India vs Pakistan – A conflict like no other

[desiman]

India vs. Pakistan - A conflict like no other

India and Pakistan blame each other's spies for just about everything that goes wrong. If there's an outbreak of plague or a riot, it's the work of the sinister "foreign hand." Indians are certain, for instance, that Pakistan's secret service, the Inter-Services Intelligence, or ISI, masterminded the December attack on the Indian Parliament in New Delhi. Do they have any concrete evidence? "Zilch," concedes an Indian official. "Quite honestly, we only know they are involved by implication." Equally, the Pakistanis are convinced that agents of India's secret service, the Research and Analysis Wing, or RAW, are behind random bombings that plague Pakistani cities.


The battle of the subcontinental spooks is played out across the region, with the ISI and RAW busily trying to foil each other's machinations in Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka. They seldom do the dirty work themselves, relying instead on henchmen who are gangsters, separatist chiefs and extremists inside each other's borders.
It's a messy, regional cold war, with a distinctive dash of South Asian paranoia�and grudging respect. Nobody speaks more highly of the ISI than counterparts in RAW, and vice versa. In New Delhi, one RAW officer praises the ISI's soldierly "aggression" and reckons his own organization is mired down by bickering bureaucrats. Pakistani officials say the Indians are way ahead of them in propaganda and psychological warfare. "We don't have the resources to carry out all these operations," says a former ISI chief, Javed Ashraf Qazi. "RAW has a budget 10 times that of the ISI's and it is more effective than the ISI." This mutual admiration may, of course, be nothing more than a sly way to lobby for a bigger budget. The scarier these agencies make the enemy appear, the more cash they can claim to need for their own skulduggery. Their finances are kept secret, but estimates put the ISI's annual budget at $45 million and RAW's at $150 million.

Each country accuses the other of using diplomats as a cover for spying. So India and Pakistan both routinely tap each other's embassy telephones, tail diplomats around the cocktail circuit and sometimes have dispatched gigolos to seduce each other's wives for future blackmail. One barometer of the chill between India and Pakistan is the frequency with which they toss out each other's diplomats. The temperature is decidedly frosty: last week, Indian police allegedly slapped around and expelled a Pakistani diplomat for spying, and the Pakistanis responded in kind. In South Asia, the "foreign hand" is always restless.

 

[desiman]

India, Pakistan: two steps forward and four backwards?


Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari has dropped a plan to travel to Egypt next month where he was expected to hold further talks with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh following their meeting in Russia this week.
Pakistan’s foreign office has said Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani will attend the summit of Non-Aligned Nations in the Egyptian city of Sharm El Sheikh although soon after the Singh-Zardari meeting in Yekaterinburg the two sides announced plans for a second meeting in July.
Has something gone wrong?
Newspapers on both sides of the border read more into the change of plans than just a normal swap of duties between the prime minister and the president.
The Dawn linked the cancellation to displeasure over Singh telling Zardari in the full glare of the world’s media that Pakistan should not allow its soil to be used for militant attacks on India.
The soft-spoken Singh’s rather unexpected remark right at the beginning of the first-to-face encounter with Pakistan’s leaders since the Mumbai attacks in November ensured that the meeting was unpleasant from the outset, it said.
Pakistan’s The News said New Delhi had handed Zardari a “well staged slight” but Islamabad was setting it aside because at the end of the day the two sides were talking again.
Indian newspapers were less restrained, saying Zardari dropped out of the next meeting after Singh’s blunt talk and that Islamabad wanted to send the message that his rather public reprimand had not gone down well with Pakistan.
Did India over-reach then? Perhaps too much shouldn’t be read into all this. The Hindu points out that this may not yet be the last word, as Zardari has changed travel plans at the last minute several times.
At home though, they are applauding Singh both for his tough talk and the realisation that you have to engage the “imploding neighbour” because that is the neighbourhood it lives in.
Singh had served notice that India and indeed its neighbours were going to see a more determined prime minister in the months ahead, “a far cry from the man who was seemingly too timid to take on his tormentors during the previous five years,” as New Delhi’s Mint wrote.
And columnist and former ambassador Kuldip Nayar said the meeting hadn’t come a day too soon.
“Too much time and too much money have been wasted in talking against each other instead of talking to each other. The two countries have not experienced peace since independence; 62 years is a long period for the people to suffer estrangement and live in fear of war all the time,” he wrote.
Are they slipping back into talking at each other?

 

[desiman]

The cost of conflict between India and Pakistan



When will Pakistan ever come to terms with India and stop talking about Jammu & Kashmir being a core issue"? And when will the United States stop fooling India? Year after year both India and Pakistan have been spending huge amounts of money and there seems to be no end to it. They rank 3rd and 15th respectively in the list of major military spender countries of the world. Indian military expenditure shot up be 12 per cent in the post-Kargil budget of 2000-2001 followed by 5 per cent escalation in 2002-2003. In 2002-2003 the military budget was lowered only to be increased by 17 per cent in 2003- 2004.

In similar comparison the defence expenditure of Pakistan came drastically down by 12.8 per cent in 2000-2001, but this is a misleading fact for what Pakistan did was to shift military pensions worth Rs 36 million from defence to general expenditure. Pakistan's defence expenditure jumped by 27 per cent during the period from 2001 to 2004.

According to current trends Pakistan is scheduled to spend Rs 188 billion or 3.9 per cent of its Gross Domestic Product (GDP) in 2006-2007. During that same period India is expected to spend Rs 706 million. In other words India and Pakistan are bleeding each other while the world must be laughing at us. For all his tall talk, Pakistan has not yet started to curb terrorist activities emanating from within its boundaries.

Within a week of the daring attack on Jammu's Jail complex, terrorists struck in Srinagar's busy Residency Road area, adjacent to the Media enclave on 9 March. The building they wanted to blow up houses the offices of the Press Information Bureau and the Kashmir Information Department. That same day terrorists also struck at a contractor's house in Badgam district, killing three persons on the spot.

In fact, whatever the Deputy Prime Minister L. K. Advani and the Defence Minister George Fernandes might say, there seems to be no end to militant violence, which has been growing, not diminishing. What is more shocking, Pakistan reportedly has spread its tentacles throughout India, if we can believe a well-documented report entitled Cost of Conflict Between India and Pakistan drafted by a Mumbai-based Think- Tank called Strategic Foresight Group of the International Centre for Peace Initiatives.

The report provides some damning information hitherto unavailable to the media. In 2003, according to the report, India identified enhanced ISI activities in nine states, namely Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Bihar, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Jharkhand and an active network of ISI-sponsored illegal madrassahs throughout the country. It is believed that this and other information was leaked out to this Think Tank by the government. And where are these illegal madrassahs situated? The report says that situated on the Indo-Nepal border are 330 of them, on the Indo-Bangladesh border there are approximately 800, in Kerala 9,975, in Madhya Pradesh 6,000 in Maharashtra 2,435, in West Bengal 2,116, in Assam 2002, in Gujarat 1,825, in Rajasthan 1,780, in Delhi 1,161, in Karnataka 961, in Andhra Pradesh 721 and in Jammu & Kashmir 122. ISI funding to illegal madrasssahs amounts to Rs 600 million per year. It is a frightening thought. In addition to these madrassahs, the report says that approximately 10,000 people are working for the ISI in various capacities. One can take these figures lightly or dismiss them as the product of highly imaginative mind. But consider this: After the 1971 war, the Indian Armed Forces shot 700 CIA agents three quarters of whom were Indians.

Writes Ashok Parthasarathi, professor and chairperson of Jawaharlal Nehru University's School for Social Sciences in World Affairs (Volume seven): "We had the names, locations and actions of all these fellows. One hundred of them who were non-Indian nationals were allowed 24 hours to leave the country and were escorted, put on planes and taken out. The Indian nationals were shot. The kind of damage they had done to the national security and safety was monumental... We have to take these realities into account ..." We do not know how many Indian nationals are presently working for the ISI in India but one can concede that they number in hundreds if not thousands.

The Think-Tank writes: "The Kashmir cells of Jehadi organisations will step up violence in India. Major attacks in Kashmir could increase substantially from once in 4-6 weeks in 2003 to 4-6 attacks a week in the coming years. The strategy of militants could also aim to expand terrorist attacks beyond Kashmir to target main cities of India..." It is well to remember that as late as the second week of March 2004, Gen. Musharraf was still harping on Jammu & Kashmir being the "core issue" between India and Pakistan.

Irrespective of the crowd behaviour of cricket enthusiasts in Karachi during the first One-dayer, Pakistan's military elite has not given up on its primary aim. And in Pakistan its presence is felt everywhere. Pakistani Army officials are to be found embedded in every Ministry and they literally run the show. In the Communication Ministry there are 98 Armed Forces officers, in the Defence Production Division 52, in the Establishment Division 16, in the Interior (Home) Ministry 88, in the Industries and Production Ministry 29, in the Ministry of Information Technology 58, in the Kashmir Affairs and Northern Affairs Ministry 25, in the Ministry of Petroleum and National Resources 39, in the Ministry of Science and Technology 21, in the Ministry of Railways 72 and in the Ministry of Water and Power 37. The chairman of Karachi, Gwadar and Port Bin Trusts are military officers, not laymen.

The chairmen of Karachi, Lahore, Peshawar, Islamabad, Hyderabad and Quetta Electric Supply Corporations are Army officers, none below the rank of Brigadier. There is no way the Armed Forces can be displaced from power. Their tentacles are spread in every department of civil and military life. Says the Think-Tank's report: "The military has over the years pervaded every segment of Pakistan society, industry, commerce, diplomatic services and civil institutions, not to forget education and health care services.
The military is the single biggest player in Pakistani economy, active in a wide variety of businesses from fertiliser production to insurance companies. The core of the military business empire is a group of four foundations: Fauji Foundation, Army Welfare Trust, Shaheen Foundation and Bahria Foundation, with assets worth over $5 billion". That is Pakistan. Western Powers, not to speak of China, have been quite comfortable with this system partly because it cuts down on red tape but more importantly because dealing with Pakistan has been a very profitable business to them down the years. These powers including the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Belgium and Netherlands, not to speak of China have allowed themselves to be used because Pakistan in turn has been most amenable to be used by them.

American, European and Chinese doublespeak in the matter of nuclear proliferation has to be studied to be believed. This has been stated in great detail by Prof. Matin Zuberi in The Road to Chagai. No other work in recent times has exposed the Big Powers as fully and as mercilessly as this one. The book traces the history of Pakistan's development of nuclear capability right from the time Zulfikar Ali Bhutto decided that "if India developed an atomic bomb, we too will develop one even if we have to eat grass or leaves or to remain hungry". Between 1960 and 1967 the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission (PAEC) sent about 600 scientists and engineers abroad for specialisation in nuclear technology.

To build an "Islamic Nuclear Bomb" Libya, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States gave Pakistan well over $500 million in full knowledge of the United States. Prof. Zuberi states on one occasion there were at least two flights from Tripoli to Karachi, each bringing under high security as much as $ 100 million in suitcases.

Between the mid-1970s to the early `80s Pakistan engaged a global `grey market of nuclear mercenaries' to work for its nuclear programme and these mercenaries included physicists, metallurgists, chemists and other needed technical specialists, right under the nose of the United States which said and did nothing. Pakistan openly made purchases of vital equipment from West Germany, Switzerland and several other west European countries.

As late as in 1999 Pakistan purchased sensitive items from offshore front companies in Japan, Singapore and elsewhere. Writes Prof. Zuberi: "Apart from western firms that liberally provided equipment, components and even entire (nuclear) plants, Pakistan also benefitted from nuclear co-operation with `all-weather' friend China".
In 1983, for instance, US intelligence officials reported that China had transferred a complete design of a tested nuclear weapon with a yield of about twenty kilotons to Pakistan. The US officials even knew catalogue numbers of some parts of the weapon. Prof. Zuberi gives a full account of every type of nuclear assistance China gave to Pakistan. In 1986, for instance, China transferred to Pakistan enough tritium gas for ten nuclear weapons.

The full story of western and Chinese assistance to Pakistan in the nuclear field will be given in another article but this is only to inform readers that in all these years the United States turned a blind eye to what was going on in Pakistan.

American intelligence sources had even silently monitored a barter deal between Pakistan and North Korea. The point to all this information is to stress the fact that all claims of friendship towards India made whether by Pakistan or the United States have to be looked at with a good deal of scepticism. Thanks to our western "friends", India has had to spend an enormous amount of money to keep up with and surpass Pakistan's expenditure on nuclear armament. By all means, let India be nice to Washington and Islamabad but let it also remember the 600 CIA spies in India that were shot in 1971 and the billions spent by the ISI in supporting madrassahs in India. To be forewarned is to be forearmed.

 

[pak-marine]

Their finances are kept secret, but estimates put the ISI's annual budget at $45 million and RAW's at $150 million
here we go as the writer said its all about money after all one has to have a war or conflict to keep the business running.

 

[desiman]

Their finances are kept secret, but estimates put the ISI's annual budget at $45 million and RAW's at $150 million
here we go as the writer said its all about money after all one has to have a war or conflict to keep the business running.

So true bro, its all business, and people need to start understanding that

 

[desiman]

The cost of Pakistan-India conflict




The SFG document points out that the India-Pakistan conflict is over 0.25 percent of the total area of the two states, 0.25 percent of their total economy and 0.25 percent of their combined population. This is a way of putting matters in perspective
The Strategic Foresight Group (SFG), a Mumbai-based private-sector think tank on security and foreign policy issues, has recently published a document highlighting the multiplicity of costs of conflict for India and Pakistan. Among other things, it has sketched a scenario for nuclear war that may not be imminent or likely, but which cannot be ruled out if the outstanding issues between the two states are not resolved and the level of tension substantially reduced.
The SFG document posits at the start a curious aspect of the relationship between the two countries over the last five or six years: the rapidity with which the pendulum has swung between periods of high tension or near-war between the two countries to pro-active efforts for peace. The period leading up to and following the May 1998 nuclear tests by India and Pakistan was characterised by high levels of tension but within less than a year we find the prime ministers of the two countries meeting at the Lahore summit in February 1999. This is followed by the 'low' of the Kargil war and the 'high' of the Agra summit that gives way to a near-war situation between the two countries by May 2002.
The current 'high' in relations started with the Indian prime minister's peace initiative of April 2003 followed by the declaration of a unilateral ceasefire by Pakistan's prime minister. The peace effort was strengthened with the January 2004 SAARC meeting in Islamabad and an even more important meeting on the sidelines between the leaders of India and Pakistan that saw agreement on the resumption of a composite dialogue between the two countries. Staying with the 'swing model of bilateral relations,' however, the SFG warns that 2005-2007 could well see the pendulum swing the other way.
The document illustrates with the help of effectively presented information and graphs why this should not be allowed to happen: it warns that a number of scenario planning exercises looking at the security environment in South Asia over the next decade have pointed to the likelihood of a tactical exchange of nuclear weapons between India and Pakistan if hostilities between the two countries continue to escalate. The cities of Mumbai and Karachi are assumed to be likely targets in India and Pakistan, respectively, for the reason that they are the most populated. But the targets could as easily be other important cities in both countries.
In a daytime attack on a working day SFG calculates that in Mumbai, a city with a population of about 12 million, the death toll in the main financial and commercial areas alone would be approximately 2.3 million. Similarly a bomb dropped at a densely populated area of Karachi would result in a death toll of over 1 million. This obviously does not include deaths in other zones and over longer periods of time. Further, key physical assets would be destroyed as also a large part of the financial infrastructure. It is difficult to categorise anyone as the 'winner' in such a deadly conflict. As the SFG document points out, as a result of a nuclear exchange, 'the surviving nation would be economically, socially and politically far weaker than calculable.'
There are some projections, however, that seem entirely out of place in such a document. In a section headed 'Interference in Internal Problems', the SFG document observes that there are 150 million Muslims in India and 'if ISI manages to persuade even one per cent of them (1.5 million) to take up arms, these 1.5 million is a large enough number to create internal turmoil in India.' The ISI's role in different contexts has been a subject of considerable concern and discussion. But, apart from anything else, it is an insult to the Muslim citizens of India to even allude to the possibility that 1.5 million of them could take up arms against their own country as a consequence of ISI's persuasive powers. It is also dangerous, given the rise of an intolerant Hindutva ideology in India promoted by the Sangh Parivar and targeted against the minorities. It is, in fact, at least one of the major threats to the peace process between India and Pakistan.
The document provides some telling details on the dominance of the military in Pakistan, well-resourced extremist groups and their political affiliations, emphasising that in the absence of peace with India and rapid economic development, extremism would grow at a rapid rate and pose a serious internal threat to Pakistan. This endorses the view held by many within and outside Pakistan. The recent killings in Quetta on Ashura and the use of suicide bombing to kill fellow Muslims is a grave reminder of the sorry pass we have come to and the need for redressing the situation, most of all for our own sake.
The document points out that the conflict is over 0.25 percent of the total area of India and Pakistan, 0.25 percent of their total economy and 0.25 percent of their combined population. This is a way of putting matters in perspective. But, as the document suggests in its concluding chapter called the 'Peace Building Ladder,' the Kashmiris remain central to a solution that clears the way for a better future for India and Pakistan: It recommends talks between the government of India and All Parties Hurriyat Conference (APHC), a dialogue between Kashmiri groups from both sides of the LoC and seeks a directive on the part of the Indian government to its security forces in Kashmir demanding humane and fair conduct and suspension of operations against any groups that may announce a ceasefire.
Not least, leaving aside the potential of earnings for Pakistan through pipelines, the figures on trade provided in the document highlight the potential benefits for the people of both countries: While current official trade between India and Pakistan is estimated at $200-250 million, third-country trade is $1 billion and contraband trade is $1-2 billion. In a conducive environment, this trade could rise to $3-4 billion and under SAFTA go up to $5 billion annually. Also, it would clearly create additional economic opportunities as a consequence. This is not unimportant, given that the poverty ratios in India and Pakistan are 26.1 and 32 percent respectively. And, while they are two of the fifteen major military spenders in the world, the Human Development rank (2003) for India is 127 and for Pakistan 144. There can be no lasting peace if millions of people in this region continue to live in conditions of abject poverty and deprivation.

 

[desiman]

The facts

We’ve known it all along — the conflict with Pakistan is a lose-lose situation for both sides. But now the report of the Strategic Foresight Group titled ‘Cost of Conflict between India and Pakistan ’ has put a figure to it… The writing is on the wall — investment in people is an investment in peace. - Editorial, The Times of India, February 26, 2004


India and Pakistan have followed a "swing" model of relations whereby the pendulum of the relationship swings from one end to the other - conflict in May 1998 to peace in February 1999 to conflict in May 1999 to peace in November 2001 to conflict in December 2001 to peace in April 2003 to further peace in January 2004.

The Siachen conflict alone will cost India Rs. 7,200 crores and Pakistan Rs. 1,800 crores in the next five years. Together they will lose about 1,500 soldiers in the next five years in Siachen without fighting a war.

Pakistan's GTP (Gross Terror-economy Product) is Rs. 264 billion or equal to 6.6 per cent of its GDP.

Pakistan's Conflict Economy is more than 10 per cent of GDP. The Conflict Economy includes GTP and military expenditure.

Pakistan's jihadi forces are expected to increase from 200,000 at present to 300,000 at the end of the decade and the army from 620,000 at present to 646,000 at the end of the decade.

The control of Pakistan's military on its economy has enabled military officer's to head Water and Power Development Agency, Electric Supply Corporations of all major cities, Oil and Gas Development Corporation, Pakistan Telecommunication Authority, Pakistan Steel Mills, port Trust of Karachi and Gwadar, National Highway Authority, Tourism Development Corporation, Shipping Corporation, Civil Aviation Authority, Post Office, National Accountability Bureau, Public Service Commission, Life Insurance Corporation and provide Vice Chancellors of major Universities.

The casualties of Kashmir conflict since 1988 to 2000 were 85 per cent Muslims and 11 per cent Hindus.

India and Pakistan have the potential to enjoy a trade of about $1 billion if hostile environment continues and $13.25 billion if peace prevails on a cumulative basis for the next five years (2004-08) resulting in an opportunity loss of $12 billion.

 

[desiman]

Tell me guys what do you think is the real reason we fight. We have to remember that many years ago we fought together to achieve our own freedom, so im guessing something went wrong that brothers turned on each other. What do you think it is, Is it –

1) Kashmir
2) Ego Issues
3) Business
4) Politicians
5) The armed forces
6) Historical animosity
7) Religion
8) Difference in Opinion
9) USA or other world powers
10) Or just pure hate for each other

Please keep the reply professional and respect each others opinion, the point of this thread this to debate in a sane and orderly manner and not again indulge in mud slinging like every other thread.

 

[arya-hind]

desidog

nothing will come out this thread just flame and flame

Pakistani and Chinese will jump in flame war

 

[desiman]

desidog

nothing will come out this thread just flame and flame

Pakistani and Chinese will jump in flame war

Ya I know but that’s what we should avoid. I have posted articles that try to show both point of views and try best to avoid flaming any emotions. A good debate can really help everyone understand that no one hate each other here, everyone has emotions and is patriotic towards their own country, and that’s where logic gets blindfolded and people loose track of what is really the issue. Discussing that here in a meaningful manner would be quite engaging and informative.

 

[Creder]

i dunno man... the thing is you could have gotten a good answer for this question maybe fifty sixty years ago...that was the time when we turned against each other... you could trace the reason there...now i dont think any of these reasons matter...now we just hate each other just because we are supposed to hate eachother...just go through ten threads on this forum..every anti-pak thread will be by an indian dude and anything that slings mud on india will be started by a pakistani guy...this is how deep this hatred is...and the reason why there isnt any particular reason for this hatred is because you and me we were born into this hatred...and we accepted it without a reason.. you and me both..we're doomed to hate each other...just look at this thread Arya-Hind has already made a comment about pak chineese jumping in...i mean hes already provoking these guys...and the guys are gonna jump in on that and then hes gonna reply and theyre gonna reply back

you see what im trying to say lol ?

 

[vkurian]

Good debate desi dog...

I feel it has to do with demilitarizing the pillars of economy and democracy in Pakistan. The stakes for the Pakistan army is very high and it will always keep the fire of hate simmering. A strong civilian government in Pakistan is the first requirement and good governance of ten years will defang lot of hate and as the economy picks up people will have many better things to do than Jihad.

The main culprits are the Saudis in collaboration with the Army. The funding has to stop and the presence of the Army in day to day running of the country has to be stopped.

I am not for once saying Army to be disbanded but have a very strong Army which is primarily is in the business of safe guarding the borders and stays in the barracks.

This looks highly unlikely as all the money and the influence is controlled by the defense forces and they will not let go of it easily. So they will create terror groups and get involved in both sides of the border to justify their presence and domination. The corrupt and lackluster civilian leadership is not helping the cause either. Pakistan desperately need someone in Zulfikar Bhutto mould.

 

[desiman]

i dunno man... the thing is you could have gotten a good answer for this question maybe fifty sixty years ago...that was the time when we turned against each other... you could trace the reason there...now i dont think any of these reasons matter...now we just hate each other just because we are supposed to hate eachother...just go through ten threads on this forum..every anti-pak thread will be by an indian dude and anything that slings mud on india will be started by a pakistani guy...this is how deep this hatred is...and the reason why there isnt any particular reason for this hatred is because you and me we were born into this hatred...and we accepted it without a reason.. you and me both..we're doomed to hate each other...just look at this thread Arya-Hind has already made a comment about pak chineese jumping in...i mean hes already provoking these guys...and the guys are gonna jump in on that and then hes gonna reply and theyre gonna reply back

you see what im trying to say lol ?

I think this is probably one of the most logical comments i have heard on this forum. Brother its is quite sad that hate now is so deeply entrenched in our blood that we have forgotten how to be even human. I have seen on many thread here that how much hate we have have for each other. Most of them dont even know what it is about anymore. But i dont think we are doomed to hate each other brother. If we make an active change in ourselves first only then the world would change. If we are doomed to hate each other we are also doomed to be brothers. I have been to Pakistan and the love and affection i got was just amazing. It really hurts to see on this forum some misguided individuals flaming hate and propagating war. I know the realities of war and i also know how much India and Pakistan can accomplish if we just set all our grievances to one side. I dont know how long it will take but im sure it will happen one day, Inshallah

 

[desiman]

Good debate desi dog...

I feel it has to do with demilitarizing the pillars of economy and democracy in Pakistan. The stakes for the Pakistan army is very high and it will always keep the fire of hate simmering. A strong civilian government in Pakistan is the first requirement and good governance of ten years will defang lot of hate and as the economy picks up people will have many better things to do than Jihad.

The main culprits are the Saudis in collaboration with the Army. The funding has to stop and the presence of the Army in day to day running of the country has to be stopped.

I am not for once saying Army to be disbanded but have a very strong Army which is primarily is in the business of safe guarding the borders and stays in the barracks.

This looks highly unlikely as all the money and the influence is controlled by the defense forces and they will not let go of it easily. So they will create terror groups and get involved in both sides of the border to justify their presence and domination. The corrupt and lackluster civilian leadership is not helping the cause either. Pakistan desperately need someone in Zulfikar Bhutto mould.

Good post brother, yes even i hope Pakistan can find a democratic leader that can save the country from the huge influence of the Army. Democracy is the only way Pakistan can save itself and that is something every Pakistani must actively work for.

 

[pagans]

Tell me guys what do you think is the real reason we fight. We have to remember that many years ago we fought together to achieve our own freedom, so im guessing something went wrong that brothers turned on each other. What do you think it is, Is it –

1) Kashmir
2) Ego Issues
3) Business
4) Politicians
5) The armed forces
6) Historical animosity
7) Religion
8) Difference in Opinion
9) USA or other world powers
10) Or just pure hate for each other

Please keep the reply professional and respect each others opinion, the point of this thread this to debate in a sane and orderly manner and not again indulge in mud slinging like every other thread.

There is only one difference between India and Pakistan - Religion.