A divided nation | Peace or War with Taliban?

[jaibi]

Sorry but the American situation has no bearing on Pakistan because this is a literate nation. In Pakistan the vast majority are illiterate so who will be doing the reinterpretations in Pakistan? The politicians who are just looking for the next big payday? Also secularism worked here because this was already a diverse nation from the onset, there were so many different denominations of Protestantism here that had they not created a secular nation the whole country would have fell apart. In Pakistan over 95% people are Muslim and Pakistan overall is a conservative nation so secularism would just be laughed at or worst case the people proposing it would be executed, most people cannot get 3 square meals in Pakistan and you libs are talking about secularism. I only brought up Jinnah because its been nearly 70+ years since Pakistan's inception and people there still ask, what did Jinnah want? So that was my question to you as well. Did Jinnah want a secular nation? No he did not or else he would have been a hypocrite.

When your nation was founded it was largely illiterate as institutional knowledge had not become the norm. It became so after the German educational system inspired Europe to take it up and your nation followed suit. We compared to your nation are young as well. Yes, we are struggling to educate our people but in the post-modernist era you would be surprised at the political acumen of my people I disagree with your hypothesis. As far as denominations of Protestanism are concerned then you have not read about the Muslims, we have a sizeable protion of Shia Muslims, even with in them there are many sub-divisions, in Sunnism we have further denominations and there is disagreement especially in the interpretation of laws between them. I would suggest that you read them up.

Pakistan existed as the State of Pakistan for nearly a decade, the reason we have had to reinforce our reason for existence is because of the attitude that you display. Fine, India is our enemy but what about you? What do you think will happen when you question our right to exist? The same problem attacked Israel and they answered with high militarism and so did we. What makes
us so special and anomalous to be degraded?

Jinnah wanted a separate homeland. That's it. He said again and again that it's up to the nation to experiment with the philosophies we want to create a stable nation and before the drama of partition both sides saw India and Pakistan much like Canada and the USA, independent but friendly and cooperative. Uptil the 60s the Pakistani leadership saw an alliance with India against any regional, Chinese at the time, aggression.

 

[jaibi]

Yes America and Pakistan are allies but most Pakistanis don't like it anyway... Things are different for Pakistan because Pakistan is not Israel or India. My rolling eye emoticon was not addressed towards the problems Pakistan faces rather the absurd solutions that are presented forward, like I said most people cannot get 3 square meals and the majority are conservative and you think telling them that they have to put religion aside would go over well with them? Where ever there is illiteracy and poverty there is conservatism your dramatic approach to thrust secularism upon such a people would only bring bodily harm upon yourself. Rather fix the economy, create a consensus with all political parties on where they stand viz a vis the TTP, and educate the whole nation. If you do that most problems would be solved and you won't need secularism because an educated populace would be able to think for themselves and not take everything Mullahs say as face value. Yes it bothers me because I am ethnically Pakistani, yes you do but like I said who will deliver it?

I was not laughing at Jinnah rather at the notion that his creation of Pakistan was a power grab from Nehru. No it is not because you misconstrued my laughter at the Indian for scorn towards Jinnah.

I will give you a very simple answer: Pakistanis are poor, yes, but we are proud. The path of the conservatives to power was paved by the US-Pak cooperation. The religious class did not want a Pakistan, the moderate elements did. Secondly, politically, we have been voting for secular parties. Has the JUI ever had a PM? Has the MMA? No, it's been the PML-N, modelled like your Republican Party, and the Indian BJP. What makes you think we are conservative? We have a separate culture and for someone from America to be Eurocentric about it surprises me. You have had such a diversity and still you think of our culture not on our terms but yours? Sorry, sir but that is an error.

Yes America and Pakistan are allies but most Pakistanis don't like it anyway... Things are different for Pakistan because Pakistan is not Israel or India. My rolling eye emoticon was not addressed towards the problems Pakistan faces rather the absurd solutions that are presented forward, like I said most people cannot get 3 square meals and the majority are conservative and you think telling them that they have to put religion aside would go over well with them? Where ever there is illiteracy and poverty there is conservatism your dramatic approach to thrust secularism upon such a people would only bring bodily harm upon yourself. Rather fix the economy, create a consensus with all political parties on where they stand viz a vis the TTP, and educate the whole nation. If you do that most problems would be solved and you won't need secularism because an educated populace would be able to think for themselves and not take everything Mullahs say as face value. Yes it bothers me because I am ethnically Pakistani, yes you do but like I said who will deliver it?

I was not laughing at Jinnah rather at the notion that his creation of Pakistan was a power grab from Nehru. No it is not because you misconstrued my laughter at the Indian for scorn towards Jinnah.

All Pakistanis who want to be against the TTP, me included, do not view the US-Pak alliance bad but sir your nation makes it hard to defend that pact. The Americans need to be with us as well. All nations deserve respect and we want that more than any aid or anything else. That is when even an educated liberal Pakistani would go against the US-Pak alliance. When we are not treated with dignity. We are critical of the US alliance because the US has had a habbit of abandoning us in our times of need.

 

[KingMamba]

When your nation was founded it was largely illiterate as institutional knowledge had not become the norm. It became so after the German educational system inspired Europe to take it up and your nation followed suit. We compared to your nation are young as well. Yes, we are struggling to educate our people but in the post-modernist era you would be surprised at the political acumen of my people I disagree with your hypothesis. As far as denominations of Protestanism are concerned then you have not read about the Muslims, we have a sizeable protion of Shia Muslims, even with in them there are many sub-divisions, in Sunnism we have further denominations and there is disagreement especially in the interpretation of laws between them. I would suggest that you read them up.

Pakistan existed as the State of Pakistan for nearly a decade, the reason we have had to reinforce our reason for existence is because of the attitude that you display. Fine, India is our enemy but what about you? What do you think will happen when you question our right to exist? The same problem attacked Israel and they answered with high militarism and so did we. What makes
us so special and anomalous to be degraded?

Jinnah wanted a separate homeland. That's it. He said again and again that it's up to the nation to experiment with the philosophies we want to create a stable nation and before the drama of partition both sides saw India and Pakistan much like Canada and the USA, independent but friendly and cooperative. Uptil the 60s the Pakistani leadership saw an alliance with India against any regional, Chinese at the time, aggression.

True which is why when Jefferson said the comment he did he was referring to the literate segments of society, he knew that the current people were not ready but that in the future some may be which is why they left amendments but what you fail to realize is that its been 230 years and there have been few amendments and certainly no complete upheaval of the constitution like the type that has occurred in Pakistan. I am a Muslim sirjee I know all about Sunni- Shia but like I said different situations, in 1947 the communities of the subcontinent were polarized into two groups, hindu or Muslim so you were on one side or the other come partition. Sunnis and shias at the time did not see their differences because they were looking at what they perceived to be the outsider threat. Compare that to the US where depending on the region there was a different denomination of protestants who left for the New world just so that they could practice their version of religion. If in 1776 had they tried to create a single Christianity based polity things would have unraveled quite quickly. Also shias and sunnis have no major differences really except for political differences from an era long past.

What attitude do I display? Idk if you want to consider me an enemy more power to you. I never degraded Pakistan, you are just getting defensive because I think your idea of secularism would blow up in your face (perhaps literally).

Not entirely true Jinnah knew exactly what he wanted for Pakistan but unfortunately he did not get to implement any of his plans. You can go to any of the what Jinnah wanted threads to get a better picture. Anyway the past is now irrelevant so let us talk present, how will you convince a largely illiterate nation that secularism is a the viable solution when many consider it the spawn of satan and the rest rather talk about how they can feed their family? How will your idea not empower the terrorists who claim to be fighting against the implementation of the very ideas you propose?

 

[Capt.Popeye]

Nothing false about what I said. Your other examples have nothing to do with Pakistan. Not to mention even in Israel many people argue that Israeli laws should be based on Jewish law because it is a Jewish state. Ok then question for you, is a secular state was Muhammad Ali Jinnah wanted or is this your own want?

The underlined part of your post displays some lack of understanding on your part about M.A. Jinnah.
Jinnah was simply looking for a country for the Muslims of India, not an Islamic country. While Jinnah was born in the 19th century, his ideas were directed towards looking beyond the 20th century where he lived (and eventually died). He was not wanting to regress either himself or his people back to the Middle Ages.

If that was wanting to create a "secular state", then Jinnah would not even hesitated to do that. He would not have tolerated what the people after him have done, to create an "Abomination of a State" or a "Bonsai Republic".

 

[KingMamba]

I will give you a very simple answer: Pakistanis are poor, yes, but we are proud. The path of the conservatives to power was paved by the US-Pak cooperation. The religious class did not want a Pakistan, the moderate elements did. Secondly, politically, we have been voting for secular parties. Has the JUI ever had a PM? Has the MMA? No, it's been the PML-N, modelled like your Republican Party, and the Indian BJP. What makes you think we are conservative? We have a separate culture and for someone from America to be Eurocentric about it surprises me. You have had such a diversity and still you think of our culture not on our terms but yours? Sorry, sir but that is an error.

Do you really want me to believe that PML-N is not a religious party? Most Punjab based Islamic organizations are in cahoots with PML-N, did you forget that in the late 90's Nawaz tried to amend the constitution to the extent that he would have been defacto Ameer ul Mumineen of Pakistan? How about that law he tried to pass that anything that he declared un-Islamic would be struck down? Obviously he never got to do all that he wished because of the Musharraf coup but the cards were on the table. Just because he claims his party is secular don't mean anything, he just says so to get international support. Would the Saudis support a secular party in Pakistan to the extent that they do PMLN? Of course when I say religious party I don't literally think they represent Islam, they are too jahil for that but they do know how to twist the right screws to get what they want.

Most Pakistanis are conservative Muslim I think 95% of the people on this forum would agree with me, just because JUI never won anything does not mean anything really because the voting system in Pakistan is so rigged that even if many wanted to vote for them (not that many would just an example) they would have to get permission from the feudal lords first. Nawaz won because most of the land owners are in his corner nothing more.

The underlined part of your post displays some lack of understanding on your part about M.A. Jinnah.
Jinnah was simply looking for a country for the Muslims of India, not an Islamic country. While Jinnah was born in the 19th century, his ideas were directed towards looking beyond the 20th century where he lived (and eventually died). He was not wanting to regress either himself or his people back to the Middle Ages.

If that was wanting to create a "secular state", then Jinnah would not even hesitated to do that. He would not have tolerated what the people after him have done, to create an "Abomination of a State" or a "Bonsai Republic".

No Jinnah did not want a theocracy but he did not want a secular state either, @Aeronaut has put it in the finest terms of what Jinnah wanted maybe if he is not busy he can repeat himself... again. Or @Armstrong.

 

[jaibi]

True which is why when Jefferson said the comment he did he was referring to the literate segments of society, he knew that the current people were not ready but that in the future some may be which is why they left amendments but what you fail to realize is that its been 230 years and there have been few amendments and certainly no complete upheaval of the constitution like the type that has occurred in Pakistan. I am a Muslim sirjee I know all about Sunni- Shia but like I said different situations, in 1947 the communities of the subcontinent were polarized into two groups, hindu or Muslim so you were on one side or the other come partition. Sunnis and shias at the time did not see their differences because they were looking at what they perceived to be the outsider threat. Compare that to the US where depending on the region there was a different denomination of protestants who left for the New world just so that they could practice their version of religion. If in 1776 had they tried to create a single Christianity based polity things would have unraveled quite quickly. Also shias and sunnis have no major differences really except for political differences from an era long past.

What attitude do I display? Idk if you want to consider me an enemy more power to you. I never degraded Pakistan, you are just getting defensive because I think your idea of secularism would blow up in your face (perhaps literally).

Not entirely true Jinnah knew exactly what he wanted for Pakistan but unfortunately he did not get to implement any of his plans. You can go to any of the what Jinnah wanted threads to get a better picture. Anyway the past is now irrelevant so let us talk present, how will you convince a largely illiterate nation that secularism is a the viable solution when many consider it the spawn of satan and the rest rather talk about how they can feed their family? How will your idea not empower the terrorists who claim to be fighting against the implementation of the very ideas you propose?

I pointed out to the markers that I said, the use of emoticons. That was unnecessary and I was addressing the situation based on nations I just wanted you to feel that on an individual level with me on the other side. Secondly, I am communicating the feeling that we get here that we are not respected, I'm aware that often it is because of misinterpretations yet they exist. Thirdly, the comparision of nations, models is a widely done thing in all social sciences I point out to that to prove that solutions exist! We can make our own! Fourthly, the reason why the US was created parallels the creation of Pakistan: the Christian world considered itself as the 'civilised' world. Muslims, Jews, Hindus were infidels, uncivilised. America was not created with them in mind.

Yet the base of American founding which had allowed for slaves, subalternation of the native populations changed, evolved. So can we and we will. So the lateral historical narrative has not withstood for your nation and neither will it for us. Nations are subjected to much wider forces than mere words of people in the past. Had it been so it would not have taken 3 decades after the civil rights movement to elect black men.

The sociological forces that stress humanity are the same yet in each culture they are expressed differently and that is what makes studying nations a bit like swimming in muddy waters.

 

[KingMamba]

All Pakistanis who want to be against the TTP, me included, do not view the US-Pak alliance bad but sir your nation makes it hard to defend that pact. The Americans need to be with us as well. All nations deserve respect and we want that more than any aid or anything else. That is when even an educated liberal Pakistani would go against the US-Pak alliance. When we are not treated with dignity. We are critical of the US alliance because the US has had a habbit of abandoning us in our times of need.

How about GOP who cries about drones 24/7 but secretly encourages them because it does not want to venture into NW itself? That alone breeds anti Americanism so what can America do about that? Sorry but Pakistani generals are the ones playing games because they do not want to reach a consensus on the taliban issue, they are still trying to reserve the taliban cadres that are non hostile in case they ever do retake Kabul and then to reignite Kashmir and that is the honest truth. The only problem is that those taliban that are non hostile to Pakistan, are also non hostile to anti Pakistan taliban and do not lift a finger against them to the point that they even mingle among themselves. Heck TTP declares allegiance to Mullah Omar yet the same Pakistanis who curse TTP will not openly curse Afghan Talibs or condemn Omar.

Yeah and Pakistan should always be ready in case things change, it is all about interests if Pakistan feels abandoned than that means that Pakistan was too dependent on the US, a nation should never let itself get that far attached to another nation or else an alliance becomes vassaldom instead. Also geopolitics are forever changing so a country always has to bear that in mind, hoping GOP learned its lesson but more likely it will not considering the same thing is now being done with China.

 

[KingMamba]

I pointed out to the markers that I said, the use of emoticons. That was unnecessary and I was addressing the situation based on nations I just wanted you to feel that on an individual level with me on the other side. Secondly, I am communicating the feeling that we get here that we are not respected, I'm aware that often it is because of misinterpretations yet they exist. Thirdly, the comparision of nations, models is a widely done thing in all social sciences I point out to that to prove that solutions exist! We can make our own! Fourthly, the reason why the US was created parallels the creation of Pakistan: the Christian world considered itself as the 'civilised' world. Muslims, Jews, Hindus were infidels, uncivilised. America was not created with them in mind.

Yet the base of American founding which had allowed for slaves, subalternation of the native populations changed, evolved. So can we and we will. So the lateral historical narrative has not withstood for your nation and neither will it for us. Nations are subjected to much wider forces than mere words of people in the past. Had it been so it would not have taken 3 decades after the civil rights movement to elect black men.

The sociological forces that stress humanity are the same yet in each culture they are expressed differently and that is what makes studying nations a bit like swimming in muddy waters.

Ok sorry about emoticons but you misconstrued what I meant when I posted them. True Pakistan is not getting respect internationally but like I said it is because of the double dealing of Pakistani power brokers. Yes people do compare nations but to compare a 200+ year old country to a nation that has not hit 100 years is a huge stretch which is why Pakistan should compare itself to nations in its own age group. Sure you can take lessons learned from older nations so you do not make the same mistakes but you cannot just copy them tit for tat because their are many other differing factors in play.

That is untrue, the founding fathers of America did keep other non christians in minds and even spoke about it. Washington welcomed Jews to form their first community in America and said that any Muslim that wanted to work alongside him he would welcome openly. Jefferson spoke about a future in which a Muslim or even Hindu may one day be POTUS. They left all doors open for all communities.

True America was able to evolve but like I said that is the American experience and Pakistan has different issues entirely. So you are comparing apples to oranges.

 

[jaibi]

Do you really want me to believe that PML-N is not a religious party? Most Punjab based Islamic organizations are in cahoots with PML-N, did you forget that in the late 90's Nawaz tried to amend the constitution to the extent that he would have been defacto Ameer ul Mumineen of Pakistan? How about that law he tried to pass that anything that he declared un-Islamic would be struck down? Obviously he never got to do all that he wished because of the Musharraf coup but the cards were on the table. Just because he claims his party is secular don't mean anything, he just says so to get international support. Would the Saudis support a secular party in Pakistan to the extent that they do PMLN? Of course when I say religious party I don't literally think they represent Islam, they are too jahil for that but they do know how to twist the right screws to get what they want.

Most Pakistanis are conservative Muslim I think 95% of the people on this forum would agree with me, just because JUI never won anything does not mean anything really because the voting system in Pakistan is so rigged that even if many wanted to vote for them (not that many would just an example) they would have to get permission from the feudal lords first. Nawaz won because most of the land owners are in his corner nothing more.



No Jinnah did not want a theocracy but he did not want a secular state either, @Aeronaut has put it in the finest terms of what Jinnah wanted maybe if he is not busy he can repeat himself... again. Or @Armstrong.

The PML-N is conservative, just like your Republicans it has various vote banks for instance the liberal business class votes for them as well and mind you these are the urban business class. Secondly, Nawaz Sharif inherited a weak government, and I would like to point out that I do not support the PML-N and voted against them, as a system where it had a trioka between the President, the Gen and the PM. The PM was the weakest of the three and NS had been the man who placed laws to award capital punishment for offences judged under the Sharait which was a step towards moderation. So Pakistan is not that simplistic to judge, secondly, our most conservative part, the KPK region has had a history of voting for the most leftist parites. Have you ever seen a PM from JUI, MMA or some other religious party? There's a reason for that.

 

[Armstrong]

Whats all the fierce commotion about ?

Oh I get it, both @jaibi & @Mamba have been severely reprimanded, beaten up & left butt-naked in the Chowk by their respective fiances on forgetting that today was their respective engagement dates !

' @Hyperion @Marshmallow @Dillinger @Ayush - Sunnaa haiii @jaibi ko tou saaath mil kar Mohaleiii kiii aurtooon nei bhii maraaa !

 

[jaibi]

How about GOP who cries about drones 24/7 but secretly encourages them because it does not want to venture into NW itself? That alone breeds anti Americanism so what can America do about that?

Our operation is centered in the FATA region, the latest battle, which was also the most bloody one was in the Tirah Valley, the edge of our country, our Army is not afraid to venture in there. We are there, sir. The drone attacks are encouraged because we as a nation are in no shape to tell the US to stop that's why we shelved the Iran-Pak line though it would have helped us a lot.

Sorry but Pakistani generals are the ones playing games because they do not want to reach a consensus on the taliban issue, they are still trying to reserve the taliban cadres that are non hostile in case they ever do retake Kabul and then to reignite Kashmir and that is the honest truth. The only problem is that those taliban that are non hostile to Pakistan, are also non hostile to anti Pakistan taliban and do not lift a finger against them to the point that they even mingle among themselves. Heck TTP declares allegiance to Mullah Omar yet the same Pakistanis who curse TTP will not openly curse Afghan Talibs or condemn Omar.

The TTP is a power divided, yes, the PA tried to raise local laskars (armies) against them but categorically the army has been against all branches of the TTP/terrorist ever since our operations there. We have lost nearly 3000 troops there and 50,000 people in total. The army has headed for a blunt approach and the civilian government has not been able to do its part successfully. I would refer you to the report on it by Shuja Nawaz, Learn by doing, please search it here on PDF, I posted it.

Yeah and Pakistan should always be ready in case things change, it is all about interests if Pakistan feels abandoned than that means that Pakistan was too dependent on the US, a nation should never let itself get that far attached to another nation or else an alliance becomes vassaldom instead. Also geopolitics are forever changing so a country always has to bear that in mind, hoping GOP learned its lesson but more likely it will not considering the same thing is now being done with China.

Again this is divorced from the ground realities, much like Israel could not survive without the US giving it a substantial support. The Israeli state enjoyed that we did not. In fact only 5% of the aid we have had could have been directed to our infrastructure.
An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie
States cannot survive while trying to defend themselves on survival, mind you, the waterworks in Kashmir are paramount for Pakistani economy. Combined with diplomatic mistakes the US has not been a good influence on the Indo-Pak relations. The USSR had tried to be better. It's not about Pakistan relying too much on the US but the US not being a good ally and positive to the Indo-Pak relations.

 

[Armstrong]

the KPK region has had a history of voting for the most leftist parites. Have you ever seen a PM from JUI, MMA or some other religious party? There's a reason for that.

I think KPK has a tendency of voting for the 'next one' every election !

And even when we talk about Leftist or Secular Parties in Pakistan - I think both Holly Oakes & Karl Marx would probably drop dead laughing if we ever called our mainstream secular & leftist parties as being Secular & Leftist (Socialist) !

After all PPP, ANP & others are neither Secular nor are they particularly Left since ever for the former & of late for the latter !

 

[jaibi]

Ok sorry about emoticons but you misconstrued what I meant when I posted them. True Pakistan is not getting respect internationally but like I said it is because of the double dealing of Pakistani power brokers. Yes people do compare nations but to compare a 200+ year old country to a nation that has not hit 100 years is a huge stretch which is why Pakistan should compare itself to nations in its own age group. Sure you can take lessons learned from older nations so you do not make the same mistakes but you cannot just copy them tit for tat because their are many other differing factors in play.

That is untrue, the founding fathers of America did keep other non christians in minds and even spoke about it. Washington welcomed Jews to form their first community in America and said that any Muslim that wanted to work alongside him he would welcome openly. Jefferson spoke about a future in which a Muslim or even Hindu may one day be POTUS. They left all doors open for all communities.

True America was able to evolve but like I said that is the American experience and Pakistan has different issues entirely. So you are comparing apples to oranges.

Again, sir, you mistook it. I am severely against the wholescale copy paste of theoretical perspectives on an independent cultures, I am showing the same sets of problems being solved by a way. I said that we can evolve our own and we should but we are not in a vaccum and we should look for the processes done in other nations.

Again, comparing apples and oranges is at times beneficial I say that as a researcher. In creative therapy we show that to people, how to evolve solutions from vastly different set of problems, drawing analogies is an amazing human capability that helps solve problems.

Again, sir, the intention of comparing problems of the US, Israel and Pakistan was to illuminate the successful culmination of similar sociological factors. The foundation of national identiy, defence of the that identiy and assimilation of the fissures of the national identity.

 

[livingdead]

@jaibi ..thanks for tagging me.. you are trying to say too many things in one post .. may be you should keep it short and sweet... thats all I want to say.

 

[jaibi]

I think KPK has a tendency of voting for the 'next one' every election !

And even when we talk about Leftist or Secular Parties in Pakistan - I think both Holly Oakes & Karl Marx would probably drop dead laughing if we ever called our mainstream secular & leftist parties as being Secular & Leftist (Socialist) !

After all PPP, ANP & others are neither Secular nor are they particularly Left since ever for the former & of late for the latter !

Dude, in the Pakistani political fabric, thanks to Zia, the definition of 'secular' becomes different. In our prespective, it would be the ANP, MQM, PPP on the left and PML-N, PTI, JUI as right. Subtle but prevalent there are ideologies that effect our voter behaviour despite the repeated muddling in our votes.

@jaibi ..thanks for tagging me.. you are trying to say too many things in one post .. may be you should keep it short and sweet... thats all I want to say.

Yar, it all got muddled as everything on Pakistan has to boil down on our existence. This thread is dead now I suppose.