A state adrift…and at war with itself

[That Guy]

No way.

Thats just the point, Pak system is governance has no parallel. No where does the Army play such a pivotal & active role as it does in Pakistan.

Other places have a release valve in the form of predictable time bound elections.

As far as naxals go they shall fall into the mainstream. The theme may be same but no two insurgencies have common methods of being addressed. In Punjab it was stamped out, in J&K it has been smothered.

No where can the terrorists call the shots and lay down terms for talks. The state , law of the land & constitution have to be supreme & non negotiable.

Are you serious? Do you honestly believe that Pakistan is the only country that exists where the military has an active role in policy making?

I was taking you seriously before, but now you're just being ridiculous.

As far as the naxals are concerned, your claim that they'll fall into mainstream politics is based on nothing more than wishful thinking. the Sikh insurgency was stamped out, but J&K is still a hot bed; if it wasn't, the Indian army presence would be significantly lower. I don't buy the "they're there because of Pakistan" excuse, because even a lower troop level in J&K, India would have absolutely nothing to fear from an aggressive Pakistan. Frankly speaking, India has pretty much cleared the few advantages that PA used to enjoy against IA.

At this point, it just seems to me that you're arguing for the sake of arguing, and pushing opinion as facts.

 

[illusion8]

That's an odd thing to say considering that Pakistan has been fighting baluchi terrorist separatists since practically independence.

Such territorial insurgencies / freedom movements are there in plenty all around the world - the naxals / taliban is a different cup of tea - they are out to change the whole ideology of their respective nations.

 

[T-123456]

The only problem Pakistan has is bad governance.
One person on top with absolute power working for and not against the country can change evrything.

 

[That Guy]

Such territorial insurgencies / freedom movements are there in plenty all around the world - the naxals / taliban is a different cup of tea - they are out to change the whole ideology of their respective nations.

Sure, but your claims that...

The difference for Pakistan is it's been put in this situation against a terrorist group for the first time.

is odd, because the Baluchi terrorists pretty much use the same tactics as the TTP, minus the suicide bombings. So to say that Pakistan is facing such a group for the first time is ignoring history.

 

[illusion8]

Sure, but your claims that...


is odd, because the Baluchi terrorists pretty much use the same tactics as the TTP, minus the suicide bombings. So to say that Pakistan is facing such a group for the first time is ignoring history.

NVM.

 

[That Guy]

The only problem Pakistan has is bad governance.
One person on top with absolute power working for and not against the country can change evrything.

And that's rare enough to find.

You have to give the GoP some credit, it went from terrible to mediocre in a few years. It's bound to get better, because once you hit rock bottom, the only way to go is up.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

And that's rare enough to find.

You have to give the GoP some credit, it went from terrible to mediocre in a few years. It's bound to get better, because once you hit rock bottom, the only way to go is up.

What is the current government's policy towards the TTP? I know that there was talks about negotiations but that seems to have fallen away from what I read on PDF. Any chance that the government will take a strong stance and give the army a free hand like Congress did with the Khalistan movement in the 80s ?

 

[T-123456]

And that's rare enough to find.

You have to give the GoP some credit, it went from terrible to mediocre in a few years. It's bound to get better, because once you hit rock bottom, the only way to go is up.

It is going up,no doubt about that.
I want to see what happens with the TTP negotiations,it would be a big step forward if something positive would come out of that.

 

[That Guy]

It is going up,no doubt about that.
I want to see what happens with the TTP negotiations,it would be a big step forward if something positive would come out of that.

Personally speaking, I think the talks will fail. They're probably going to be used to justify military action and get the entire nation behind the government, like with Swat.

The deal for Swat was pretty much broken by the TTP, who was lead by the same guy at the time, and the Pakistani nation rose up and gave the military it's full support to accomplish an operation that is to this day the most successful operation taken against the militants.

 

[T-123456]

Personally speaking, I think the talks will fail. They're probably going to be used to justify military action and get the entire nation behind the government, like with Swat.

The deal for Swat was pretty much broken by the TTP, who was lead by the same guy at the time, and the Pakistani nation rose up and gave the military it's full support to accomplish an operation that is to this day the most successful operation taken against the militants.

Are you in favor of the military doing it again(since it was succesfull)?

 

[That Guy]

Are you in favor of the military doing it again(since it was succesfull)?

Before I answer that, I'd like to go on record here and say that it doesn't matter what I think, it's going to happen whether we like it or not. The TTP have shown they cannot be trusted to keep to the agreement.

Now, am I in favor? Yes. If history has taught me one thing, you don't negotiate with ultraconservative nutjobs, hellbent on taking everything away from you. The military has the capabilities to successfully carry out the operation, all they need is support from the public.

 

[syedali73]

Are you in favor of the military doing it again(since it was succesfull)?

Who can fight against the armed rebels of the state? obviously military and para-military/Police. However, they are like surgeons, who can take out a rotten part but cant do more than that. Post-op care needs to be done by the civil government. However, it is not this simple, especially considering the track record of our politicians and those who rule Pakistan (that includes civil and military bureaucracy).

 

[T-123456]

Before I answer that, I'd like to go on record here and say that it doesn't matter what I think, it's going to happen whether we like it or not. The TTP have shown they cannot be trusted to keep to the agreement.

Now, am I in favor? Yes. If history has taught me one thing, you don't negotiate with ultraconservative nutjobs, hellbent on taking everything away from you. The military has the capabilities to successfully carry out the operation, all they need is support from the public.

Who can fight against the armed rebels of the state? obviously military and para-military/Police. However, they are like surgeons, who can take out a rotten part but cant do more than that. Post-op care needs to be done by the civil government. However, it is not this simple, especially considering the track record of our politicians and those who rule Pakistan.

Yes,what happens after the ''clean up''is very important.

 

[third eye]

Are you serious? Do you honestly believe that Pakistan is the only country that exists where the military has an active role in policy making?

I was taking you seriously before, but now you're just being ridiculous.

As far as the naxals are concerned, your claim that they'll fall into mainstream politics is based on nothing more than wishful thinking. the Sikh insurgency was stamped out, but J&K is still a hot bed; if it wasn't, the Indian army presence would be significantly lower. I don't buy the "they're there because of Pakistan" excuse, because even a lower troop level in J&K, India would have absolutely nothing to fear from an aggressive Pakistan. Frankly speaking, India has pretty much cleared the few advantages that PA used to enjoy against IA.

At this point, it just seems to me that you're arguing for the sake of arguing, and pushing opinion as facts.

Slow down.

Yes, I am being serious. We were talking of the region where Pakistan has a unique system of Governance. Even BD has turned its Army to the barracks where they belong.

I am not arguing , merely stating facts.

India never had much to fear from Pakistan, the troop levels in J&K are to ensure ' non state actors ' stay on the West and do what they do best in the land of their birth which as events show they are doing a splendid job of.

If J&K is a ' hot bed' its a hot bed India can handle. Those plotting against the state hang by a noose & the law of the land applies.

Thats what Pakistan too needs to do .

My views.

 

[That Guy]

Slow down.

Yes, I am being serious. We were talking of the region where Pakistan has a unique system of Governance. Even BD has turned its Army to the barracks where they belong.

I am not arguing , merely stating facts.

India never had much to fear from Pakistan, the troop levels in J&K are to ensure ' non state actors ' stay on the West and do what they do best in the land of their birth which as events show they are doing a splendid job of.

If J&K is a ' hot bed' its a hot bed India can handle. Those plotting against the state hang by a noose & the law of the land applies.

Thats what Pakistan too needs to do .

My views.

Well at least you're honest that this is your opinion. I completely disagree, but I can respect that much at least.

Going back to the main point, I honestly think that these talks must occur, if only to show you cannot negotiate with those that don't want to.