Gen. Raheel not received any job offer from Saudi Arabia: Sartaj Aziz

[cocomo]

If Pakistan is able to sit Iran and Saudi on a negotiation table to agree on a future course. That would be a great achievement, and would end the sectarianism that plagues our Muslim countries.

 

[Khanate]

A prerequisite to joining any alliance - the alliance members must firmly state that they support our position on Kashmir - liberating IoK from the occupiers.

Any country that wouldn't say that fearing it might piss off India is not an ally!

So I must add - I'm not even remotely interested in this 40 nation bullshit alliance. Unless the other 39 nations agree to fight our wars!

This.

I have little to no regard left for Arab League considering they take 'no position' on Kashmir while dolling out observer status to India. So I see no reason in asserting Pakistan's interests. Brotherhood is a two-way street.

Read: Arab League has 'no position' on Kashmir (Hindustan Times)

 

[Indus Pakistan]

I don't think they started it but they also got dirty in it...

Oh yeh? In order the countries that started the Syrian conflict -

USA
Israel
Saudia Arabia

Link > http://www.mintpressnews.com/julian-assange-us-israel-planned-to-overthrow-assad-in-2006/209493/
Link > https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html

 

[TankMan]

An Islamic coalition would definitely be a step forward - but not if the Saudis intend to use it as their personal servant.

Iran must be included in dialog at the very least. The Saudis' and Iranians' pride has cost hundreds of thousands of Muslim lives while the West continues to 'intervene' to 'liberate' Muslim nations.

Counter-terrorism would be so much more effective if a Muslim coalition was doing it rather than a western army, which is always seen as an occupier (and rightly so).

I suspect if the Saudis were considering General Raheel Sharif as a leader for this alliance, he probably had reservations - and so did they, considering that the General wasn't too keen on sending troops to do their bidding in Yemen.

It always struck me as 'too good to be true'. But I still have hope.

Even without the Arabs, a Turkey-Pakistan-Indonesia alliance would be formidable if done properly.

 

[PaklovesTurkiye]

Oh yeh? In order the countries that started the Syrian conflict -

USA
Israel
Saudia Arabia

Link > http://www.mintpressnews.com/julian-assange-us-israel-planned-to-overthrow-assad-in-2006/209493/
Link > https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/06DAMASCUS5399_a.html

What do you say, @Valar Dohaeris ? Is KSA responsible, along with US, Israel for mess in Syria??

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

No, but it does seperate the "doers" from the "talkers".

Like when the indians claimed that Pakistan would NEVER EVER become a nuclear weapons state with or without Chinese assistance That it was impossible for Pakistan to do so...........lol......lol...Pakistan was the "doer" then weren't we?.........

 

[The SC]

Gen. Raheel not received any job offer from Saudi Arabia: Sartaj Aziz

Not yet, but he has joined the HQ, most probably to get acquainted with the organization before the official announcement..all is known for now is that he got the accord of the Pakistani Military Establishment and the Government..

 

[Manidabest]

the job offer is not for Saudia but for an alliance of Islamic countries but again we need to bring iran on board so the alliance can work otherwise i m afraid this wont work

 

[war&peace]

Well I was so sure that Gen. Raheel would not get command of any Saudi alliance that I placed a wager that I would leave PDF if I was wrong.

How long this offer is valid sir

 

[F86 Saber]

I totally agree with @Kaptan, the arabs of today are no where near the arabs of 1400 years ago. They are rich, arrogant, extremely prejudice and have no regard for Islam or Muslim ummah, it is only the simple minded Pakistanis who believe otherwise. They much rather lick the boots of Westerners then accept that they need help from us "Masakeen". Even if they do hire Gen. Raheel, he will be used as a puppet or an escape goat in the Arab-Iran sectarian war.

 

[Khafee]

Well I was so sure that Gen. Raheel would not get command of any Saudi alliance that I placed a wager that I would leave PDF if I was wrong. This was not based on having any secret contacts, knowing Gen. Sharif, or indeed having some insider in the Saudi defence ministry.


It was just based on my analysis of KSA, Pakstan, GCC and the history of that relationship. That history points to Arabs getting Pakistani help when needed but secretly or informally. The final product always has 'Arab' printed on it and any Pakistani contribution is masked. In the public space GCC people regard Pakistan with concieted arrogance and look down as 'Miskeen' - even when their fighter jets are being flown by Pak pilots, or their banks were set up by Pak CEOs.

As I said before GCC treats Pakistan like a brothel. It just surreptitiously buy's out services instead of building up institutional compact with the Pakistani state. For example GCC could set up a Organization of Trans Arabian Sea Nations - OTAN. This could be structured along NATO lines where members around and across the Arabian Sea join in a military alliance.

OTAN

Pakistan
KSA
GCC
Oman
Kuwait

Could all join and bring forth what they have to offer. Pakistan has plenty of military age youth and could easily another new 300,000 army command with say 100 4th gen fighters and air support based in Arabian peninsula. Since GCC members have the money they could contribute to the financing of OTAN. Command could be circular, every new commander takes over every year from each member country.

OTAN would employ the principle of mutual defence. Attack on one member would be considerd attack against all. In this situation who would dare attack OTAN members. Certainly not Iran or any local powers. OTAN forces could be deployed in Yeman as defensive-offensive operation to secure OTAN member KSA's flank. In this scenario I would have no issues with Pak elemts of a OTAN force fighting Iranian sponsored groups or even Iranian soldiers. This would be a strategic force with strategic interests and that would mean fighting for other members even if you don't have beef with that country on the premise that if we get attacked then others would come to your aid and not look on.

MODEL IT ON NATO

And this is how it pans out in Afghanistan

However this is not what KSA/GCC wants. Instead it wants to create a master/dog relationship. Dog does this. Then throw a bone. Next day dog do this then throw a bone. This keeps the dog beholden to the master. I give example of England in Middle Ages. The King would rule in his full regalia and might. Poor people would walk and stand outside the palace in the vain hope of getting audience. If they were lucky they got a chance to meet the King. They would say 'I beg your majesty but I am poor and my children are hungry please help me' and the king might turn to his court staff and hand him some money. The poor guy would walk out praising the king like a god and thanking him profusively and saying if ever his majesty wants anything he will be their to serve him. This was arbitrary. It made the poor guy a begger and made the king like a god. Every time he helped somebody all the praise his ego got massaged. It was a power trip for the rulers but made beggers out of the common folk.

Today everything has been institionalized. You get sick you go to the NHS hospital and everybody is treated equally. You want justice you go to police or the courts and everrybody legally has free acces to the law. Your poor you go to the welfare agency and they will give you money as matter of law and not a favour. The queen instead today is just a figurehad.

KSA/GCC similarly want to keep one to relationship where they buy out services from Pakistan without developing institutional structures. Now compare the West. NATO acts as a joint defence organization. EU acts like common market that helps out any country in trouble or those that are poor. We all know how many $100s of billions were given to Greece as bailout by EU.

MODEL IT ON EU

@Khafee @Saif al-Arab

 

[saaju]

In other words leading Islamic military isn't like doing a job for Saudis Arabia??

 

[Peshwa]

Like when the indians claimed that Pakistan would NEVER EVER become a nuclear weapons state with or without Chinese assistance That it was impossible for Pakistan to do so...........lol......lol...Pakistan was the "doer" then weren't we?.........

I think "follower" is more appropriate for the situation mentioned..

Besides I'm still waiting for you to provide an ounce of proof for your claim that India was not aware of the Pakistani nuclear program right since the 80s...somehow you have created this fantasy in your mind that Pakistan had pulled a rabbit out of the hat!
Last time we spoke, your source was "memories from childhood"

Sorry but you have proven to be no more than a "talker"...lets see if you can change that.

 

[Hiptullha]

No, but it does seperate the "doers" from the "talkers".

Please also saythis to the foaming Hinditva fanatics we get who happen to be physically based in the US/Australia but mentally based in the designated shitting streets of Delhi.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

I think "follower" is more appropriate for the situation mentioned..

Besides I'm still waiting for you to provide an ounce of proof for your claim that India was not aware of the Pakistani nuclear program right since the 80s...somehow you have created this fantasy in your mind that Pakistan had pulled a rabbit out of the hat!
Last time we spoke, your source was "memories from childhood"

Sorry but you have proven to be no more than a "talker"...lets see if you can change that.

I think "follower" is more appropriate for the situation mentioned..

Besides I'm still waiting for you to provide an ounce of proof for your claim that India was not aware of the Pakistani nuclear program right since the 80s...somehow you have created this fantasy in your mind that Pakistan had pulled a rabbit out of the hat!
Last time we spoke, your source was "memories from childhood"

Sorry but you have proven to be no more than a "talker"...lets see if you can change that.

Talkers???????.........like the indians who claimed that Pakistan's SLBM test a few days ago was a fake as we're our Nuke tests in May 1998...........lol.......


Or talkers like those indians who claimed to have invented aeroplanes 7000 years ago:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-the-science-congress/?utm_term=.b5cbf7fcd408


............