What's new

Raheel Sharif appointed chief of Islamic military alliance, confirms Khawaja Asif

As per my understanding the objective of this alliance is to combat terrorism. We don't need to concern ourselves with Palestine issue anymore.
Any sort of Military alliance will not be a solution for Kashmir issue.
We should do everything is our power to stop the terrorists if that means stopping them from overthrowing any M.E govts or create civil war like situation any any of these countries. Even if it looks like "protecting" the "Royal" family.


At that time we were fighting terrorists ourselves. Even now the regular army is not getting involved.
Coalition is only solution. Americans and Europeans should not be dealing with this is the first place. Its time Muslims world start fixing these issues.



Iranians should be included in this coalition, if we are resolve the terrorism issue.
K.Asif is a moron.
Do you realize that this coalition is just fighting in Yemen and supporting some rebels in Syria. It is a coalition against Iran blessed by america. You may interpret it in any way but you need to see the actions of masters of this coalition if you want to be factual.
 
Do you realize that this coalition is just fighting in Yemen and supporting some rebels in Syria. It is a coalition against Iran blessed by america. You may interpret it in any way but you need to see the actions of masters of this coalition if you want to be factual.

What actions and which "Masters" are you referring to ?
Are you suggesting that everyone should leave Yemen as is, so it becomes another Iraq or Syria ?
 
What actions and which "Masters" are you referring to ?
Are you suggesting that everyone should leave Yemen as is, so it becomes another Iraq or Syria ?
I am saying Pakistanis on PDF claimed that Pakistan is neutral and bad mouthed this coalition. Now RS has joined same coalition and it has become some pious Islamic organization.
 
Criticism of him heading this useless alliance is well justified.
who told u it'll b useless ???? can u see the future,. this all depends on how this alliance is handled and if a proper person is given the chance, he might make it a good usefull allaince.. i don't know why all people become clairvoyant..had the goras people like ours in their nation then there wud never had b a NATO,.. let the alliance move and then there wud b problems but they can b ractified and it can b made into a proper shelter for Muslims which ummah desperately needs,..
 
I am saying Pakistanis on PDF claimed that Pakistan is neutral and bad mouthed this coalition. Now RS has joined same coalition and it has become some pious Islamic organization.

The objections at that time were regarding direct involvement of Pakistan Army which is still my position. There is nothing wrong with advisory/leadership role taken by retired personals.
 
The objections at that time were regarding direct involvement of Pakistan Army which is still my position. There is nothing wrong with advisory/leadership role taken by retired personals.
The role is not ordinary. Any success against Iran will be attributed to RS back home in Pakistan.
 
Sending Pak general to lead Saudi-led coalition inappropriate: analyst
Home / Today's Paper / Top Story / Sending Pak general to lead Saudi-led coalition inappropriate: analyst
By Monitoring Desk
January 08, 2017
Print : Top Story
  • 0
  • 0
l_177658_115509_print.jpg



Lt Gen (retd) Talat Masood says coalition not backed by all Muslim states

ISLAMABAD: A senior Pakistani analyst believes that appointment of former Pak army chief General Raheel Sharif (retd) as Saudi led coalition chief is not appropriate.

In an interview with a foreign news agency, Lieutenant General Talat Masood (retd) said the whole coalition is controversial and heading an organization which does not have the full support of Muslim world is not a correct decision to be made.

Defence Minister Kh Muhammad Asif has confirmed the recent development that Gen Raheel was made the chief of Saudi led coalition.

Gen Talat Masood said that this coalition backs Saudi Arabia which is fighting war in Yemen and has its own interests. “There are many countries which are backing Saudi Arabia, but at the same time there are also countries which are opposing Saudi Arabia in Yemen,” he noted.

He said at the personal level, this appointment shows that Gen Raheel Sharif’s services during his three-year tenure as Pak army chief had been lauded and the Saudis appointed him on the basis of his performance, but the fact remains that this appointment has been done by the approval of Pakistani government, so there seems to be sort of approval of military engagement against Yemen by this coalition.

“One should be very careful while engaging in military operation in Yemen especially when there is no unanimity in the Muslim world specially regarding Yemen conflict,” said the analyst.

He was of the opinion that viewed the coalition cannot achieve its targets without key regional countries rather it could become a coalition against each other actually.

MWM concerned over Gen Raheel’s joining Arab alliance army
Home / Today's Paper / Top Story / MWM concerned over Gen Raheel’s joining Arab alliance army
January 08, 2017
Print : Top Story
  • 0
  • 0
l_177656_071510_print.jpg



ISLAMABAD: Majlis-e-Wahdat-e-Muslimeen (MWM) Secretary General Allama Raja Nasir Abbass has expressed grave concern on Gen (retd) Raheel Shareef's becoming head of the army of 39 Arab countries alliance adding that objectives and purpose of the formation of this alliance was still unclear.

The MWM central leader, in a statement issued here on Saturday, stated that international observers and world media was viewing the said Alliance would push the Islamic world in sectarian and linguistic war and divide them in combatant groups against each other.

Allama Nasir said if idea behind setting up of 39 Arab States Alliance was the security and safety of the Islamic world then it should first raise voice against incessant killings of the innocent people of Palestine and Held Kashmir and support them for resolution of these lingering problems.

Raja Nasir said that Pakistan in accordance with its foreign policy should play mediatory role in resolution of any dispute between two Islamic countries.
 
The Iraqi military in it's prime under saddam was the 4th largest in the world. They had about 4000 tanks around 900 aircraft total. Though they had large numbers the Americans had vastly superior technology.
True.

Although Iraqi war-machine was battle-hardened and well-equipped for an Asian country at that time, U.S. had advanced much further in the aspect of military capability than the rest of the world. Lessons from the war in Vietnam were taken at heart and digital revolution occurred 1980s, and a high-tech American war-machine was the end-result.

No country, other than U.S., was capable of tackling Iraq like that in 1991. In-fact, Russian and Chinese analysts had predicted an estimated 30,000 American casualties during this war (in advance) but they had no idea what U.S. was bringing to the table at that time.

Iraq had committed 50 divisions to the war. It would have thrashed a lesser coalition like GCC left and right. It is often said that Cold War ended with defeat of Saddam Hussein.

Yes, indeed there was huge overreach on my part.

The demography I am addressing has other notions - not quite as well founded on 'ground realities' that you so ably demonstrated in your post. So as they say 'differant horses for diffeant courses' I was following a path that is preferred by this demographic - the favourite being Pak is the strongest military power in the muslim world and if unleashed our Al-Khalid Armoured Divisions would not stop till they reached Marocco and along the way taken a detour to squash that Zionist pest - Israel.

What I am really trying to wake our deluded folk is KSA is just another country that is out to look out for it's interests - the fact that the prophet (pbuh) was born there is entirely incidental to the reality as it exists today. KSA does not in any way confer anything special to Pakistan beyond it's interests and Pakistani's shoul;d not get all misty eyed about this country. They should look at it through the hard, cold prism of self interest. However you know they rarely do this when the name of KSA is brought up.

For example @Khafee brought up the supposed help KSA gave to Pakistan in 1999. Overlooking the fact that USA has given far more aid, military or otherwise to Pakistan then any other country yet we don't sing songs about USA or our legs don't go gooeey the moment 'America' is mentioned. Indeed on the contrary hostile thoughts pour out.
My friend,

I see your point. However, I had to point out the overreaching aspect in your argument.

Think about it. Iraq had committed 50 divisions (about a million men in total) to the war in 1991 in order to prevent a breakthrough in Kuwait. And that force wasn't amateurish either.

Pakistani military didn't had cruise missiles, stealth aircraft, long-range bombers, aircraft carriers, aircraft with BVR and precision strike capabilities, JSTARS ground activity monitoring system, a huge network of satellites, powerful conventional bombs like Daisy Cutters, Apache gunship helicopters and M1A1 Abrams MBT at its disposal back then. On top of this, Pakistani military was not capable of conducting large-scale military operations during night-time or periods of darkness.

How many divisions do you think Pakistan could commit to that war and how could it shift a huge chunk of its military capability to that region in the first place? Could Pakistan even afford to leave its borders with India and Afghanistan largely unguarded in 1991? Can it even today?

Pakistani military capability is no where close to that of U.S. and geopolitical situations of both are also different. We are not a superpower and neither we are in the position to commit a huge force to a war in some other part of the world without compromising our own defensive posture. Not even close.

Overreaching in arguments do not make them credible. Saudi Arabia had thought through the scenario back then and we cannot fault it for seeking American intervention at that time.

Yes, GCC should have discouraged efforts of Bush administration to invade Iraq in 2003. But they all thought that downfall of Saddam Hussein is good for the entire region. They all miscalculated the magnitude and reach of jihadi mindset in the region.
 
Last edited:
Sending Pak general to lead Saudi-led coalition inappropriate: Lt Gen Talat Masood (R)
January 08, 2017

1eO414M.jpg


ISLAMABAD: A senior Pakistani analyst believes that appointment of former Pakistan army chief General Raheel Sharif (R) as Saudi led coalition chief is not appropriate.

In an interview with a foreign news agency, Lieutenant General Talat Masood (R) said the whole coalition is controversial and heading an organization which does not have the full support of Muslim world is not a correct decision to be made.

Defence Minister Khawaja Asif has confirmed the recent development that Gen Raheel was made the chief of Saudi led coalition.

Lt Gen Talat Masood (R) said that this coalition backs Saudi Arabia which is fighting war in Yemen and has its own interests. “There are many countries which are backing Saudi Arabia, but at the same time there are also countries which are opposing Saudi Arabia in Yemen,” he noted.

He said at the personal level, this appointment shows that Gen Raheel Sharif’s services during his three-year tenure as Pak army chief had been lauded and the Saudis appointed him on the basis of his performance, but the fact remains that this appointment has been done by the approval of Pakistani government, so there seems to be sort of approval of military engagement against Yemen by this coalition.

One should be very careful while engaging in military operation in Yemen especially when there is no unanimity in the Muslim world specially regarding Yemen conflict,” said the analyst.

He was of the opinion that the coalition cannot achieve its targets without key regional countries rather it could become a coalition against each other.


Source: The News
 
Lets suppose, Gen Raheel does not take the offer. Will the war in Yemen stop ? Will the peace in the region restored ? It will lead towards more chaos and more bloodshed, and in the worst case, we may loose some of key regional allies. It is more suitable for Pakistan to keep the influence in the Arab world.
Creating a vacuum will allow others players to project their agendas in the region.
 
Lets suppose, Gen Raheel does not take the offer. Will the war in Yemen stop ? Will the peace in the region restored ? It will lead towards more chaos and more bloodshed, and in the worst case, we may loose some of key regional allies. It is more suitable for Pakistan to keep the influence in the Arab world.
Creating a vacuum will allow others players to project their agendas in the region.
Yes this Coalition has everything it only needs a good and honest Leader .
 
Being such a "senior" analyst I could not understand how Talat Masood did not mentioned the effects if Pakistan loose the support of Arab world today and if the war in Yemen continues for a long time.


Can you elaborate what will be the effects of a prolonged conflict in Yemen on Pakistan? Is it piracy you are worried about? Refugees?



P.s. There is also Houthi invasion of Pakistan. :partay: :partay: :partay:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom