What's new

Badruddin Haqqani killed in drone strike?

If US don't take out Pakistan's enemy then why should they expect action against Pakistan's enemy.

Quid Pro Quo.

thats why the terrorists win and manage to survive.

what seems to be so simple, no sh*t Sherlock situation for us doesnt seem to be the case for the people of power. just leaves you to wonder if their stated goals and hidden agendas are in totally opposite tangents?

You mean moral and diplomatic support or something else :)

touché
yup thats one way of putting it

No.. I just repeated what most members here say when US makes a demand of PA going after Haqquanis .. ;)

lol perpetual circular argument even better than Hafiz Saeed's friend invite

scaled.php
 
right
by that logic you are agreeing with Pakistan not to launch the NW operation?

comment: Pakistan army has not attacked the Haqqani Network
response: Why should they? Haqqanis are not attacking Pakistan army..

Because there is more to Pakistan than just the Army?

One should consider that hosting non-state actors exposes the entire state of Pakistan to international pressures and sanctions, the price of which is paid by the people at large.

What do you think IB?
 
thats why the terrorists win and manage to survive.

what seems to be so simple, no sh*t Sherlock situation for us doesnt seem to be the case for the people of power. just leaves you to wonder if their stated goals and hidden agendas are in totally opposite tangents?
After hundreds of thousand dead, billions spent, these terrorists get away due to same state of mind.

You are right about goals and hidden agendas, it is costing too much to everyone.

It makes me wonder, if for US, their soldiers death and billions spent is worth enough to keep the region destabilize. Going according to their past record, I think their International Police Job is facade to keep their defense industry kept running as ever longing threat perception and possibility of sudden wars create an environment in Peace time (relatively, in context) keeps other nations to beef up their military.

US goals are too much complicated to be sure.
 
@Orignal Topic

This isn't confirm news so nothing special..

@Current Topic

Terrorist? What terrorist? Terrorism is owned by US, and they started this **** to de-stablize pakistan..
 
Because there is more to Pakistan than just the Army?

One should consider that hosting non-state actors exposes the entire state of Pakistan to international pressures and sanctions, the price of which is paid by the people at large.

What do you think IB?
I think Pakistan is already facing international pressures and sanction in indirect way. FDI is not growing, people are skeptical about investing due to security region, their key projects are stuck due to freezing of funds by "you know who" nations.

Pakistan is already suffering because of non-state actors and funny thing is world blame Pakistan whereas Pakistan is the one who was forced to enter the war and now paying the highest price.

I don't support Pakistan's stance against terrorism as it seems biased just like US, but at the same time the other side is not even considered or discussed, the side of what Pakistan has to deal with WOT.


P.S. Sorry I answered your question to IB, but question was interesting and I found it attractive enough to reply.:D
 
Why should they? TTP is not attacking NATO..

Pakistan made this argument because It's not easy for pakistan to attack NWA because, economy badly screwed up, need more money for IDP, operation and post operation rehabilitation plus it's a hilly terrain and PA needs equipment which can attack them precisely and can cover their backs 24/7.

While America don't have such problems. Why? Because they got drones? A drone does what Pakistan Army have to do by moving 100 soldiers out having a helicopter escort above them because they would be raiding a hornet nest plus such a large scale movement will surely be picked up by Terrorist spies and target will be tipped off and mission failed kaboom or if mission successfull on the count of casualties on our soldiers behalf. Last time Pak Army raided a House, they killed their target but got surrounded by 300 Men who were called as backup and next thing we know 12 of our soldiers head were hanging on the polls of NWA streets.

In short Economy associated with such kind of statement is what makes Pakistan argument strong and when America says something similar, than it's a excuse, a fcuking lame excuse because they can easily target TTP using DRONES without getting hit or spending so much or tipping of the enemy or without any causality!

Because there is more to Pakistan than just the Army?

One should consider that hosting non-state actors exposes the entire state of Pakistan to international pressures and sanctions, the price of which is paid by the people at large.

What do you think IB?

I think Pakistan is already facing international pressures and sanction in indirect way. FDI is not growing, people are skeptical about investing due to security region, their key projects are stuck due to freezing of funds by "you know who" nations.

Pakistan is already suffering because of non-state actors and funny thing is world blame Pakistan whereas Pakistan is the one who was forced to enter the war and now paying the highest price.

I don't support Pakistan's stance against terrorism as it seems biased just like US, but at the same time the other side is not even considered or discussed, the side of what Pakistan has to deal with WOT.


P.S. Sorry I answered your question to IB, but question was interesting and I found it attractive enough to reply.:D

When Pakistan say this thing in simple and plain term that economy is one of the reason of not conducting the operation and since we are already spending so much on in the operations in Orakzai and South Waziristan and Khyber Agency, than you guys think this as a lame excuse and Pakistan supporting terrorism.
 
Because there is more to Pakistan than just the Army?

One should consider that hosting non-state actors exposes the entire state of Pakistan to international pressures and sanctions, the price of which is paid by the people at large.

What do you think IB?

check my post above

perpetual circular argument. we say the same about NATO's guests in Kunar and Nooristan in Afghanistan.
 
When Pakistan say this thing in simple and plain term that economy is one of the reason of not conducting the operation and since we are already spending so much on in the operations in Orakzai and South Waziristan and Khyber Agency, than you guys think this as a lame excuse and Pakistan supporting terrorism.
You took it wrong buddy. All I am saying is the popular, so called, belief people have.

Answer it as I need an explanation not calling it a lame excuse. Point is the selective action and reason behind it. Just a query to know what is the reality rather an an accusation.
 
IB why dont you counter these terrorists.after all you are the Intelligence bureau @IB :)
 
thats why the terrorists win and manage to survive.

what seems to be so simple, no sh*t Sherlock situation for us doesnt seem to be the case for the people of power. just leaves you to wonder if their stated goals and hidden agendas are in totally opposite tangents?



touché
yup thats one way of putting it



lol perpetual circular argument even better than Hafiz Saeed's friend invite

scaled.php

You seem to be in one of those awesome moods today :)

check my post above

perpetual circular argument. we say the same about NATO's guests in Kunar and Nooristan in Afghanistan.

Its like the Lakhnavi Nawab style of Pehle Aap... :)
 
You took it wrong buddy. All I am saying is the popular, so called, belief people have.

Answer it as I need an explanation not calling it a lame excuse. Point is the selective action and reason behind it. Just a query to know what is the reality rather an an accusation.
what you want..a full scale war at our western frontiers.if the operation is not selective,there would be a lot more resistance and attacks.
 
I think Pakistan is already facing international pressures and sanction in indirect way. FDI is not growing, people are skeptical about investing due to security region, their key projects are stuck due to freezing of funds by "you know who" nations.

Pakistan is already suffering because of non-state actors and funny thing is world blame Pakistan whereas Pakistan is the one who was forced to enter the war and now paying the highest price.

I don't support Pakistan's stance against terrorism as it seems biased just like US, but at the same time the other side is not even considered or discussed, the side of what Pakistan has to deal with WOT.


P.S. Sorry I answered your question to IB, but question was interesting and I found it attractive enough to reply.:D

Not at all, the more participants in a civil and well-thought discussion, the better it is likely to be.

.....................
When Pakistan say this thing in simple and plain term that economy is one of the reason of not conducting the operation and since we are already spending so much on in the operations in Orakzai and South Waziristan and Khyber Agency, than you guys think this as a lame excuse and Pakistan supporting terrorism.

What you are saying might be correct, but it definitely comes across as "give us more money so we can deal with our problems that we do not want to spend our own money on", similar to renting out the Army. This is not good for international perceptions.

check my post above

perpetual circular argument. we say the same about NATO's guests in Kunar and Nooristan in Afghanistan.

It might be a circular argument, but the fallout affects Pakistan far more disproportionately, and hence the onus is more on Pakistan to rectify the situation too, granted in conjunction with NATO and not by itself.
 
It is not confirm...


THis is what the credibility of drone.. No one is sure about the victoms!!
 
Back
Top Bottom