which decides who is expendable and who is a prized asset - not the US or the UN. Thus, Kansi and some Al Qaida leaders (all numbered no. 3!) were expendable and were extradited. But A.Q. Khan, Omar Sheikh or Maulana Saeed are prized assets and could spill the beans on their collaborators in the establishment, therefore they are protected and not handed over for interrogation and never will be. So, while it may appear to outsiders that the Pak govt. is a puppet, it is in fact quite careful in protecting its assets.

Re: # 120 Tahmed

While much water has indeed 'under the bridge' since the CIA killings, the enduring principle on which the friendly relations with the US and China that you cite, rest on the matter that any Pakistani implicated in attacking/killing/terrorizing these countries is 'rendered' to them. This rendition (however, extra judicial) goes a long way in assuaging these same countries about the friendly intent of the Pakistani government. (Indeed, the tension that does exist between the US and Pakistan can be traced back to Pakistan Taliban attacks on ISAF). The same applies to rendition of Uighurs caught in Pakistan to China.

No such rendition (that is too far a target), but even a serious investigation under Pakistani law is carried on UN-proscribed organizations and their leaders in Pakistan. That is the difference!. These actions signal intent. I hope that you appreciate the difference now.

Re: # 117

tahmed mian,

..... i don't know why you insist on extending a hand of friendship to the horrible hindoos - these guys might be vegetarians, but they will still bite it ! ......

......... look, there should be no doubt in anyone's mind that our uncircumcised heeng eating cousins are providing arms and funding these terrorists through their afghan channels - it is payback for what we have been doing in kashmir .....and there is nothing wrong with that, since all is fair in lover and war ........ now that they have tittated our tat, we need to go back and tit them again by redirecting these suicidal jihadis towards kashmir ...... the jihadis have a lot of nervous islamic energy that needs to be channelized in the right direction ....... otherwise thse cave dwellers will continue to kill innocent civilians in pindi and lahore instead of the idol worshippers who live on the wrong side of the border ......

#121 iron_mask

[(b) The Army and Kiyani - who are over ruling the civilians and seem to be calling the shots]

Are you suggesting that in Tahmed's "vibrant democracy", it the army that has the real power, and not the "democratically elected" Zardari and Co.?

YOU LIE!!!

How dare you twist facts? Monkeyman!! Liar!! Hater!! Hindoo!!

Re: # 117 Tahmed32 a quick question for you:

Who do you think India should talk to:

(a) Zardari and PM - the ones who seem okay with the Americans and the KL bill (despite the noises they are making)

(b) The Army and Kiyani - who are over ruling the civilians and seem to be calling the shots

(c) the Mullahs who are currently on a series of small killing sprees

Even for the Americans, it is Kiyani and his Corps Commanders who wield the real power not Zardari. They talk real matters with Kiyani & Co by-passing the DEMOCRATICALLY elected set.

A Constitutional settlement has not been made in Pakistan. And it would be foolish for any country not as powerful as the US to talk to anyone one party in Pakistan to make any settlement/agreement of any kind. Unfortunate, but there are way too many runes to read. Don't you think?

#118 Pew Research: Much water has flowed under the bridge since the extradition of Kansi, notably the lawyers where "missing persons" was a major issue. Or is it in India's interest for Pakistan to remain frozen in time wrt to the rule of law?

tahmed,

Your sweeping statements, that pak govt. is stratching a hand of frienddship and the indi govt. is refusing to shake it ... shows you are an idiot.

Reality is hardly ever this simple ... unless viewed through goole searches of sponsored links. Let us know when you finally wake up from your beauty sleep ...

(I hope you are diligently keeping track of my responses ...!)

Re: # 117 Tahmed32

There is a difference between the 3 countries that you mention, isn't there? Neither the US, nor China, are in a situation where Pakistanis have gone on to conduct terrorist attacks. And in the instances that they have, they have been summarily extradited without any legal proceedings (e.g. Mir Aimal Kansi, executed in VA for the attack on CIA). Please don't ignore this vital difference.

SPY #101/102: Let me try and put a positive note to this discussion by starting with the one thing I wrote that you are consider to be the "most sensible", namely that "Pakistan will still be there (when India is ready) to extend the hand of friendship".

You reject this by saying that the "reality" is that ISI wont let it happen. The reality, my friend is, that the Pakistan government has been standing with hand outstretched for the past several months, and it is the Indian government that has refused on the pretext of mumbai (and it is clearly a pretext by any objective standard).

In other words, rather than stand in support of the democratic government of Pakistan and against the terrorists and their supporters inside Pakistan which Indians like to pretend are the real force in Pakistn, the Indian government has chosen to see it as an opportunity to make things more difficult for the progressives. Great move!! This may make Pakistan-deniars in India happy, but it certainly keeps India a political pygmy in the sub-continent relative to its vast population. The statesmanlike thing to do would have been for the Indian govenrment to do what it says - and support the progressive forces in Pakistan. What the US has done for example, with its handling of the Kerry-Lugar bill (just signed into law by Obama, along with an official statement added by Congress in response to objections by the Pakistan National Assembly). Or what the Chinese did a couple of days ago when it received the Pakistan PM to work out ways China could support Pakistan during this testing time for it.

#113 chicken: so i hounded your uncle jay thakeray out of chowk? and a dozen of you jumping out of the woodwork in defense of a "fellow indian" whose misrepresentations about pakistan i questioned (as per below) is not enough indians?? How many indians does it take to replace facts with lies?

iron mask: and what i have been saying on chowk? that terrorists dont exist, dont need to be crushed with full force??

where does this article say that US drones are attacking Pakistan? (to take just one of the constant bakwas that chowk indians write). or that islam is an evil religion? (another piece of indian bakwas).

i dont have a problem with people like you are SPY who I know are not here for the purpose of abusing their anonymity on the internet - until you start doing what you seem to think is your naitonal duty of pretending that these half-brained communal psychopaths who cant bear to even call Pakistan by its name are some kind of journalists.

Once again the racist Pakistan haters are back in action here, discussing extreme hypothetical scenarios.

Wait till you guys are terrorised by Naxalites & Maoists. Wait till your army enters the 9 states that are "affected" by maoists. Gujarat & Bombay are already infested by RSS stalwarts, so there is no fun in being happy over what transpires in Pakistan.

Calling Uncle JayP


Anyone remember him?

He was the only one predicting, the current situation in Pakistan almost 7 years back. He also predicted Iraqisation of Pakistan.

Pity Tahmed and his types hounded the poor man from here.

Re: # 96
coward...
danger never comes alone :-(

Re: # 110 Pavo

Thanks for the clarification. Was the Brigadier who was shot not in charge of site security? (I could, of course, be wrong in believing that he was not MI).

pew your research needs brushing up so think before you put ur brilliant thoughts into the immortal pages of chowk interacts.traditionally the pakistani military intelligence is headed by two star and the ISI by a three star after 1971.So the deputy dear brilliant pew is a brigadier.
Agha Amin

Re: # 105 Pavo

"...the intruders killed the number two of military intelligence yards from his office is a grave matter..."

I am sure that your pun was not intended :)

But, who is this #2 man of MI? We didn't hear about it. He should be a general, but no general was killed.

On a different note, here is a summary of the last days' blitz in the NYT:

The spree began with a suicide bombing of the World Food Program of the United Nations in the capital 10 days ago. Then, militants attacked a busy bazaar in Peshawar, the provincial capital of the North-West Frontier Province. After the siege at the military headquarters in Rawalpindi, militants hit an army convoy at a crowded market in Sangla, adjacent to the Swat Valley.

The army announced its intention to launch a ground offensive against insurgents in South Waziristan two months ago but so far has refrained from using ground troops, instead using airstrikes over the militant stronghold.

In a separate episode on Thursday, a suicide car bomber rammed his vehicle into a police station in the northwestern city of Kohat. At least eight people were reported killed in the attack, including three police officers, officials said.

What's the motto of the paki army again? something to do with jihadi by the way of allah....? prophetboy? anyone...

GHQ is ‘out of bounds’ for Malik
By Syed Irfan Raza
Thursday, 15 Oct, 2009 | 06:50 AM PST

ISLAMABAD, Oct 14: Interior Minister Rehman Malik faced an embarrassing situation on Wednesday when he was not allowed to enter the General Headquarters (GHQ) in Rawalpindi during a “scheduled” visit to attend “a ceremony” to pay homage to the army personnel who died during the siege on Saturday.

Pakiland's support to the jihadis comes back to bite them in the rear..(thumbs up wala icon)

Gunmen, Bombers Hit 4 Sites in Pakistan; 37 Die

ISLAMABAD, Oct. 15 --The Pakistani cultural capital of Lahore came under assault this morning, as bands of militants and suicide bombers stormed three security installations in attacks that appeared to be coordinated. Around the same time, a suicide bomber blew up part of a police station in the Northwestern city of Kohat.

The death toll from the four attacks was 37, wire services said.

The attacks, coming less than a week after a deadly assault and hostage situation at the army headquarters in Rawalpindi, prompted questions about Pakistani security forces' ability to prevent an insurgency based in mountainous tribal areas from terrorizing the whole of the world's fifth most-populous nation.

"They are exploiting the weakness of our intelligence agencies," Javaid Hussein, a retired brigadier, told Dawn television. "You will see many more attacks on security installations, on police installations."

The Pakistani Taliban claimed responsibility for the Lahore attacks, according to one television news report. Two of the three targets -- a Federal Investigation Agency and two police training centers -- had been struck by insurgents before, authorities said.

PAVO: an article in the Wall street journal(or as prophet tahmed calls any publication that runs contrary to his deluded worldview: bastion of hindu hate)

Pakistan's Partial War on Terror
The deadly results of cooperation with terrorists.

By C. CHRISTINE FAIR

The past week's spate of suicide bombings in Pakistan and the siege of its military headquarters are again casting the spotlight on that country's war on terror. Attention will—and should—focus in particular on Islamabad's many failures to control militants on its own soil. Pakistan is now paying the heavy price for its earlier attempts to use terrorist groups as strategic tools.

For decades Islamabad has viewed and used terrorist groups as assets to be cultivated. Before the Soviet invasion, Pakistan used Islamist militants for operations in India and Afghanistan. Today, Pakistan aids the Afghan Taliban mainly in the belief that if U.S. and international commitment to Afghanistan wanes, it would be better to be friendly with a group like the Taliban that can keep Indian influence in the country at bay—the same logic behind Pakistan's pre-2001 support for the Taliban.

At home, Pakistan has tolerated a raft of terrorist groups ostensibly linked to Kashmir, such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group responsible for last year's Mumbai massacre, continues to operate under various names. Its leadership roams free and its offices remain open. Jaish-e-Mohammad, responsible for several attacks in India and against international and domestic targets within Pakistan, is similarly unconstrained. Pakistan's track record against so-called anti-Shi'a militias, such as the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipha-e-Sahaba-e-Pakistan, has been equally lackluster despite vicious attacks against Shi'a who are perhaps one-fourth of Pakistan's population. These varied groups are ensconced not in the unruly tribal areas, but in Pakistan's most populous and militarized province: the Punjab. Punjab hosts six army corps, yet these groups proliferate and operate with impunity literally under the nose of Pakistan's army.

Islamabad has long believed it could exploit these groups for strategic aims while preventing them from causing too much "unapproved" trouble. The government would have likely come to some modus vivendi with the Pakistan Taliban, had its leaders agreed to focus upon Afghanistan rather than Pakistan. Islamabad cracked down militarily on the Pakistani Taliban earlier this year only after it was clear that deal-making had failed. With respect to the so-called Kashmiri groups, Pakistan only sought to moderate their activities to prevent serious Indo-Pakistan crises and international pressure while maintaining their basic operational readiness.

Now it's possible to see exactly how shortsighted and dangerous Pakistan's strategy has been. First, all these groups are more interconnected than at first might appear, and in ways that make them much harder to control than Islamabad may believe. Lashkar-e-Jhangvi shares membership and resources with Jaish-e-Mohammad and the Pakistan Taliban. Both Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Jaish-e-Mohammad facilitate the movement of persons outside of Pakistan into the terrorist sanctuaries in the tribal areas, provide suicide bombers to the Pakistan Taliban, and facilitate high-value operations throughout Pakistan. With the exception of Lashkar-e-Taiba, all support the Afghan Taliban and all are close to al Qaeda. They all share connections with Pakistan's intelligence agencies and some civilian leaders.

Some of these groups have now bitten the hand that once fed them. These groups are vexed by Pakistan's support of the U.S. fight against al Qaeda, provision of logistical support for the Afghan war to undermine the Taliban, the state's complicity in Washington's use of drones in the tribal areas and Pakistan's own military operations in the Pashtun belt.

It is unlikely the recent attack on the Army headquarters, perpetrated by Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, will focus some minds in Pakistan on this complex problem. Pakistanis prefer to attribute their terrorism problem to blowback from the U.S.- and Saudi-sponsored anti-Soviet jihad, or to blame India for domestic attacks. Polls I have conducted suggest Pakistanis are unaware of both the activities of Pakistani militant groups operating on their soil and the long-standing ties between these groups and their security and intelligence agencies.

In reality, Pakistan needs to own responsibility for its mistakes and reverse course swiftly. Other countries, especially the U.S., can help, but so far have shown a worrying lack of interest in doing so.

Washington has largely failed to understand the problem of Pakistan's militant landscape and forge appropriate policy. Since September 11, the U.S. has worked to secure Pakistan's sustained fight against al Qaeda, yet the U.S. demanded Pakistani action against the Afghan Taliban only from 2007 onward. The delay happened in part because the Taliban was believed to have been vanquished. Even when the Taliban re-emerged in 2005, Washington was slow to prompt Pakistan to act for fear of compromising its cooperation against al Qaeda. Similarly, Washington has pressured Pakistan to act against the so-called Kashmiri groups only episodically, and only when their actions have sparked near-war crises between India and Pakistan. And Washington has tended to see anti-Shi'a groups as a domestic problem rather than the threat to regional security they really are.

During this period, the U.S. disbursed more than $13 billion to compensate or reward Pakistan for its cooperation in the war on terror even while it undermined the goals of the same. Congress is improving on this record. Late last month, the legislature proposed tying $7.5 billion of aid over five years to the strengthening of Pakistan's civilian governance. The bill also proposes binding security assistance to Pakistan's efforts to eliminate militant groups that have previously been viewed as state assets. The Pakistani army balked at these conditions because they would limit its ability to use terrorists strategically. But precisely for that reason, it's a good move.

Pakistan's efforts to fight the bad terrorists while protecting the good militants cannot be sustained. The latest string of attacks and bombings shows the high cost this policy is inflicting on Pakistan itself. Nor can the lackadaisical international response to Pakistan's action and inaction in the backdrop of enormous financial largess be justified. Despite army balking, Washington should insist that Islamabad act against terrorism comprehensively as a condition for further security assistance. In the end, Pakistanis may benefit most from such steadfast commitment.

Ms. Fair is an assistant professor in the Security Studies Program at the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University.

plenty of naieve layman here.the fact that the intruders killed the number two of military intelligence yards from his office is a grave matter.but who cares in pakistan where the military intelligence and ISI failed miserably despite being headed by silent soldier and hameed gul in detecting 35 miles of indian infiltration in siachen in 1983-84.
Agha Amin

Tahmed32: I had earlier today written as follows:

"But do you realise these patting / comparision / appreciation have no meaning the next time such event occurs. And you cannot deny that Pak is more vulnerable (happens every week) to the terrorist attack than India."

Before you could respond, the terrorists have been faster than you and have striked at Lahore.

I sincerely wish your country comes out ASAP of this mess.

Economist (WSJ): Pakistan's Partial War on Terror. (did chowk Indians write this article)
Topic started by iron_mask on Oct 15, 2009 2:20:30 am

I got to this article from the Economist site...but is apparently an article from the WSJ..

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100014240527487041072045744700040527 09162.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

the points raised:

(1)Attention will—and should—focus in particular on Islamabad's many failures to control militants on its own soil. Pakistan is now paying the heavy price for its earlier attempts to use terrorist groups as strategic tools.

(2)At home, Pakistan has tolerated a raft of terrorist groups ostensibly linked to Kashmir, such as Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. Lashkar-e-Taiba, the group responsible for last year's Mumbai massacre, continues to operate under various names. Its leadership roams free and its offices remain open. Jaish-e-Mohammad, responsible for several attacks in India and against international and domestic targets within Pakistan, is similarly unconstrained. Pakistan's track record against so-called anti-Shi'a militias, such as the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi and Sipha-e-Sahaba-e-Pakistan, has been equally lackluster despite vicious attacks against Shi'a who are perhaps one-fourth of Pakistan's population. These varied groups are ensconced not in the unruly tribal areas, but in Pakistan's most populous and militarized province: the Punjab. Punjab hosts six army corps, yet these groups proliferate and operate with impunity literally under the nose of Pakistan's army.
...........................................


Actually the article is like as if the Chowk Indians have writen it and the WSJ just printed it with another byline!

Tahmed32, please tell me if my assertion, that this article was writen by Chowk Indians is correct or not.

Re: # 100 Tahmed32 says: "I was responding to your original post where you had listed all the negatives about Pakistan."

- I would not call them "negatives", but rather pointed, unbiased questions about the Pak nation's health. I am only interested in knowing how a Pakistani feels about the current state, events happening in his / her country. Do they want to brush it away as Indian propaganda, or deny it's existence or it is normal to have them or something is being done - serious introspection and corrective actions taken to fix them.

"As for this man's comments - now that his beloved taliban have been given a thrashing by the military in Swat, and more to come in Waziristan, is it any surprise that he has nothing good to say about the army from which he draws a pension?? The less said about him the better."
- I have no clue of this man or any of the parties mentioned - Taliban, Pak army, Swat, Waziristan, pension etc.
- All that I know / believe is that if Pakistan comes out of the India fixation a large number of problems in this sub-continent can be solved.

Re: # 54 tahmed32: "the things you listed these retards have been harping about over and over again on chowk for over ten years now, while pretending india was some kind of USA"
- I was not expecting such a deflecting answer from you. If similar grave situations that were listed for Pakistan, would have been happening in India, I would have no hesitation in accepting the reality and our problems. India is definitely "Not USA". We are much behind them, but we have made significant progress to bridge the gap. The world also accepts that.

"the BJP government tried mightily in the 1990's (by exploiting world fears about Pakistan's nuclear weapon program) and failed."
- Agreed. Go ahead and be my guest to point out more such Indian failures. If true I will accept them.

"Pakistan has grown from strength to strength in the meantime"
- I would like to believe you but the stark questions that stare in your face give a different picture.
- On financial strength: Are there no IMF loans taken in last 6 months or it is normal for the president / PM of a country to ask such loans.
- On stability/safety: Are regular explosions / suicide attacks not happening or it is normal to have them.

Note: I dont gain any satisfaction nor do I want to get the win feeling or make you feel lost, by throwing such pointed questions at you, but it reflects that our yardsticks, meaning of normal conditions, meaning of gaining in strength etc. have become very different.

"from neutralizing India militarily in 1998 to (as Sen. Kerry said"
- But that could not prevent India from making an all out attack and evict your soldiers from kargil.
- You want to ignore the loss in a real battle but feel happy getting a certificate from a US senator.

"becoming a vibrant democracy - not by merely preserving what the british gave indians on a silver spoon..but by shedding blood and grabbing power from a dictator"
- Its your internal matter. None of our business whether you are vibrant or falling. Although personally I want Pak to be a vibrant democracy. But another one of your answer comparing with India.
- Do you have confidence on the stability of your present govt. Can you vouch in front of all that the present govt will last its full term, or the militry dictatorship will never return. I sincerly wish the militry does not come again, but wishing is one thing, actually happening is another.

"some day when India grows out of its pettiness and communal mindset and accepts the reality of Pakistan instead of trying to "paint it away"
- I have already told you, most Indians dont know much about Pakistan and have accepted, happy at the creation of Pakistan.
- Why are you worried about the Indians "paint it away" for Pakistan. India is no painting country in the world. We are an IT (Infromation Technology) conuntry. We are happy whatever way you paint on your own country. Grow up and take ownership of your image/paint, rather than blaming Indians.

"Pakistan will still be there to extend the hand of friendship."
- This is the most sensible statement from your post. But the ground reality is far from it. Your ISI does not believe in it and its activities are increasing everywhere in our country - fake currency notes, kabul embassy attack, increase in Kashmir terrorism etc. You need to convince the ISI / Pak army to see India as a friend.

SPY #98: I was responding to your original post where you had listed all the negatives about Pakistan.

As for this man's comments - now that his beloved taliban have been given a thrashing by the military in Swat, and more to come in Waziristan, is it any surprise that he has nothing good to say about the army from which he draws a pension?? The less said about him the better.

arjun...
I felt bedu32 is one of the most hilarious persons...
http://www.defence.pk/forums/world-affairs/36167-ghq-attack-india-st rikes-again-zaheerul-hassan.html

Here you see...his brother Zaheerulla Hassan is accusing India of attacking GHQ of Pakistan....

Re: # 84 Tahmed32 says: "And that was better than anything Indians have ever been able to do."

You want to feel happy comparing the pak army effort against the Indians. Go ahead nobody can stop from patting yourself. If you want an appreciation from my side, you have it.

But do you realise these patting / comparision / appreciation have no meaning the next time such event occurs. And you cannot deny that Pak is more vulnerable (happens every week) to the terrorist attack than India.

Secondly I am surprised that you are so much "India focussed" and want to see yourself better than India that you are completely missing the big message in the article. "The most crucial and grave question is that the Pakistani military seems to have lost in a great degree its coercive value and moral deterrence.” Also read the last para again.

“Sad is the story. Hilarious are the praises being heaped on the military's response. Where is the honour and dignity of danger in overcoming six well motivated irregulars by a commando force outnumbering them by 100 to 1. This is not a criticism. I am not a paid journalist. This is a call for reflection. Serious reflection and serious inner thinking that may be the spur to serious reorganisation in the Pakistani military. The enemy is not in Waziristan or Afghanistan. The enemy is our own damn inefficiency and complacency. It merits serious thinking at all plains, tactical,operational and strategic.”

Tahmed: Does you post reflect your Serious reflection and serious inner thinking.

this article seems far too personally emotional to be rational......

.....one needs to compare this with other similar scenarios, in other countries.....

ghq is located in the heart of a metropolis.....this is the main problem.....anything located in such a central place, cannot put in security perimeter, way beyond its buildings......which is, probably, the easiest way to secure a place.....

.....this is why ghq's should be in the boondocks somewhere, as should most, if not all, military establishments......the british had set them up like this, in present day pakistan (which was the boondocks of india, at that time)......however, now sprawling cities have grown up around them.......

anyone driving close to the ghq can throw gernades etc. and get through the first set of gaurds......those gaurds cannot open fire, until they are sure who's who.....by that time, most of them will be dead......

once the terrorits are inside.....then they can enter a builiding and hold people hostage.....which is what they did......this can be done at the air headquarters or naval headquarters also......

someone could just take a car and blast it into the door......

after the terrorists got in, the army was able to get rid of them, and free the hostages, out of which three were killed.........not sure what else any other military in the world could have been able to do, in such a situation......

the main problem is having such huge military installations in the center of cities......they need to be moved out to remote areas, with very well defined perimeters, separated from the builidings by large distances.......

http://news.rediff.com/report/2009/oct/15/pak-federal-investigation-agency-attac ked-2-dead.htm

Terrorists on Thursday attacked the headquarters of Pakistan's Federal Investigation Agency in Lahore [ Images ], killing two children and taking two others hostage.
Television reports said four gunmen had stormed the building.

The FIA building has been cordoned off.

These numbers have increased since the then.

Peshawar also a blast.

Every where blasting. Very time testing period for Pakistan.

bedu32...
red flagging is OK, but see this...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8306350.stm

"I am scared of the fact that I might see the end of Pakistan I my lifetime"

kuppu...
There were 2 options left for Pervez Mussraf, when Richard Armitage called him at the midnight and made his pant stained...
either you kill your countrymeny or NATO will kill both Pakistani army and common pakis/jihadis....

The purpose of creation of Pakistan was to promote Islam/barbarism...and they were in their right path, until they crossed the limit....

sad part is that the sane people in pakistan, are not coming to terms with the fact that terrorism or supporting terror groups are not a good thing for their internal security. Pakistan still remains a rich soil for jehad mentality.

tahmed32...
Pakistan was supposed to be Beduinistic slave of Saudi Arabia...If US forces it's pet dog to behave like human, then that will be gross injustise to Pakistan...and, when US diverts it's attention, Pakistan will be again under the umbrella of Saudi Arabia, Islam, mosque etc... whatever baggage you get with that 7th century bedjuin gangster's theology.....Somonw suggested that LUMS etc. are true representation of Pakiland...whaoao, but is it what for Pakistan was created? I guess not....Suadi arabia and ummah should help Pakistan to get out from the clutch of USA....

tahmed32 #20:

What happened to the American style Counter Insurgency training that Pakis got....to save themselves from their own Jihadis....

Looks like ur army kids are slow learners.....

#62 Posted by Pew_Research,

Yeah ... he was in the 'SSG' of Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami's 313 Brigade, not the Pakistan Army. But at the time it was just an extension of the Pak Army.

And what about the other guy? You failed to mention him. Was he SSG or a male nurse?

prophetboy...when was the last time you said something funny? even unintentionally like capt clueless...

running-from-chowkidar-monkey-man, and now sri-ram-not-cool-not-Al-either running to declare victory. i am really in trouble now.
:-(

#84

At the end of the day, your butt was handed to you on a silver platter. It was done in a very classy manner. That is now being acknowledged by one and all.

Of course, you were asking for it. And you got what you so richly deserved. Now you are acting like a petulant child. That is icing on the cake. ;-)

If you blow a gasket and have a meltdown, it will make my year :-)

Go for it... I am sure you can think of some Hindu gods to heap abuse on. Go on... rant about the "Monkey God" or "Code Coolies" .. It will make you feel good I promise you....

Or, how about a sermon on your version of the "religion of peace".....

pavo...your security services are still breeding the jihadi snake..

Taliban present in Quetta, claims US envoy

A US official in Pakistan has again claimed that the Taliban militants have their presence in Quetta - main city of Balochistan province, urging the government to take necessary action against them. “They have their existence in Quetta and the Government of Pakistan should root them out from here,” US Consul General Stephen G. Fakan told the newsmen during a press conference here Wednesday. He warned of occurrence of Waziristan-like situation in the province if according to him the ‘necessary action’ was not taken against Taliban in Quetta, a private TV channel reports.

damn alephnull...that was funny...

I am in awe of the rush to applaud Nobel Laureate Professor AlephNull for his brilliant satire and dripping sarcasm.

Of course, at the end of the day the fact remains that a well planned attack was quickly ended and lives saved by Pakistani forces. And that was better than anything Indians have ever been able to do.

But when did little things like facts come in the way of chowk experts???

Alpha:

India should have responded, and will, in future, respond vigorously. This message is clear to all state (ex or otherwise) and non-state actors, who must receive it.

Comparison is silly. It is comparing apples and oranges. Mumbai there were innocent unarmed civilians, GHQ attack was an attack on the army's bulls-eye, where army and no one else is in control.

In both attacks, terrorist succeeded in making their statement and in meeting their objectives.

Re: # 68

Aleph, how long did it take you to write that biting satire??? Agree with Che Gue here! Hope you have it stored besides this place for future self-amusement. :)

Hope all other serious questions are being "resolved".

Hahahah aleph..that was funny man! You own this tahmed fella!

#70 Posted by tahmed32

[Alephnull #68: good attempt. your dripping sarcasm drowns out any substance you may have to add.]

Once again tahmed has proved conclusively that his opponent has nothing of substance to add. In sharp contrast to his own posts.

#69 Posted by tahmed32

[#67 good. you attempted to do your homework.]

You have the attitude down pat. Now if only you could back it up with some substance.

[Who did I say was talking about Pakistan? ]

"And Pakistan has grown from strength to strength in the meantime - from neutralizing India militarily in 1998 to (as Sen. Kerry said only yesterday in responding to the rejection of even the hint of any "strings" in the national assembly) becoming a vibrant democracy"

Since you agreed, it's also your point of view. This makes you an idiot.

You have been misguided about your command of the English language by fellow Pakis. What you wrote does not make clear which part of the sentence was a quote from Kerry.

[As for your insults to the prophet muhammed]

Which "insults"? It is historically correct to state that your role-model was a pedophile (53yrs/6yrs) and a mass murderer (600 unarmed civilians butchered, on one occasion).

You are getting your facts confused with the onset of senility.

#68

AoA! Brilliant!

Another "matric":

Public communications. In Mumbai there was non-stop coverage by news media which allowed the Indian commandos to stay fully informed of what was going on. In Pindi, due to an unfortunate news blackout, the kammandus had to rely on their own reconoissance and get their own news. This undoubtedly made the job much harder.

are we sure all the "militants" were killed-captured? maybe some were already "inside" on security detail etc. they all spoke panjabi-ordoo right?

Re: # 68
This is a classic post!

Re: # 73 TAhmed32, you seem to be on a totally different course these days. Has someone hijacked your account and masquerading as you? This is so very unlike your usual jovial and convivial self.

hahahahahaha good one Alephnull.

Ironic sarcasm, espcially neo-modernistic one is good to read. Very Rushdie there....

#72 normal people would consider that piece of bs masquerading as sarcasm in #70 as an error of commission.

tahmed32 #71

Sahib, if you believe I've left out any significant matrics in my comparative accounting, let me know and I'll endeavour to rectify the omission.

corrected #70

Alephnull #68: good attempt. however, your dripping sarcasm drowns out any substance you may have to add.

Alephnull #68: good attempt. your dripping sarcasm drowns out any substance you may have to add.

#67 good. you attempted to do your homework.

now next step: Who did I say was talking about Pakistan? (I know you are stupid, but dont worry - we'll go through this step by step).

As for your insults to the prophet muhammed - that is not the issue we are discussing and you are merely gibbering incoherently. (I know you are deranged, so it is OK - it is hard to write a coherent post for you. But dont worry - I'll help you stick to the topic).

tahmed32 #20:

{{What are your views on the relative performance of the Indian military in responding to Mumbai vs the Pakistan military in responding to the GHQ attack? Matrics related to hostages saved vs killed, and elapsed response time would be good.}}

This is indeed a pertinent question. I think we should look at many matrics, not just the two that sahib has suggested, to compare the performances of the two militaries and draw appropriate conclusions.

Geography and terrain related factors

(0) Number of locations attacked by terrorists: The 26/11 terrorists attacked only a couple of locations within a compact area of Mumbai, whereas the 10/10 attackers were present in multiple locations within the sprawling GHQ complex. Thus the Pakistani security forces had a much more difficult task to perform.

(1) Suitability of locations for terrorist versus security forces: The locations taken over by the 26/11 terrorists, such as the Taj Mahal Hotel, the Oberoi Trident, and Nariman House Jewish Center, are basically open structures where it is very difficult for terrorists to hide; whereas the GHQ complex, with its multitude of rooms, labyrinthine corridors, secret passageways and such, is ideally suited for a terrorist takeover and difficult terrain for security forces. Once again the Pakistani security forces had a much more difficult task.

(2) Prior familiarity of security forces with sites: Mumbai, as the site of multiple prior terrorist attacks, was a location that the Indian security forces ought to have known intimately. They must have had reliable and accurate maps and plans of the Taj Mahal Hotel and other locations attacked. By contrast, no one could reasonably have expected the PA's GHQ to be attacked by terrorists; it must have been terra incognita to the SSG. Here too, the Pakistani forces had a much more difficult task.

(3) Prepositioning of security forces: Mumbai is the home base of India's National Security Guards (NSG), whereas Pakistan's SSG units had to be rushed to Rawalpindi from as much as 70 miles away. Despite this, Pakistani forces reacted much faster than their Indian counterparts.

Training, equipment of the terrorists; assistance from accomplices

(0) Training and equipment of the terrorists: The Mumbai attackers were completely untrained amateurs who were minimally equipped with barely effective weaponry. By contrast the 10/10 attackers were highly trained commandos with carefully selected assault weaponry, explosives and other equipment.

(1) Assistance from accomplices: The Mumbai attackers had no external help during the 26/11 attacks. By contrast the 10/10 attackers were in constant touch with Indian and Israeli handlers who were tipping them off on the location of the Pakistani security forces opposing them.

So the Pakistani security forces had the more difficult task to perform by far against much more formidable opposition.

Leadership of security forces

(0) Leadership: The Indian security forces had incompetent leadership or none at all. The officers stayed at a safe distance from the action; the men were left to fend for themselves. By contrast, the Pakistani officers led from the front. No less that a Brigadier-General and a Lieutant-Colonel embraced shahadat in the course of the initial response to the 10/10 terrorists, thus spurring their men to greater feats of valour.

In summary, the Indian security forces, who had a comparatively simple task in easy terrain against barely trained opposition, bungled it completely, let 165 people be slaughtered, and were humiliated in full view of the world for nearly four days. They were shown up as an incompetent leaderless rabble.

Whereas the Pakistani security forces accomplished a very difficult task in a location ideal for a terrorist takeover against highly trained opponents, in barely twenty hours, with a loss of only 16 killed. They proved themselves to be a well-trained, disciplined, professional and combat-ready force and a corps of officers and gentlemen.

#64 Posted by tahmed32

[So, you are stupid as well as being deranged. Re-read what I wrote.]

I just read the gems of wisdom again:

"And Pakistan has grown from strength to strength in the meantime - from neutralizing India militarily in 1998 to (as Sen. Kerry said only yesterday in responding to the rejection of even the hint of any "strings" in the national assembly) becoming a vibrant democracy"

So here's ANOTHER brain-buster:

Who's the stupid deranged idiot - is it a) the one who is enamoured of (and frequestly quotes) a pedophile, mass-murdurer and lives his life according to what he said, or is b) it someone who does not?

I'm going with a).

Any war is launched based on four fundamental factors in which non-avoidability is primary in its strategy. Use of proportional force to win the war is must. This is only possible when one can easily isolate the targets. None of these factors were analyzed by the Bush administration. He was using belligerent language with sheer arrogance of a white supremacist. Wanted: Live or Dead. Most people who had sympathy with America after 9/11 started thinking otherwise. Pakistan army joined the war for two reasons. First, after their defeat in 1971, mostly they became a bunch of cowards. A person who joins army to pillage, rule, build bungalow and amass wealth has no interest in fighting and dying. If they could not face Indians in 1971 it was impossible for them to stand against any aggression by NATO. Second this cowardice further got mutated when Bush threw money to them. They constitute on an outmoded mercenary force which is most likely to be maintained by the west to fight for its vested interests in the region. The US spends over $10 billion per month in Iraq to maintain its army. This much amount is sufficient for Pak army to fight for 10 years. In other words Park army can fight for 80 years with one year US expenditure in Iraq. Not a bad bargain. But the problem is, can Taliban be isolated? People may not want to live under Taliban but also they hate and suspect their own army. Only cronies, sons/daughters of army officers and few chewing on imperial Haddi are supporters of army in Pakistan anyway. The attack on GHQ is just a start. The question for the west: How long they want to run this war furnace fueled with native blood?

Pavo Cavalry (Agha Amin).

You are making a big deal of this attack. These suicidal attacks can be carried out virtually anytime, anywhere. No building is immune. Apparently, the building security did succeed. From an operational perspective, this attack was not all that spectacular, and was militarily insignificant.

The larger question is why some former military men are turning against their own erstwhile masters.

#63 So, you are stupid as well as being deranged. Re-read what I wrote.

#61 Posted by tahmed32

[My response: Between the two of us, one is definitely deranged. ]

Yes. Now the question is, is it the one who thinks Pakistan is a "VIBRANT DEMOCRACY", or the one who thinks that ISLAMIC Pakistan (where the Constitution is Sharia-compliant) should not be lecturing SECULAR India on it's "communal" mindset.

Re: # 52 Zeemax

"...Ilyas Kashmiri was never in the army..."

Enjoy reading this link:

http://www.thenews.com.pk/top_story_detail.asp?Id=24626

pay special attention to the section which states, "Very few people know that Ilyas Kashmiri was a former SSG commando of Pakistan Army."

ajeya: #57 writes:
"Hahahahahahahahaha....hahahahaha...hahahaha..haha...."

ajeya #58 writes:
"Hahahahahahahahaha....hahahahaha...hahahaha..haha....hahahahaha hahahahahaha.....ooooohhhh!!!!"

ajeya #60 asks me: "Are you completely deranged?"

My response: Between the two of us, one is definitely deranged.

[The good news is: some day when India grows out of its pettiness and communal mindset and accepts the reality of Pakistan....]

Yes, SECULAR India should grow out of its communal mindset and accept the reality of the ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKILAND.

[...instead of trying to "paint it away" - Pakistan will still be there to extend the hand of friendship.]

Oh, so Pakistan, will STILL be extending it's "hand of friendship" like it is doing currently? You mean more Mumbai carnages, more LeT terrorists in Kashmir, more innocents killed?

Are you completely deranged?

If Soviet Union could unravel inspite of having nuclear weapons, what is different about Pakistan?
If member states/people do not want to be part of a
country, can nuclear weapons stop them from doing so?

It is OK for people to say all sort of jingoistic things
sitting 10,000 miles away about a country that they have
decided not to be part of, but if some of the residents do
not hold such an entity sacred and would want to split,
it will happen.

#54 Posted by tahmed32

I missed this little gem -

[becoming a vibrant democracy...]

Hahahahahahahahaha....hahahahaha...hahahaha..haha....hahahahaha hahahahahaha.....ooooohhhh!!!!

Pakistan, a VIBRANT DEMOCRACY!!!! Hahahahahahahahaha.... hahahahaha...hahahaha.hahahahaha......


A Paki to end all Pakis.....hahahahahaha......

#54 Posted by tahmed32

[And Pakistan has grown from strength to strength in the meantime...]

Hahahahahahahahaha....hahahahaha...hahahaha..haha....

Good one...

Nobody can beat a Paki for self-delusion. No one.

This GHQ attack is nothing compared to coming carnage and it would radiate from Kabul mainly east. Current efforts at containment are failing and moving to building castles. Is it going to be siege of Moscow or Constantinople? Any ideas military brains?

Re: # 45

Zeemax is right, militants penetrated the first perimeter but were unable to get through the second security check post. When they failed with their objective they then scrambled into the ancillary building. Snipers placed on strategic places were unable to differentiate the good guys from the bad guys but eventually succeeded in taking out four militants. What's not clear is the number of terrorists involved as there were some placed out side the gates who called journalists announcing their successful takeover of GHQ.

#51 SPY: "painted" by who and where?? a bunch of retards from India on chowk? the things you listed these retards have been harping about over and over again on chowk for over ten years now, while pretending india was some kind of USA!! this "paint" is something that fools only indians. reality cannot be hidden by this kind of "paint" for anyone except these retards themselves.

Forget these retards - even the Indian government cant fool the world - the BJP government tried mightily in the 1990's (by exploiting world fears about Pakistan's nuclear weapon program) and failed.

And Pakistan has grown from strength to strength in the meantime - from neutralizing India militarily in 1998 to (as Sen. Kerry said only yesterday in responding to the rejection of even the hint of any "strings" in the national assembly) becoming a vibrant democracy - not by merely preserving what the british gave indians on a silver spoon, but by shedding blood and grabbing power from a dictator. No amount of Indian denials and misrepresentations can change this reality. India can only paint its spiteful wishes about Pakistan in its dreams - it fools no one else. And this petty and spiteful attitude hurts no one more than India itself - because (while Indians are too petty minded to see it today) the fact is that it is better to have friends than to have enemies. Even if the friends are the hated Pakistanis. The good news is: some day when India grows out of its pettiness and communal mindset and accepts the reality of Pakistan instead of trying to "paint it away" - Pakistan will still be there to extend the hand of friendship.

SPY: #47 I am sorry if you didnt get it. perhaps the above helps give you a non-indian pov. perhaps it doesnt.

SPY #46 you have your facts all wrong - those were not "rich tourists" at the Indian railway station. and when saving lives, you dont ask whether the lives are those of "rich foreign tourists" or not. nor is it relevant that the GHQ attackers included a traitor. the facts are as i had suggested you consider and discuss.

PAVO Saab,

"The fact that the battalion plus DSG soldiers although armed with G 3 and SMG rifles just bolted away is a grave matter."

If this is correct, that is indeed shameful. However, is there any evidence that 10 Punjab or the DSG threw their weapons away and ran? Or are you simply maligning the poor jawans who did their job, some at the cost of their lives?

To quote the great A. E. Houseman, they

Followed their mercenary calling,
And took their wages and are dead

since "mercenary" is a favorite insult of yours for the PakArmy. Obviously somebody returned fire since four (?) of the attackers were killed almost immediately. Or did they embrace shahadat by detonating their bomb-vests and killing themselves?

I can well believe the initial reaction was wild confusion since that is what we as a people excel at; that it took too long for the reaction force to reach there, that officers took too long to react, that the initial reaction was panic and not coolness, etc. Just look at the shambolic confusion and inefficiency that characterizes all S. Asian anything. But, please, these level of insults?

And for men very much like those that you yourself commanded. You should be ashamed of yourself.

Illyas Kashmiri and the leader of the latest attack in Pindi were former Pak Army SSG men

Haha ... monkeys will be monkeys even if they call themselves researchers.

Ilyas Kashmiri was never in the army and the other guy was a male nurse in the Army Medical Corps.

SSG? Haha ... do you even know what these initials stand for?

Re: # 39 tahmed32 says "I must say that I am surprised at how even intelligent Indians (as opposed to the retarded parrots from India) like you are determined to paint Pakistan in negative colors."

How does Pakistan gets painted is entirely in the hands of Pakistani people, the events that happen in their country, how they portray themselves etc. The opinion we Indians (at least me) make or the rest of the world have, is the result of the image that Pakistan itself portrays.
You are wrong to say I am painting Pak in the negative colors. The rest of the world least cares about my / India's opinion or how do we paint Pakistan. But they are not fools to ignore the messages coming out of:
- regular blasts happening almost every week
- interferrance in neighbouring countries (India 9/11 and Afghanistan)
- support to the terrorist infrastructure (every terrorist attack happening anywhere in the world in the last decade has been groomed / links with Pakistan)
- Killing of its own leaders (Benzir assination, hanging of Bhutto)
- Financially weak position (seeking IMF loans)
- Unstable poilical situation (Frequent imposition of martial law, army overthrowing the civil rule)
- Selling nuclear weapons / technology illegally to rougue nations.

These are some of the actions/events of your country which give the negative image to the rest of the world and none of them have any India's hand in it. You are responsibile for your actions and its resultant image.

Re: # 10 Riaz

"...such an attack can be prevented in pre-launch stages with good intelligence. ..."

Yes, BUT, the best way of prevention is for the state to quash ALL these terrorist cells (there are no 'good' or 'bad' terrorists - they are all dangerous). The Pakistani state's tolerance of jihadis is now coming full circle, and these guys are turning on their former masters. Illyas Kashmiri and the leader of the latest attack in Pindi were former Pak Army SSG men who went over to the other side.

One has to return to the first principles of political science: A viable state must have a monopoly on the use of force. Pakistan ceded this to non-state actors, and is facing the consequences. India coddled the LTTE and Sikh extremist groups. You know the result as well as I do.

anyhoo...prophet tahmed(pbuhsrr) keeps telling us that the jihadis are arabs and stuff...

now it turns out - and pavo can confirm this - the people who attacked the paki army hq were punjabi jihadis...now are the arabs learning punjabi or have the punjabis become arabs now...

#47 Posted by SPY on October 14, 2009 6:12:51 am

prophetboy is telling people to look at the evidence presented?

precious....

Re: # 41 tahmed32: "Please take another look at the evidence I presented rather than ignoring it."

I am not ignoring it but frankly not getting it. Pardon me for that. Can you repeat / elaborate it for my benefit.

Re: # 41 tahmed32: I would not like to compare the perfromance of the two armies as the conditions were entirely different.

The Indian army was saving the international tourists, very rich pople, in an unknown terrain (hotels), while its hands were restricted to go "all out approach" due to international/business pressure, and most of the persons had already been killed by the time the army reached the scene. Also the terrorists were getting the complete guidance from their Pak sponsors.

The Pak army was saving its own army people at its headquarters (known location) from the killers (talibans were once created by the Pak army). The Pak situation is more of an in-house job as one earlier post commented "the taliban wipe their asses with rock and do not know the GHQ etc."

I am sure each army must have drawn their individual lessons and weaknesses to be plugged. But for civil people like you and me to compare such a performance has no meaning.

Agha,

That 6 plus armed men were roaming the GHQ for many hours and had the opportunity to kill many generals,an opportunity that they for some mysterious reasons chose not to exercise is a cause of grave strategic concern.

I have checked with several sources and this account appears to be incorrect. The militants were never anywhere near any general, which is why none was targeted or taken hostage as was the original intent i.e. to get a list of arrested militants released.

The first check post was breached but the second wasn't. The Brigadier and the Lt. Colonel both belonged to security detail near the second checkpoint and stepped out to see what was going on, and got hit. Then the militants made it to an ancillary service block nearby and held the 38 junior personnel present hostage.

If you have a reliable reference for your statement, I will stand corrected.

Re: # 27 tahmed32:

"why you believe Pakistan is in a "deadly embrace" with the US" – repeating again my earlier response. Your general population hates the USA, but your govt cannot survive without the aid / blessings from the USA, and Uncle Sam is perfectly happy at this arrangement. USA also has lot of suspicion on Pak army and that is why it is bringing stringent conditions in the aid bills. The USA also knows that they can get done their dirty things (i.e. fight talibans) only in a country like Pakistan. All three parties don’t see eye to eye but cannot divorce and get away from it. In short - The USA and Pak have some needs from the other but they also have great dislike for the other. This I call the deadly embrace.

“when the PM of Pakistan is meeting the Chinese President in China on even greater cooperation than what Pak-China have had the past 40 years. And at the same time the Pakistan Foreign Minister is visiting the US to make it clear that Pakistan does not recognize any strings (even if those "strings" are merely a restatement of what Pakistan is determined to do in any case - namely, send urstruly's people to hell) - and the US agrees wholeheartedly to make sure this is clear (see Kerry's statement yesterday, e.g.).”
– I have no comments on these statements. This is none of our (India) business as these are entirely your country’s relations with other countries in the world.

“please advise if you are pleased with the $7.5 billion from the US for socio-economic development for the poorest people in Pakistan or would you rather see the US attacking Pakistan (per the long-standing Indian dream lived out by your more pathetic countrymen every day on chowk).”
– yes I would be very much pleased that the aid reaches the poor / needy people. But it disturbs when Musharaff accepts that most (80% ???) of the 10.5 billion aid given earlier was siphoned off and used for building military capabilities against India. The indian opposition to aid arises due to the diversion right from the Soviet war days.
- I would definitely not like USA attacking Pakistan. But I would like to understand know why / how the two nations (i.e. USA, Pak) at one time are so cosy (aid, dependence on each other), and then suddenly this talk of attacking. Surely there is something wrong in the relationship, which only you can tell.

“why do you think India is the only country in the world that Pakistan does not get along with”.
- I strongly believe the two countries treat the relationship to be a zero-sum game. We do not discuss / resolve the issues one at a time, but rather bring all the past issues / history and make no progress. The same is true for most of the chowk people also. You start any disucssion and it ultimately brings in the 1000 years and all history. I would borrow from one of your earlier response. Take the past as facts and move on, look to future. That is missing.

“Is the rest of the world stupid”
– They do not share the past as India and Pak do, so no problems with other countries.

“only the Indians who understand why Pakistan should never have been created??”
- Most Indians now feel happy that Pak was created. I don’t blame Jinnah / Nehru or hindus, muslims for it. I simply believe that when the hindus / muslims (some sections of it) could not get along in those days (1947), so nothing wrong in moving away and live as per individual choice. I respect individual choices and decisions. However I would like to know how the Pakis feel about partition, and how much section of the Pak society still dreams of having a green flag on the red fort. Is it true that the Kasabs, Pak sponsored terrorists, Pak army still cherish those dreams and get inspired by the Ghazni, Ghori, Babur etc.

In general I find the Pakis to be more knowledgable of India and interferring in Indian affairs. They get ready support from some of the misguided Indians to create trouble within India such as Kashmir or Punjab in past. Indians on the other hand hardly know anything about Pakistan, and it surprises me when India is blamed for the internal trouble in Pakistan.

Agha Sahib - As usual, excellent analysis and article.

I have to reproduce an interact written by someone on another board about the Pak Army. Here goes:

"One really has to question the level of motivation of the ordinary soldier when you know the the top guns are on the the take (big-time; clue: missing millions). When you know, and see, that politics is being played every day, all around you. When you know that there are "elements" within the organisation that are in bed with "elements" of the Taliban, one day good and another day bad. When you know that retd generals are being bumped off from orders above. When you know that a key reason why you are working is to make a living and provide for your family in a corrupt state where jobs are few. When you know that you are in a civil war and are being asked to kill your compatriots. When you know you signed up actually to fight the Indians, but your team has never won anything off them. (And anyway those lucky indians across the boreder get a legit rum or whiskey to keep them warm on those cold nights, just like your generals.)When you believe that your enemy is probably less corrupt than your own top brass, save that they are jihadists and you think maybe there's something in it. When 80% of your countrymen hate the Americans, why should 80% of the military be an exception."

The last sentence really sums it all:

"When 80% of your countrymen hate the Americans, why should 80% of the military be an exception."

Here is the message for Islamists:

Everyone who has studied Islam knows that it can't compromise on anything. Islam must destroy Israel, they will never allow it to live in peace. One day in the not too distant future if certain forces in the Middle East get nuclear weapons they will try their luck. It is immaterial what happens to Israel.


I don't know if you know about the Samson option. It is the name for the second strike capability of Israel. It is a very impressive strike capability. The Israelis bought three Dolphin class submarines from Germany with enlarged torpedo tubes for launching cruise missiles. They have had nuclear weapons for at least 40 years and will have certainly have miniaturized them to fit into a cruise missile warhead. All of the Arabic capital cities will be in range.


They also have an intercontinental ballistic missile capability. Even a near miss on Israel will mean that they will react. No self respecting Israeli government could do otherwise, a wounded Israel would be easy prey for countries on it boarders Israel's response will be to cripple them all, so they can't take advantage. First an atomic bomb on the Aswan dam will keep Egypt quiet, Damascus will go along with Mecca and Medina. What will you do if you can't go on the Haj. It might make you concentrate your mind, but I doubt it.


Muslims will react as they have done b4, go on the rampage. Insurrections in the west will be put down with a hard hand no tear gas and rubber bullets, if an inflamed muslim mob leave the self imposed ghettos of London and Amsterdam and go on an infidel killing spree. You would do well to remember that we Infidels are exceptionally efficient at mass murder. You would also do well to remember what Teodor Roosevelt said, speak softly and carry a big stick and the infidels have some very big sticks.


America has at this moment three Carrier Battle squadrons stationed off the coast of Iran each with the destructive power equal to the total no of bombs dropped in the Second World War. It might not frighten you safe in the womb of the one true religion knowing from your scriptures that you have right on your side, and you will eventually win, but I would like to point out that from my reading of history that God is usually on the side with the big battalions. I am not anti anything by the way I am just pro reason, I try and use the facts to make my judgments and not rely on the fantastic fairy tales told by a set of holy men who like to walk around in public in ball gowns and party hats.

SPY: There is nothing disgusting in saving lives. Or in reacting promptly to terrorists. I was merely pointing this blind spot on your part to the excellent job done by the military.

As for the "third option" - it is "hidden in plain view". I already tried to bring it to your attention in my previous post, but you remain oblivious to it. Please take another look at the evidence I presented rather than ignoring it.

WASHINGTON: US President Barack Obama has approved the deployment of an additional 13,000 US troops to Afghanistan beyond the 21,000 he announced publicly in March, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday.

With friends like these.....

Re: # 20 tahmed32: I like interacting with you.

"What are your views on the relative performance of the Indian military in responding to Mumbai vs the Pakistan military in responding to the GHQ attack? Matrics related to hostages saved vs killed, and elapsed response time would be good."
I find it disgusting to compare the performance of the two armies based on the number of deads. Rather I would simply like to compliment the two armies for saving whatever lives they could. If they really need to be compared than compare their performance of the 3 wars and Kargil.

"As for your saying that Pakistanis are either terrorists or lackeys of the US - I suggest a third option...but I wont tax your mind on that. I must say that I am surprised at how even intelligent Indians (as opposed to the retarded parrots from India) like you are determined to paint Pakistan in negative colors."
I would definitely like to believe if someone can tell categorically that most of the Pakis are of the 3rd category. But than also tell the full picture. Why is the Kabul blast and Kshmir terrorism increasing after the betulla ahmed killing. Is it the case of the 1st and 2nd category is influential and decision making and ignoring the wishes of the peace lovers.

This is going to get really ugly, I think:

DERA ISMAIL KHAN: Tens of thousands of civilians have fled Pakistan's South Waziristan tribal region fearing an imminent army offensive against Taliban militants, officials said Wednesday.

Military and government officials vowed in June to launch an operation into the mountainous northwest stronghold of the Taliban and al-Qaeda, but so far only air raids and occasional artillery strikes have hit militant sanctuaries.

However, the wave of Taliban attacks killing 125 people in Pakistan since last Monday have stoked fears that a retaliatory ground onslaught is looming, sending more people fleeing into districts neighbouring South Waziristan.

‘People are coming out of the area and around 90,000 people have left the area and have been shifted to safer places in Dera Ismail Khan and Tank,’ said Shahab Ali Shah, the top administrative official in South Waziristan.

That figure was as of August 1, he said, but there has been a fresh exodus after 10 militants staged an audacious hostage siege at army headquarters near Islamabad on Saturday and Sunday, deeply embarrassing the military.

‘Again people have started coming out of the area because of the fear of an army operation,’ Amir Latif, chief administrative official in Tank district, told AFP. ‘We have started registering them and giving them help,’ Hameedullah Khan, a senior government official in Dera Ismail Khan, said that his district had registered about 8,300 families — up to 60,000 people — with the rest taking sanctuary in Tank and elsewhere.

An anti-Taliban offensive in northwest Swat valley earlier this year forced nearly two million people from their homes, creating a massive humanitarian crisis. Most have since returned home.

Residents said that life was becoming increasingly difficult in South Waziristan, with sporadic air strikes hitting in the mountains and a military blockade of key roads taking a harsh toll on civilians.

‘I left the area because the government is going to launch an operation against the Taliban,’ said Mohammad Hashim Khan, who left his hometown of Sarwakai for Dera Ismail Khan on Sunday with seven family members.

‘We were facing food shortages as forces have blocked various roads. Most of the residents are shifting their families to safer places.’

The army headquarters siege and three recent massive suicide blasts have shown the Taliban threat is far from quashed, despite the death of their leader Baitullah Mehsud in a US drone strike in South Waziristan on August 5.

oye lal jhanda wallay, terray ko salaam

Re: # 33 bhayya arjun, that is the mark of a true person. Saccha aadmi - dil mein, sar mein aur har jagah. baaki sab jo yahaan hain woh sab saccha admi naheen hain.

Pakistan: Airstrikes Killed 9 Militants

DERA ISMAIL KHAN, Pakistan (AP) -- Pakistani jets pounded militant hide-outs along the Afghan border and killed at least nine guerrillas, intelligence officials said Wednesday, part of a stepped-up campaign of airstrikes before an expected government offensive in South Waziristan.

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

#31 Posted by HPsauce on October 14, 2009 3:50:59 am

It always amazes me how one can have his head so far up his ass and still ride a moral high horse...

From yesterday's Frontline

Review: 'Frontline: Obama's War' on PBS

John Nagl, retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel who wrote the foreword to the military's latest counter-insurgency manual, is unrestrained when asked about the Pakistanis and their truthfulness or lack of it. "I absolutely have to hold my nose when I work with the Pakistani government," he said.

New Yorker writer Steve Coll summarizes: "This could not be a more complicated war. If you think about it, the United States is essentially waging a war against its own ally. The Taliban are a proxy of the government of Pakistan. We are an ally of the government of Pakistan. We are fighting the Taliban."

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

(Thumbs up wala icon)

In Pakistan, a Deadly Resurgence
Spate of Attacks Shows Taliban Waging 'a Real Kind of War'

By Karin Brulliard
Washington Post Foreign Service
Tuesday, October 13, 2009

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, Oct. 12 -- At summer's end, there were hints of optimism in the battle against Pakistan's Islamist insurgents. The military said it had routed the Taliban from the verdant Swat Valley. A CIA missile had killed the Pakistani Taliban's chief -- so shaking the group, U.S. and Pakistani intelligence officials said, that his likely successor was killed in a duel for the top spot. Bombings slowed.

But that successor, Hakimullah Mehsud, is alive, a military spokesman said Monday. And as a spate of mass-casualty attacks during the past week has proven, so is the Taliban.

"They have been able to regroup, and they now feel confident to take on the Pakistani state in the cities," said Hasan-Askari Rizvi, a professor and security analyst in Lahore. "They want to demonstrate that they have the initiative in their hands, rather than Pakistani authorities. So it's a real kind of war."

#27 Posted by tahmed32 on October 14, 2009 3:45:56 am

really prophetboy?

The afghans say you are sending terrorists into afghanistan. Iran shut the border with you all because you were sending in sunni nuts to blow up shit in iran.

So..other than these 3 countries, you get along well with all your neighbors.

#13 Posted by Urstruly on October 13, 2009 10:28:02 pm

IIRC, while the congress is in session, a bill automatically becomes law in a few days even if the president doesn't sign it.

SPY: Also, please describe in 20 words or less why you believe Pakistan is in a "deadly embrace" with the US when the PM of Pakistan is meeting the Chinese President in China on even greater cooperation than what Pak-China have had the past 40 years. And at the same time the Pakistan Foreign Minister is visiting the US to make it clear that Pakistan does not recognize any strings (even if those "strings" are merely a restatement of what Pakistan is determined to do in any case - namely, send urstruly's people to hell) - and the US agrees wholeheartedly to make sure this is clear (see Kerry's statement yesterday, e.g.). Finally, please advise if you are pleased with the $7.5 billion from the US for socio-economic development for the poorest people in Pakistan or would you rather see the US attacking Pakistan (per the long-standing Indian dream lived out by your more pathetic countrymen every day on chowk).

Finally, why do you think India is the only country in the world that Pakistan does not get along with. Is the rest of the world stupid and it is only the Indians who understand why Pakistan should never have been created??

prophet tahmed(pbuhsrr) and others...you should watch the latest Frontline to see how the US military really views Pakiland and the paki military.

Anyway..maulana urstruly might sit in canuckistan and fantasize all he wants, the paki army will STFU and bomb whoever it's told to bomb...From what I read, they're already bombing the jihadis in waziristan.

I agree
Tari has a khuruk which is prepetual
I think it comes from his deep seated inferiority complex which has orginated because of his lack of achievements in life and I am sure, because of an ugly face.

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

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

Re: # 18
"Any call related to hardware, software, networks etc. ultimately gets routed to Bangalore, Hyderabad or Gurgaon in India."

Agreed, you are good telephone operators!

Re: # 13

Do you live in Mrikan, Truly? Why do you always abuse the Army but never analyse or rationalise.

We need improvements, not your anti-Army comments.

SPY: What are your views on the relative performance of the Indian military in responding to Mumbai vs the Pakistan military in responding to the GHQ attack? Matrics related to hostages saved vs killed, and elapsed response time would be good.

As for your saying that Pakistanis are either terrorists or lackeys of the US - I suggest a third option...but I wont tax your mind on that. I must say that I am surprised at how even intelligent Indians (as opposed to the retarded parrots from India) like you are determined to paint Pakistan in negative colors.

Listen to the truth about Al-CIAda ('how did a small minority of a few handpicked young men developed the resolution to attack the citadel of Pakistani military') and Washing-ton ('whether these men had their organisational centre in Wazirstan or Afghanistan') instead of removing my comments.

And look at all the retired RAW majors descending on Chowq to comment on the situation!

Re: # 12 Ahmedmadani: Keep on dreaming. Whether USA sinks or China rises, that is a too big a topic to be put that straight way. You will be surprised that today the biggest supporters for a strong dollor / US economy is not the USA itself but China and Gulf countries. If USA sinks the biggest loosers will be China and Gulf countries who have given trillions of loans to USA. China's economy is heavily export oriented while Indian economy has a much higher internal conmsumption.

If USA sinks India would loose the softwarer / IT services but you will definitely be doomed for not getting the $1.5 billions annually and no IMF to support. Also before accepting China as your new masters, first check if they contributed anything to your begging bowls before the IMF stepped in.

Regarding the code coolies, you are living at least 15 years in the past. Today it is the Indians who run most of the IT / software companies in the world. Any call related to hardware, software, networks etc. ultimately gets routed to Bangalore, Hyderabad or Gurgaon in India.

Rather than think about imginary situations of India, China, USA etc, you must think how you can come out of the deadly embrace that Uncle Sam has given you. Your general population hates it, but your govt cannot survive without it, while Uncle Sam is perfectly happy at this arrangement. First be in control of your destiny rather than thinking about others. Anyhow keep on dreaming, it does not cost anything.

Re: # 5 Iron_mask says:

"the vast majority of the 160 Million who will stream into India". First the Indian borders with Pak today are well protected/fenced and would not allow the mass scale movement as it happened in 47 or in 71 (Bangladesh). But if the fences/security setup fails, it would really be a problem for India.
Alternately we can ask the 160 million to read Riaz's iLog about Pak is better than India, well fed than Indians, better HDI and all those indicators that he talks about. That should stop them from moving to India.

"Another eviction of huge proportions is in the offing if they do come into power." - Are you referring the LET/ilk coming to power. Although a Paki would be better placed to answer this, but my 2 cents are that this would not happen. Simple reason the LET / terrorist can work effectively only in the mountaineous/tribal regions but not in the flat plains or civil administration / population areas. They can cause havoc by striking as they have done at the GHQ, but they cannot evict out the current administration setup in entirity and take control of it. So no worries about the huge eviction.

"it might serve Pakistan better than the current crop of people ever did." - the same way they served the 18 year old swat girl (public flogging)

Re: # 4 Giani says : "If it (Pak) collapses, Indians are not likely to like the outcome at all - strange as this may sound. Imagine LET and ilk controlling the nuclear arsenal."

I would not like to take this line of thought. Whether Pak remains united or collapses, whether it is army or civilian or LET/ilk in power in Pak and which of the three will be better for India. All that is none of India's business and we cannot influence that. All these are hypothetical questions for future which nobody has seen and cannot be planned.

I would go with a simple approach of basics first - As long as pak views the India relationship as a zero sum game, it is a danger situation for India and we need to be prepard for any evantuality. What happens if Pak collpses we will worry once we reach that stage.

The attack on GHQ is a significant event but these things happen all the time. There are killings and suicides among American troops all the time. There are also bombing in Swat and Peshawar in recent days. This implies that tactic of using full force in controlling Taliban and their allies is not completely successful. It was employed when PPP got in power. It has not brought any dividends for army or PPP. This means going back to the drawing board.
KL bill has brought the fissures out in the open and army would lay the blame squarely on PPP. KL bill is powerful and a beautiful trap that sucked in all players foreign and domestic. It surely lends clarity to American goals and how they perceive the interests of regional players. It will be fun seeing them backtrack, lie and hide.

Fighting season comes to close in a month and I don’t see any military action starting now. It is semiannual political season in AFPak and also in Washington. PPP has painted itself in a corner without any real friends. They will come out with a bigger round of reconciliation. Stay tuned.

Re: # 1 ellora: You have put my thoughts in a better way than I could have attempted. Very much agree to these points.

tahmed32: Probably you can also clarify it here. Ellora's questions/points are the ones that I wanted to hear out from Akber and you in post#94, #95 in the article on "Mr President, stop the war". But none of you answered it straight.

Looks like the Pak society/army/govt is at cross roads with a sizeable section still looking at ways to hurt India while the other section under international pressure (USA after 9/11 and India after 26/11), forced to behave properly. Earlier everything was ok as the Pak sponsored action was happening in the neighbouring countries, but now the scence of action has been limited to Pakistan itself and the two sections of society have come face to face. It is an internal conflict between two thoughts - first: how to please USA, and get maximum aid by fighting talibans and dismantle Afghan pointed terror infrastructure , second: what terrorist infrastructure to save for future use against India. As long as Pak does not come out clean on its stand on terrorism and interferrance in neighbouring countries, its populace will be subjected to this dichotonomy.

They tried to outsmart everyone by "running with the hare and hunting with the hounds". Instead they would be better served by "You reap what you sow", alternately "you cannot get milk and honey if you sow poison".

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

Re: # 11 Arjun286.... Do you know even USA has now no growth but -ve Shrinkage od economy. IN usa they are selling 50% cars compared to two years go. This is world wide phenemon except china everybody is down.

Now you can read seriously what Prof.R Haq is stating. India has mental problem as 50% poor have no sufficient food and specially when young its permanant damage of brain ( so only job one can do is softwere coolie) which is very clear way illustrated by Indian responses.I am sure india needs help by global organizations to feed hungry people ans sure people like Prof. R.Haq and others will contribute heavily. I will not as I do not believe in feeding Hungry starving tigers and Cobras ( Hindus worship animals which are created by Allah, why not go source and worship him) and hope have gratitude thry will become my friends. That is my way of thinking. Prof Haq are bit gullible in thinking gratitude is appreciated.
Good day , keep your job applications ready and top notch condition, american economy is sinking and cina is rising . Our friend is rising and your boss country is sinking economically.
Good day.

Jihadi policies come back to bite pakiland in the butt..

IMF projects Pakistan’s 09/10 GDP flat at two pc

KARACHI: Pakistan’s gross domestic product (GDP) growth is expected to remain unchanged at two per cent in the 2009/10 fiscal year, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said.

The government’s GDP growth target for this July-June fiscal year is 3.3 per cent.

No one can stop a band of suicidal terrorists once they have reached their target, especially if the terrorists are ready to die for their cause. Such a situation is further complicated when there are hostages taken, as was the case in the GHQ attack.

However, such an attack can be prevented in pre-launch stages with good intelligence. The GHQ incident is more of an intelligence failure than the failure of the guards at the premises. There are reports that Punjab police had warned the military of the attack. Apparently, the military did not take the police warning seriously.
Riaz Haq, PakAlumni Worldwide

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

Wonder special forces finished rescue in about 20 hours and very few deaths. Indian army failed in saving many people and attackers kept fighting almost 4days. Wonder far better performance than indians in every way ?
Any comments.

Sins of forefathers visiting the country

oooppps:

DSG soldiers could do the job and =DSG soldiers could not do the job and


and 420=240

Agha Amin:the fact that SSG troops had to be brought from some 70 miles away to redeem the situation is ironic par excellence.

This is serious stuff - the in situ DSG soldiers could do the job and the 10 Punjab ran away (according to Pavo).

As things stand, it appears that the Pak Army has been seriously infiltrated and there are few people who can be trusted by the top echelon. This goes beyond what Giani_420 says below. The implosion, or the impending implosion, if unchecked is going to cause Pakistan massive trauma.

Giani the Nuclear weapons are not a threat - it does not matter who has them or controls them (in all likely hood they are not around in fully assembled, operational form (they can be put together ofcourse)). The threat to India is not from the LET types. But rather from the vast majority of the 160 Million who will stream into India. Another eviction of huge proportions is in the offing if they do come into power. Who knows, it might serve Pakistan better than the current crop of people ever did.

Agha Amin is an expert on the history of the sub continent and on current affairs of armed forces.

His concerns should not be dismissed by anybody,least of all Indians.

What he hesitates to point out explicitly are the following points

1. Paki Army a glue that keeps Paki nation together, is on the verge of collapse.

2. If it collapses, Indians are not likely to like the outcome at all - strange as this may sound. Imagine LET and ilk controlling the nuclear arsenal.

3. It is on the verge of collapse bcos its prime pool of recruits (Punjabis) is being radicalized and therefore unreliable as a military force.

Unfortunately the army brass has not learnt its lesson as exemplified by its objection of the KLB. Note the real objection is that it wants US to condone the Paki army's use of terrorism against India.

Or maybe having ridden the tiger, it feels that getting off it may consume the army altogether - It tried doing it in SWAT with disastrous consequences.

Bottom line is that the Paki nation is rapidly degenerating into choas and it needs some very bold leadership which does not seem to be forthcoming at the present time either in the civilian sphere or in the military sphere.

The leadership is more or less in a knee jerk mode rather adopting bold measures.

The funny part is that everyone thought Pakis were a strong nation and Bangladesh would collapse.

Was the 'pig' brother vacationing in Dal lake when attacked by 'Indians' ? This is such an outrage. :-)

the bus driver who saved the sri lankan team against the jihadis had a jihadi pig brother he revered who was killed by the indians in kashmir....the terrorist is YOU!!!

Once General Musharraf decided to make a U turn under coercion by USA the army lost its moral credibility in the eyes of a large section of Pakistani populace

Not to be churlish, but didn't the populace question the morality of interfering in the affairs of a foreign (albeit fellow Muslim) nation and imposing on it a medieval regime which treated women like sheep - and harboured terrorists operating against foreign countries ? Before 9/11 there was the Kandahar hijacking.

The fact is that much of the 'populace' applauded these actions - rather like Kasab's parents who were proud of their son's activities. Until he was caught. And in the wake of 9/11 OBL was (and remains) a highly admired figure among the populace.

If the populace was so demoralised as to have no opinion on these things, where did this post-U-turn moral indignation come from ?