Clinton Warns Pakistan of "severe consequences."

[PAKFA]

Hope this never happens If it does Gujarat, Punjab, Rajastan will face a massive refugee problem like the one faced buy Bengal and N.E in 1970's

It will not happen , all theses states has closed border with massive fencing.

 

[mehru]

Warning of severe consequences will not solve the problem. America needs to keep an eye on people in its own territory. We are not responsible for everything that happens in their country neither they are responsible for everything that goes wrong in our country.
As for Pakistanis, it's our prime responsibility to keep an eye on people around us like relatives, friends and our other contacts. If anyone shows murderous or suspicious behaviour then report it to the authorities. Shehzada's relatives and friends noticed change in his personality but noone cared to report it, not even his wife which i am sure was aware of it. Later his friends admitted their mistake. Same goes for Overseas Pakistanis.
And another thing that we need to counter is conspiracy theories and Anti Americanism. A very interesting article that i read today is pointing to this very issue.

Faisal Shahzad’s anti-Americanism

The man who tried to set off a car bomb in Times Square was a Pakistani. Why is this unsurprising? Because when you hold a burning match to a gasoline tank, the laws of chemistry demand combustion.

As anti-US lava spews from the fiery volcanoes of Pakistan’s private television channels and newspapers, a collective psychosis grips the country’s youth. Murderous intent follows with the conviction that the US is responsible for all ills, both in Pakistan and the world of Islam.

Faisal Shahzad, with designer sunglasses and an MBA degree from the University of Bridgeport, acquired that murderous intent. Living his formative years in Pakistan, he typifies the young Pakistani who grew up in the shadow of Ziaul Haq’s hate-based education curriculum. The son of a retired air vice-marshal, life was easy as was getting US citizenship subsequently. But at some point the toxic schooling and media tutoring must have kicked in.

There was guilt as he saw pictures of Gaza’s dead children and related them to US support for Israel. Internet browsing or, perhaps, the local mosque steered him towards the idea of an Islamic caliphate. This solution to the world’s problems would require, of course, the US to be destroyed. Hence Shahzad’s self-confessed trip to Waziristan.

Ideas considered extreme a decade ago are now mainstream. A private survey carried out by a European embassy based in Islamabad found that only four per cent of Pakistanis polled speak well of America; 96 per cent against.

Although Pakistan and the US are formal allies, in the public perception the US has ousted India as Pakistan’s number one enemy. Remarkably, anti-US sentiment rises in proportion to aid received. Say a good word about the US, and you are labelled as its agent. From what TV anchors had to say about it, Kerry-Lugar’s $7.5bn may well have been money that the US wants to steal from Pakistan rather than give to it.

Pakistan is not the only country where America is unpopular. In pursuit of its self-interest, the US has waged illegal wars, bribed, bullied and overthrown governments, supported tyrants and undermined movements for progressive change. Paradoxically America is disliked more in Pakistan than in countries which have born the direct brunt of its attacks — Cuba, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. Why?

Drone strikes are a common but false explanation. Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi implicitly justifies the Times Square bombing as retaliation but this does not bear up. Drone attacks have killed some innocents but they have devastated militant operations in Waziristan while causing far less collateral damage than Pakistan Army operations.

On the other hand, the cities of Hanoi and Haiphong were carpet-bombed by B-52 bombers and Vietnam’s jungles were defoliated with Agent Orange. Yet, Vietnam never developed visceral feelings like those in Pakistan.

Finding truer reasons requires deeper digging. In part, Pakistan displays the resentment of a client state for its paymaster. US-Pakistan relations are transactional today but the master-client relationship is older. Indeed, Pakistan chose this path because confronting India over Kashmir demanded big defence budgets. In the 1960s, Pakistan entered into the Seato and Cento military pacts, and was proud to be called ‘America’s most allied ally’. The Pakistan Army became the most powerful, well-equipped and well-organised institution in the country. This also put Pakistan on the external dole.

The Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979, even as it brought in profits, deepened the dependence. Paid by the US to create the anti-Soviet jihadist apparatus, Pakistan is now being paid again to fight that war’s blowback. Pakistan then entered George W. Bush’s war on terror to enhance America’s security — a fact that further hurt its self-esteem. It is a separate matter that Pakistan fights that very war for its own survival and must call upon its army to protect the population from throat-slitting fanatics.

Passing the buck is equally fundamental to Pakistan’s anti-Americanism. It is in human nature to blame others for one’s own failures. Pakistan has long teetered between being a failed state and a failing state. The rich won’t pay taxes? Little electricity? Contaminated drinking water? Kashmir unsolved? Blame it on the Americans. This phenomenon exists elsewhere too. For example, one saw Hamid Karzai threatening to join the Taliban and lashing out against Americans because they (probably correctly) suggested he committed electoral fraud.

Tragically for Pakistan, anti-Americanism plays squarely into the hands of Islamic militants. They vigorously promote the notion of an Islam-West war when, in fact, they actually wage armed struggle to remake society. They will keep fighting this war even if America were to miraculously evaporate. Created by poverty, a war culture and the macabre manipulations of Pakistan’s intelligence services, they seek a total transformation of society. This means eliminating music, art, entertainment and all manifestations of modernity. Side goals include chasing away the few surviving native Christians, Sikhs and Hindus.

At a time when the country needs clarity of thought to successfully fight extremism, simple bipolar explanations are inadequate. The moralistic question ‘Is America good or bad?’ is futile.

There is little doubt that the US has committed acts of aggression, as in Iraq, and maintains the world’s largest military machine. We know that it will make a deal with the Taliban if perceived to be in its self-interest — even if that means abandoning the Afghans to bloodthirsty fanatics. Yet, it would be wrong to scorn the humanitarian impulse behind US assistance in times of desperation. Shall we write off massive US assistance to Pakistan at the time of the earthquake of 2005? Or to tsunami-affected countries in 2004?

In truth, the US is no more selfish or altruistic than any other country. And it treats its Muslim citizens infinitely better than we treat non-Muslims in Pakistan.

Instead of pronouncing moral judgments on everything and anything, we Pakistanis need to reaffirm what is truly important for our people: peace, economic justice, good governance, rule of law, accountability of rulers, women’s rights and rationality in human affairs. Washington must be resisted, but only when it seeks to drag Pakistan away from these goals. More frenzied anti-Americanism will produce more Faisal Shahzads.

The writer teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

i think her statement is for local population consumption and to deal with Political Opponents who would find any thing to point scores, however instead of hoping for the best we should be prepared for the worst . Moreever i think the Ops in NW has become more likely but should only be carried out when situatiuon is feasable and when PA has gain sufficent consolidation in its gains in SW,Bajor and SWAT.

 

[below_freezing]

Pakistan needs ICBMs in case some large country in the western hemisphere believes that it is able to conquer pakistan with little to no losses. the warning signs have been there for a while.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

The proper response would be a compromise on both sides. The Pakistan military will have to allow joint military operations by US forces within Pakistan. The US military will have to work alongside the Pakistani military, to make it a joint anti-terrorism rootout, instead of a unilateral US invasion.

There are no guarantees for a joint Military action in NW to succeed. However the US can help to increase surveillance through drones and in the Heliborn Operation against the millitants. But Still it will be sign of weakness to ask for help when our own Armed forces are doing good . I dough the public perception abt the PA might change .
The best thing would be that our PA carries out Military action on its own. Though the price would be high but it will help PA to develop and mature skills and tactics in Counter-Insurngency Operations.

 

[IceCold]

Pakistan needs ICBMs in case some large country in the western hemisphere believes that it is able to conquer pakistan with little to no losses. the warning signs have been there for a while.

Actually you are right however the current state of our economy does not allow us to acquire an ICBM. Another factor is that maybe for now Pakistan does not want to alienate its western so called allies by bringing them directly into Pakistans strategic range. I suppose for the latter part Pakistan can launch an ICBM project in disguise of an SLV project.

 

[Prometheus]

you said , sorry .......... wasn't able to understand what you mean by This time

means the time which is going on now...........

 

[Napalm]

Clinton warns Pak: Stop terrorists or else...

In the strongest message to Pakistan since the failed Times Square bombing plot, United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has warned of 'severe consequences' if a successful terror attack is traced back to that country.

In an interview with CBS, which will be aired on Sunday, Clinton said that though Pakistan's attitude towards Islamic terrorism has changed in the recent past, it still needs to take far more stringent measures to quell militancy emanating from its soil.

"We've made it very clear that if, heaven-forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences," Clinton warned.

"We've gotten more cooperation and it's been a real sea-change in the commitment we have seen from the Pakistan government. But we want more. We expect more," she added.

Acknowledging that both US and Pakistan share much better military and intelligence ties than before, Clinton minced no words in saying that Islamabad

had been playing a 'double game' on the issue of terrorism.

"I think that there was a double game going on in the previous years, where we got a lot of lip service but very little was produced. We have seen the killing or capturing of a great number of the leadership of significant terrorist groups and we are going to continue that," Clinton said.
Clinton warns Pak: Stop terrorists or else...: Rediff.com India News

 

[yashchauhan]

IF US ATTACKS PAKISTAN LIKE IRAQ....JUST IN CASE...THEN IT WILL HAVE MIXED EFFECT ON INDIA AND CHINA...ATTACKING A NATION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF WORLD'S TWO PLANETARY POWERS WILL SURELY CREATE SOME BROWS!

 

[abrahams]

Faisal Shahzad, with designer sunglasses and an MBA degree from the University of Bridgeport, acquired that murderous intent. Living his formative years in Pakistan, he typifies the young Pakistani who grew up in the shadow of Ziaul Haq’s hate-based education curriculum. The son of a retired air vice-marshal, life was easy as was getting US citizenship subsequently. But at some point the toxic schooling and media tutoring must have kicked in.

The writer teaches at Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad.

I guess this is the root cause... of all this mess... and can only be changed by re-writing the so-called hate based curriculum...

 

[abrahams]

attacking pakistan would make it a mess in our region... for india's best interest pakistan should be a well developed state or developing state then only the rhetoric of forcing a war would mellow down cause then there is more to loose..

 

[karan.1970]

85% of their supplies go from pakistan...block 'em and then we'll see consequences..no need to pay heed to her statement which she HAD to make politically...try to understand what i mean bruvz

c'mon dude.. Your military runs on their hardware. Your country depends heavily on their money.. This hoo-ha of blocking supplies is just rhetoric.. get over it..

 

[T-Faz]

c'mon dude.. Your military runs on their hardware. Your country depends heavily on their money.. This hoo-ha of blocking supplies is just rhetoric.. get over it..

We survived in the 90's without them 'dude', ad these threats are nothing but hoo haa from a falling power.

Sort yourself out and then blame others, the mighty USSR threatened us too. Remember them and them talk.

 

[SAUD-404]

Pakistan needs ICBMs in case some large country in the western hemisphere believes that it is able to conquer pakistan with little to no losses. the warning signs have been there for a while.

well, the way i see this all west vs pakistan thing, is they are not brave enough to go to war wid us, one reason being we are the best and close friends of china, so we dont need icbms

 

[FlickerSingh]

well, the way i see this all west vs pakistan thing, is they are not brave enough to go to war wid us, one reason being we are the best and close friends of china, so we dont need icbms

so china will nuke america if america goes to war with u ?

americans should take cover now that their drones are whacking some of your population in your country. who knows when china will launch a nuke against america