Low Intensity Conflict

Khurram,

What a great feat it would have been in the history of military conflict had the Pakistan Army fought to the last man instead of shamelessly surrendering? What have those 90 000 `good lives` achieved but bring utter shame to the nation? And that dog niazi... don`t even make me start....

I know this may sound inhuman or too emotional... but after committing horrible crimes against their own people, after raping countless Pakistani women (remember Bangladesh was still Pakistan then), and after murdering systematically the best of that society.... the least those `Good lives` could have done was to have died with honor... after all they were the inheritors of `glorious traditions`...


Shame on every soldier and an officer who surrendered in Dacca... Shame on Pakistan Army.

-YLH

re nakhok

``Last but not the least, Mahathir would be doing humanity a real favor if he can persuade the Bangladesh government not to push a war criminal as its candidate for Secretary General of OIC. It will truly make OIC a laughing stock of the world if it is already not so.``

Amen.

Salahuddin Qader Chowdhury, the alleged war criminal, is a disgrace to say the least. But then, as a wag opined, he and OIC deserve each other amply. Better to have the crook away from Dhaka and living with the creeps in Jeddah.

The two-nation theory wasn`t uniquely the subcontinent`s in the late 1940s. It was unfolding in Palestine as well. And, at the OIC summit, Dr. Mahathir has excorciated the Jews even more bitterly than Musharraf has excorciated India.

It might be easier to think through Musharraf`s rage on Kashmir if we first try to think through Mahathir`s rage against the Jews.

Sometimes it is wise to walk a little in the other party`s mocasins.

Cooler tempers might prevail if Mahathir mulls over what he would have done in 1948 if he were a holocaust survivor. Wouldn`t he have done everything in his power to defeat the Arab armies that invaded Israel?

More importantly, Mahathir might want to mull over the fact that Palestine was a two-way street at that moment in history. Yes, many a Palestinian ( 0.5 million?) fled his ancestral home in the wake of Palestine`s partition. But at least an equal number of Jews got thrown out from Arab countries (from Morocco to Iraq) and even from Iran.

Today, the majority of Jews in Israel are Shephardic Jews most of whom have either lived in Palestine for centuries or are from Arab lands.

In fact, the downfall of the Labor Party in Israel and the rise of the hard line Likud is specifically related to this demographic mix - the better educated Ashkenazic Jews (of Yiddish heritage) yielding to the numerically dominant Shephardic Jews.

Needless to say, these Shephardic Jews have no reason to feel that they owe anything to the Palestinians who had lost their ancestral home. More importantly, the Shephardic Jews have genuine cause to resent the Arab countries that threw them out of their ancestral home in the aftermath of Palestine`s partition.

If Mahathir mulls over the facts, I am sure he`ll see how illogical and unreasonable it was for him to denounce the Jewish people.

More importantly, Mahathir will realize how unreasonable are those that will not settle for peace for anything less than the Palestinians` right to return to their ancestral land.

Last but not the least, Mahathir would be doing humanity a real favor if he can persuade the Bangladesh government not to push a war criminal as its candidate for Secretary General of OIC. It will truly make OIC a laughing stock of the world if it is already not so.

As for the subcontinent, it would do well to recall what President Clinton had told Pakistanis pointedly in his TV address from Islamabad, ``This era does not reward people who struggle in vain to redraw borders with blood``.

Pakistan doesn`t need more real estate. It needs to be more concerned for its own citizens. Bringing home the stranded Pakistanis in Bangladesh (aka ``Biharis``), for example, surely deserves a higher priority than winning real estate in Kashmir. The ``Biharis`` after all do call themselves Pakistanis, Kashmiris don`t.

Tariq Aqil (or be-akal?)

Why not rename the country ``PakiArmistan``? Then silly essays full of nonsense like:

[quote]
Pakistan army has performed a monumental and historical task in containing and combating low intensity conflict in all its forms and manifestations. In Kashmir, Rann of Kutch, Siachin, Kargil
[end-quote]

could become official policy. oooops, I am sorry, they are ALREADY official policy !! oh, no ....

re khurram
``By most accounts, the foot soldiers did show personal courage and bravery in the 3-week war. ``

If indeed there was `personal courage and bravery`, why is it that almost all who went into the war came out as POWs? Usually courage and bravery translate into fairly high casualties, especially on the vanquished side.

More likely the `personal courage and bravery` consisted of what Pakistani journalist Anthony Mascarenhas called the `ugliest genocide in history`. Really you cannot expect courage and bravery from an army whose most noticeable acheievements since 1949 have been regular assaults on its own people, its own cities, its own Constitution with an occasional set of extra judicial murders thrown in for giggles.

Re Manto
``The Pakistani nation should not and cannot afford to keep up such an army... a loser army which knows only how to take over the Capital city of Pakistan.``

Oh, don`t forget the port city also :(

Pakistan ought to keep an army, a real one that is not the bloated, corrupt, money-pit institution it has today. After all, Pakistan inherited one of the finest fighting forces in 1947 with good officers and chivalrous traditions. Get `em out of business, sports administration, and politics, trim up the fat (literally and otherwise), and fire half the general officers and Pakistan can have an army that can fight again and of which the nation can be proud. There ought to be a clear understanding that the army exists to serve the people of Pakistan not the other way around.

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

Manto #3

I think you went a little overboard there.

The 90,000 ordinary soldiers trapped in Dacca were put in an unwinnable position by their bankrupt leadership. By most accounts, the foot soldiers did show personal courage and bravery in the 3-week war. It was just an impossible situation.
The one honorable thing the leadership did was to surrender and not waste 90,000 good lives.

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

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

PS to #1 Tariq,

May I suggest that the Pakistan Army would have lived up to the praise you wish to heap on it... had every single soldier of the Pakistan Army would have fought to the last breath against the Indian onslaught during the Dacca Siege... had everyone of them died an honorable death, they would be heroes today... Instead they were cowards and loser... and you call them the `rock of gibraltar`.... what sense of fairness.

The Pakistani nation should not and cannot afford to keep up such an army... a loser army which knows only how to take over the Capital city of Pakistan.

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

This article is bizarre and thoroughly pro-establishment...

While the author`s statement about the Pakistan Movement made only in passing is sad in its over simplification... what is worse is his analysis of the situation since 1947 and his glorification of our army. With articles like these which talk of `Low Intensity Conflict` and `limited wars`... not only is Jinnah`s Pakistan a distant dream .... but peace is a casualty... I am a patriot of Pakistan... but this kind of utter nonsense I don`t subscribe to.

Another way I guess to fool the people of Pakistan by the Military wallahs and their supporters....


May god save Pakistan from this guy i.e. Tariq Aqil.

-YLH