Former ISI chief: Hiding Osama a victory

[SMC]

I was not rebutting anything, because "there was just nothing worth rebutting at all".
Actually the rhetorical questions in my post had the answers intrinsic to them.

As they say; it is not only the Blind who cannot see and not only the Deaf who cannot hear!

You mean to say that unnamed sources are kosher when they're speaking against Pakistan?

And as far as your last comment, you mean to say you do not require evidence and will believe conspiracy theories when they're against Pakistan?

Great, nothing to rebutt for me either then. Same as all the other bharatis, gross hypocrite.

 

[Secur]

You are quite right there; in the underlined part. That warm waters or "Garam Paani" BS/Canard was a lot of "Garam Hawa"/or "Hauwaa" floated by interested parties viz. the Saudis and Americans to start with. Then Zia ul Haq climbed on to that band-wagon because it helped to butress his image as the "Caliph-in Waiting" of the Islamic Crescent that could be carved through the CARs right upto Af-Pak. Now what a tremendous leap in stature that would be for someone who was just a mediocre Soldier who had missed his right calling in life----- as an oily obsequious rug salesman.

Even the fictitious claim that the Soviets wanted to walk in through Afghanistan and Pakistan was a sheer impossibility in military terms. Afghanistan had a pliable collaborationist regime. But Pakistan did not. So militarily; Pakistan was no pushover.

Then there was the other part; which was carefully suppressed by the chief proponents of this canard. The Soviet Union was a declining power already. The "Economic Gas" was fast depleting out of their system. There just no way that they could have sustained any military adventure for long anywhere. That is what forced their pull-out from Afghanistan. Not the 'fairy-tale' that the ISI and Pakistan laid them low. The biggest beneficiary of that 'fairy-tale' was meant to be Zia ul Haq; it would have firmly installed him as the divinely ordained "Sultan of Pakistan" and led the way towards being anointed the "Caliph of the Cenral Asian Ummah". But God (and Uncle Sam) decreed otherwise. They saw what a menace this man could be and acted. Unluckily for Zia and luckily(?) for Pakistan, a C-130 Herk fell out of the sky.
Why else do you think a crate of particularly tasty mangoes just blew up, instead of being eaten?

The problem with that myth is that it has been circulated for so long now that people now believe it , as some sort of historical fact . Nothing could be farther than the truth . The Soviet reasons for intervention and the reluctancy of its political and military leaders to do so is well known . It was never indicated by any means , that the eventual target of the now defunct USSR was to get access to warm waters , whereas it was trying to save the comrades-in-Kabul and in the meantime , hoping to bring some stability to the tense Central Asian region . It may be worth noting that during the initial years of Zia-ul-Haq in office , he was facing severe International isolation . Therefore , analysts believe that when the communists intervened on the request of Afghan Govt , he saw it as a golden opportunity to get out of it . In a fortnight , the entire world minus the Soviet bloc - The Warsaw Pact members became supportive of his actions . Mr.Zia somehow thought that he could be the next ' Commander of the Faithful ' and a sort of de facto leader of the Muslim world . What the fool , didn't realize that he was merely a pawn in a larger scheme of things . That the ' victory isn't for goblins ( third world countries ) in a wizard's ( superpowers ) war ' . The delusions of the grand power that the man harbored were unbelievable . The Soviet , communist threat were raised to disproportionate levels , the society radicalized with an imported version of Islam and a special alliance forged with the Mullah brigade and the Madarsa Graduates .

What people do not realize is that USSR at that time , wasn't remotely doing well . Moscow wasn't that powerful to to come to Gwadar or Karachi when they weren't even expecting victory in Afghanistan .

The USSR due to its economic policies and huge military spending vis a vis U.S was already on the verge of decline . Just like the Americans aren't leaving Afghanistan today because they are military defeated , the Reds didn't do so because they had lost some 14,000 comrades but mainly because their economy didn't permit them to further continue the futile endeavor furthermore . However , the Pakistani involvement in the Soviet war did speed things up , which had to happen sooner or later just like the civil war in Afghanistan and struggle for control of Kabul . Hadn't it been for the Islamabad's military training and support to the point of direct involvement with the SSG and Pakistan Army , the Soviet causalities are expected to be much less . However , that of course wasn't the cause of the withdrawal .

Gen.Zia had again got a golden chance to point out that the ' godless infidels ' had been defeated and abandoned Afghanistan adding credibility to his quest for Muslim world leadership . A person who had defeated a superpower in the public's view . What he didn't remember that Americans use people and after their work is done and the objectives achieved , they are discarded , much like the Commander of the Faithful was , who would die with an American ambassador on board .

 

[humanfirst]

I am not sure you understand me at all. I do not deny that what I believe is a conspiracy theory. That's what makes me different from you guys, and what keeps from being a hypocrite, while you guys continue being gross hypocrites. You guys on the other shout conspiracy theories yet acuse others of believing in conspiracy theories, yet fail to admit that what you say (at least in this thread) is a conspiracy theory. If you guys openly admitted that you're being conspiracy theorists then I couldn't care less what you say.

In agreeing that you beleive in selective conspiracy theories,you are agreeing yourself to be a fraud or at least an intellectually dishonest person,not just a hypocrite..And that is what really separate you from us..Your concerns about indians being hypocrites are based on the faulty premise that Indians propogate and promote conspiracy theories like you do and pathetically admit,which inturn is based on your desparate attempts to tag in the accusations over ISI in hiding osama as a "conspiracy theory" despite several "facts" indicating state complicity ..Anyway There is no point in arguing with someone who when shown their intellectual dishonesty replies that "at least I agree that I beleive in conspiracy theories",as if beleiving in their own lack of logic would justify it...It is the usual argument of islamofascists who cries loud against burqa ban etc by saying-"At least we agree that we are intolerant sobs who denies secularism and equality(in islamic countries),while west preaches secularism and ban burqa,so west is hypocrite.."

Which "overwhelming facts" are you talking about here? What you have is merely circumstantial evidence. There is, in fact, FAR MORE circumstantial evidence that 9/11 was an inside job. Or are you saying that mere claims count as "facts" now?

Lol...More circumstantial evidence for "9-11 was inside" job than "ISI hid osama",That too in a thread in which founding father of ISI supported militancy congratulating ISI for hiding osama..And no,by facts i meant hard undeniable facts strongly indicating state complicity..

 

[Capt.Popeye]

The problem with that myth is that it has been circulated for so long now that people now believe it , as some sort of historical fact . Nothing could be farther than the truth . The Soviet reasons for intervention and the reluctancy of its political and military leaders to do so is well known . It was never indicated by any means , that the eventual target of the now defunct USSR was to get access to warm waters , whereas it was trying to save the comrades-in-Kabul and in the meantime , hoping to bring some stability to the tense Central Asian region . It may be worth noting that during the initial years of Zia-ul-Haq in office , he was facing severe International isolation . Therefore , analysts believe that when the communists intervened on the request of Afghan Govt , he saw it as a golden opportunity to get out of it . In a fortnight , the entire world minus the Soviet bloc - The Warsaw Pact members became supportive of his actions . Mr.Zia somehow thought that he could be the next ' Commander of the Faithful ' and a sort of de facto leader of the Muslim world . What the fool , didn't realize that he was merely a pawn in a larger scheme of things . That the ' victory isn't for goblins ( third world countries ) in a wizard's ( superpowers ) war ' . The delusions of the grand power that the man harbored were unbelievable . The Soviet , communist threat were raised to disproportionate levels , the society radicalized with an imported version of Islam and a special alliance forged with the Mullah brigade and the Madarsa Graduates .

What people do not realize is that USSR at that time , wasn't remotely doing well . Moscow wasn't that powerful to to come to Gwadar or Karachi when they weren't even expecting victory in Afghanistan .

The USSR due to its economic policies and huge military spending vis a vis U.S was already on the verge of decline . Just like the Americans aren't leaving Afghanistan today because they are military defeated , the Reds didn't do so because they had lost some 14,000 comrades but mainly because their economy didn't permit them to further continue the futile endeavor furthermore . However , the Pakistani involvement in the Soviet war did speed things up , which had to happen sooner or later just like the civil war in Afghanistan and struggle for control of Kabul . Hadn't it been for the Islamabad's military training and support to the point of direct involvement with the SSG and Pakistan Army , the Soviet causalities are expected to be much less . However , that of course wasn't the cause of the withdrawal .

Gen.Zia had again got a golden chance to point out that the ' godless infidels ' had been defeated and abandoned Afghanistan adding credibility to his quest for Muslim world leadership . A person who had defeated a superpower in the public's view . What he didn't remember that Americans use people and after their work is done and the objectives achieved , they are discarded , much like the Commander of the Faithful was , who would die with an American ambassador on board .

That description is very accurate apart from being eloquent.

That episode of Pakistan's history was simply one of many peole and entities riding their 'own band-wagons' and of Pakistan simply being 'taken for a ride'!
Zia ul Haq was a man of unbridled ambition (even more than his benefactor Bhutto), but he did not have the abilities to match. He had little respect and standing in the international arena; while in Pakistan, if he did not have the fauj to back him up would have been consigned to some dust-bin. Even within the fauj he did not have unstinting support, since within the PA itself there was a substantial constitency in the higher echelons which knew that he was 'tinkering-about' with the essence of an institution if not of the State! Which would have dramatic consequences for both. And all because of personal ambition. The PA's reactions after the plane crash attest to that. Now Zia was shrewd enough to understand that he alone had little respect; so he adopted one of the politician's favorite tricks. Of creating some populist slogan/agenda and then co-opting organisations to propagate that. He then insinuated them into the institutions eg the Army and the State. Doing that to the Polity of the Nation is somewhat inevtable but can be manageable. But doing that to Institutions can be fatal.

Outside Pakistan; none of the other players/entities have been/are stake-holders in Pakistan. Certainly not beyond a point where there interests cease to exist. So how and what they did conformed to the script. Even Zia and his sympathisers found the "abandonment" a convenient peg to 'spin their script around' and help speed up the polarisation within Pakistan. That was the time when any dreams of Mohammed Ali Jinnah were pretty much administered the "last rite".
And the Quaid-e-Azam got elevated in to the form of a "patrician-looking elderly gentleman in a gilt-edged frame hanging on walls in Pakistan".

 

[SMC]

In agreeing that you beleive in selective conspiracy theories,you are agreeing yourself to be a fraud or at least an intellectually dishonest person,not just a hypocrite..And that is what really separate you from us..Your concerns about indians being hypocrites are based on the faulty premise that Indians propogate and promote conspiracy theories like you do and pathetically admit,which inturn is based on your desparate attempts to tag in the accusations over ISI in hiding osama as a "conspiracy theory" despite several "facts" indicating state complicity ..Anyway There is no point in arguing with someone who when shown their intellectual dishonesty replies that "at least I agree that I beleive in conspiracy theories",as if beleiving in their own lack of logic would justify it...It is the usual argument of islamofascists who cries loud against burqa ban etc by saying-"At least we agree that we are intolerant sobs who denies secularism and equality(in islamic countries),while west preaches secularism and ban burqa,so west is hypocrite.."

A lot of hoopla and rhetoric but no argument with substance. Your hypocrisy is clear as day light, mine not so much. At least I am honest with myself and others, you not so much. This is what separates us from you, you make friends with someone with the intent of stabbing them from the back, we at least are clear in our intentions. We do not pretend to play dumb and act like we have no idea what we're talking about.

You know deep down that this is a conspiracy theory, even by the narrowest definition. Yet you continue to play dumb. The claims against ISI are a conspiracy theory precisely because the US state has not even accused Pakistan of being complicit, let alone provide evidence of ISI doing anything. . Much less the UN even remotely talking about any Pakistani involvement. And neither US nor UN has created any sanctions for Pakistan. So I have NO IDEA what you mean when you say that there are facts against Pakistan, because clearly, UN and US might need to know about those, and they don't as of now. I am really wondering which "several facts" you're discussing here.

If you think these are "desperate attempts" then you HAVE no idea what you're talking about. Absolutely no idea - zero, nada, nil, zilch, zippo. If there's anyone making desperate attempts, it's you guys, to show this as not a conspiracy theory. Remember, what you're saying is a conspiracy theory EVEN BY THE NARROWEST DEFINITION. I don't need to make any desperate attempts.

Lol...More circumstantial evidence for "9-11 was inside" job than "ISI hid osama",That too in a thread in which founding father of ISI supported militancy congratulating ISI for hiding osama..

Irrelevant point. Hamid Gul left ISI in the 80s. This incident is at least 15-20 years beyond his time. Next.

And no,by facts i meant hard undeniable facts strongly indicating state complicity..

And which are these facts, please enlighten me? Maybe that US state needs to know these facts as well, so they can go on record and accuse Pakistan?



OR....

You'll say that US privately has evidence of Pakistani involvement, but is waiting for the right time to show the evidence? Ala Rehman Malik? The same theory you ridicule to no end? I really hope you don't even start to go there, because then you'll look utterly ridiculous.