What's new

ENOUGH!

Do you support decisive military action against the Taliban militants?

  • Yes

    Votes: 54 96.4%
  • No

    Votes: 2 3.6%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    56
.
Yes we must take these imposter of Islam head on . We dont want these Externally controlled Talibans operating in our Reagion . We should look for All the possible US assistance to carry out massive milletery operations against these falsebelievers and Brainwashed Weardos. They are truely not human who want to destroy Pakistan and threten our very own existance.

We should also make sure that BLA operating in Balochistan should be compleetely wiped out. Its like the mukti bani force Funded by India which entered in Bangladesh during that turmoil .

BLA and Taliban should be compleetely wiped out from our Soil once and for All.
 
.
Though the colleteral damage is inevitable but atleast we would have Pakistan cleansed from thes talibs .
 
.
On a personal note, I detest the term, 'collateral damage' which was coined by the Americans in the first Gulf War in order to protect themselves from the negative connotations of hte actual word 'civilian casualties'.

Human beings are not collateral, nor is their dying collateral damage. It is an offensive term which we should best not copy.
 
.
such actions, the latter especially (if implying Indian military operations on Pakistani soil) would be extremely counter productive
Please pardon my ignorance, but counter-productive in what way? As I understand it, part of the reason for cutting the failed Swat deal wasn't foolishness (according to Agnostic Muslim, saadahmed, and others) but to give the Taliban a chance to show more Pakistanis just what monsters they could be, even though Pakistan's leadership knew the people of Swat would suffer. Preserving pride, it seems, was more important than expending political capital to preserve justice and the rule of law.

So if the reason for not openly endorsing action on Pakistani soil by the U.S. (or even India) is pride, isn't that something you conceive it your duty to attempt to change by speaking out? As you put it, "once we have annihilated this menace, then we will go to such countries, and demand an explanation for the wrongs they have done to us and compensation for our losses."
 
.
Agreed. But can you clearly state what you offer instead, and why the Pakistani Army should be asked to fight for it?

I'm a Muslim Pakistani and i love my religion & my country. I'll never left my country in the hands of some brainwashed people backed by some Anti-Pakistan forces which are doing such horrible things for some dollars, they are trying to ruin my country and Islam, so no mercy for them.

Pak-Armed forces have one Absolut priority: defence of Pakistan and it's people. no matter who's the enemy, even Taliban if they are harming Pakistan they are our enemy!

but don't forget that these Talibans are only puppets, once we fix them then will be the turn for the real masters who backed them.
 
.
I didn't read the whole article because this was enough:

"Time to take on the Taliban head-on"

There can't be two opinions about it.
 
.
Hopefully the armed forces have resupplied themselves by now, the military ran out of basic supplies and fuel fighting the Taliban. Leadership and a clear agenda has also been missing, while on the other hand the Taliban are well armed and have charismatic and staunch leaders at their disposal along with an unwavering ideology.
 
Last edited:
.
So if the reason for not openly endorsing action on Pakistani soil by the U.S. (or even India) is pride

The major reason for not endorsing action on Pakistani soil by foreign forces is that it would be a blatant violation of Pakistan's sovereignty, and would provide propaganda fodder to the extremists, therefore complicating the war effort.

As I understand it, part of the reason for cutting the failed Swat deal wasn't foolishness (according to Agnostic Muslim, saadahmed, and others) but to give the Taliban a chance to show more Pakistanis just what monsters they could be, even though Pakistan's leadership knew the people of Swat would suffer.

You understand incorrectly then, at least on my part - the intention behind the peace deal was always sincere, as it offered a slight ray of hope in terms of ending the conflict peacefully.
 
.
Pakistan makes 'last' appeal to defiant Taliban

Associated Press Writer= PESHAWAR, Pakistan (AP) — A Pakistani leader on Friday issued what he said was a final appeal to Taliban militants to retreat to their Swat Valley stronghold and salvage a peace deal sharply criticized by the United States.

The government agreed in February to impose Islamic law in Swat and surrounding areas of the northwest in return for a cease-fire that halted nearly two years of bloody fighting between militants and Pakistani security forces.

But hard-liners have seized on the concession to demand Islamic law, or Sharia, across the country, and the Swat Taliban have used it to justify a push into the adjoining Buner district, bringing them to within about 60 miles (100 kilometers) of the capital.

The embattled government of Pakistan's North West Frontier Province on Friday convened a meeting with heads of ruling and opposition parties to decide how to respond.

"Those who took arms must lay them down. Those who went to Buner, they must get out from Buner," Iftikhar Hussain, provincial government spokesman and a leader of the ruling Awami National Party said before the meeting. "This is the only way, and we are asking them for the last time."

Government leaders have warned that they will use force if the militants — who have beheaded opponents, torched girls schools and denounced democracy as un-Islamic — continue to challenge the Pakistani state.

But they have also sought to counter a rising tide of extremist violence with dialogue and peace deals that critics worry only grant brutal extremists impunity, legitimacy and the time and space to muster more forces.

In a sign of the rising tension, gunmen on Thursday attacked paramilitary troops sent to Buner to protect government offices, killing a police officer escorting the force.

A subsequent meeting between Taliban representatives and tribal elders in Buner ended with the militants making some concessions but no pledge to withdraw. There were reports that fighters from Swat had also entered another neighboring district, Shangla.

Militants have made no secret of their desire to see Islamic law imposed across the country, and unease about the peace deal is growing in Pakistan and in the West.

The U.S. considers rooting out militant sanctuaries in Pakistan as critical to success in the Afghan war. At the same time, it also worries about the security of Pakistan's nuclear weapons.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Wednesday that Pakistan's leaders were "basically abdicating to the Taliban." On Thursday, however, she said Islamabad appeared increasingly aware of the threat.

Clinton told U.S. lawmakers the Obama administration is working to convince Islamabad that its traditional focus on India as a threat has to shift to Islamic extremists.

"Changing paradigms and mindsets is not easy, but I do believe there is an increasing awareness of not just the Pakistani government but the Pakistani people that this insurgency coming closer and closer to major cities does pose such a threat," she said.

Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani insisted no group would be allowed to challenge the authority of the government and a few lawmakers — including some who initially backed the peace deal with the Swat Taliban — said the administration had to do more to contain extremists.

"If the other party is not able to give us peace and expanding themselves to Buner and Shangla, then it is the government's duty to use its full strength to stop their expansion," said Haji Mohammad Adeel, another leader of the ruling party in the northwest which negotiated the peace deal in the first place.

The accord covers Swat, Buner, Shangla and other districts in the Malakand Division, an area of about 10,000 square miles (25,900 square kilometers) near the Afghan border and the tribal areas where al-Qaida and the Taliban have strongholds.

Supporters have said the deal takes away the militants' main rallying call for Islamic law and will let the government gradually reassert control — a theory yet to be seriously tested.
 
.
Pakistan need to make - a strong stand point but this - will be hampered by political and anti national approach by corrupt - officials and leaders. Who are milking money by creating these injury to pakistan.
Pakistan need no help from american drone or american soldiers in side their Border.
They are very much capable to kick out the talibanis out of their border - in to hand of american - who should hunt these meaningless existent right on border of afghan.
These peace deal or sheria law - compromise - are all deemed by gut less - officlas and politicans , army or people of pakistan - must oppose this. Go for the kill - these buggers are nothing - if the full power is given to army.
As for civilian casualty - civilian will die in much lesser number - if pakistan pioneer the - war on terror in this region. They have much more under standing and will to fight against them.
 
.
but don't forget that these Talibans are only puppets, once we fix them then will be the turn for the real masters who backed them.

OK I am glad to hear that you are going to fix rogue elements within ISI, your army & politicians once you take care of the Talibs.
 
.
OK I am glad to hear that you are going to fix rogue elements within ISI, your army & politicians once you take care of the Talibs.

hah .. it wouldnt be funny if it wasnt sadly true .. but if they fix them .. who do you think they will go after?
 
.
You understand incorrectly then, at least on my part - the intention behind the peace deal was always sincere, as it offered a slight ray of hope in terms of ending the conflict peacefully.
So you're saying you were a fool? If that was the case then, then how are matters different now?
 
.
When there's military operations going on in those areas people cry that civilians are caught in cross-fire and they want military operations to end but when there's a peace deal then people cry that Pakistan has given in to Taliban.

There's no winning!

That pretty much sums up every decision and problem in politics since the start of organized government.

You can't win. You can only "lose less".
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom