Kerry calls for more efforts to purge Pakistan of militancy

[third eye]

So I guess:

7000+ security forces killed
12,000 security forces wounded
36,000-65,000 civilians killed
3.5 million civilians displaced
32,553 militants killed

is not good enough...

The first 4 are seen as self inflicted injuries.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

This is going to be hard to answer, since you have so many facts at your fingertips. Now, if those facts had all related to the question, it might have been impossible to answer. Fortunately, it appears that some of us are like Gerald Ford, in LBJ's coarse and earthy description of him: that he wasn't able to chew gum and fart at the same time.

First, India has had nothing to do with Syria. Nothing. Go read up on it (even easier, ask the neighbourhood Mamu who apparently keeps you up to date with world events every day).

Second, Pakistan is being asked to get rid of its own peculiar brand of militancy, that it paid for and nurtured, for which it built training camps, handed over guns, ammunition and the munitions of war, and then shelled Indian positions to distract the border guards and allow them easy passage. You are the only ones involved in this.

Third, hypocrisy applies in this situation, but in the opposite direction. Pretending to know nothing about a situation created by yourselves is called what else, pray? Rock-ribbed integrity, perhaps?

Fourth, this is not about the Taliban. It seems strange that you don't even know which set of terrorists faces in which direction.

• The Taliban face the Afghans and give them hell. Kerry DID NOT ask you to fix that problem, as he and others have been asking for some years now, not this time.
• No, he was not talking about the Haqqani Network either, or about Gulbaddin Hekmatyar.
• Not about Jundallah; that's Iran's headache, and Kerry might have liked to talk about it, but the US isn't fixing Iran's headaches just at the moment.
• Not about the TTP; that is your own internal toxic mess.
• Not even about the Sipaha-e-Sahiba; that vicious group is entirely a Pakistan sectarian concoction.

Kerry was talking about Jaish-e-Mohammed, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Hizb-ul-Mujaheddin. These have nothing to do with Pakistani involvement with Afghanistan.

Fifth, by suppressing these terrorist groups, you will create no more enemies; you will reduce the violent elements who destabilise your own society by openly preaching the utility and beneficial effects of terror, rather than of discussion and debate, and who have proliferated the gun culture through every province, not just in a few isolated pockets. If this is not in your own NATIONAL INTEREST, what is? Merely suppressing the overt rebellion against government authority in KPK is not enough; there are other provinces where the writ of the government doesn't run. You should worry.

Sixth, Kerry was not asking about terrorist activity within Pakistan; he was referring to terrorist activity in Kashmir, which has increased. Your leaders have been asked to stop sponsoring, training and infiltrating them. That may well be all that matters to you, but it obviously isn't all that matters to Kerry and the US. Or to other countries in this world. That is the message that is being given to you.

Seventh, just took a good, hard look in the mirror, acting on your recommendation. Gosh, good-looking devil. Liked what I saw. I think you had best confine yourself to looking good and hard in my mirror for a change, you've obviously been giving yourself some nasty shocks in the morning looking in your own mirror. Give it up, it's bad for your BP. And, oh, nearly forgot; work on your posts. Right now, they suck. Big time.

Those 3 groups you have listed are not going anywhere. To some extent Pakistan has taken action against them but not to the point where it will get rid of them. Why should we get rid of them if they aren't attacking us? That is flawed logic at best. It is a fairly simple concept. Don't touch me and I won't touch you. The ONLY reason Pakistan has had terrorism is because of involvement in the war. Before that things were relatively stable. US pressure is not going to change our stance on Kashmir. India can dream at best. But again terrorism has drastically reduced in Pakistan and continues to do so.That is our only concern. If terrorism increases in Kashmir against India then there is no need to change the status quo. Either way if you listen to at 38:52 he said that Pakistan should continue the good work. India has said to do more.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Those 3 groups you have listed are not going anywhere. To some extent Pakistan has taken action against them but not to the point where it will get rid of them. Why should we get rid of them if they aren't attacking us? That is flawed logic at best. (1)The ONLY reason Pakistan has had terrorism is because of involvement in the war. Before that things were relatively stable. US pressure is not going to change our stance on Kashmir. India can dream at best. But again terrorism has drastically reduced in Pakistan and continues to do so.That is our only concern. If terrorism increases in Kashmir against India then there is no need to change the status quo.(2)

(1) Flawed logic? What a weird proposition! YOU fan the flames, YOU encourage the enlistment, YOU organise training camps, YOU fire at our border guards and our army to let them get into our country, YOU honour the parents of the slain after every two months or so, and YOU now say that you shouldn't get rid of them because they aren't attacking you?

Are you serious? Would you like to repeat this anywhere, to anyone and see the reception you get?

(2) There is EVERY need to change the status quo. Or so Kerry seems to think. And the rest of the world.

It is amazing that you are openly advocating terrorism. Or at least allowing them to exist and flourish in your society, while they kill, maim and rape people in another country.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

(1) Flawed logic? What a weird proposition! YOU fan the flames, YOU encourage the enlistment, YOU organise training camps, YOU fire at our border guards and our army to let them get into our country, YOU honour the parents of the slain after every two months or so, and YOU now say that you shouldn't get rid of them because they aren't attacking you?

Are you serious? Would you like to repeat this anywhere, to anyone and see the reception you get?

(2) There is EVERY need to change the status quo. Or so Kerry seems to think. And the rest of the world.

It is amazing that you are openly advocating terrorism. Or at least allowing them to exist and flourish in your society, while they kill, maim and rape people in another country.

1) That is exactly what i am saying. Thank you for putting it simply. This is the grim reality of today's world. Nations have done much worse AKA USA.\

2) Openly they say this stuff but behind closed doors it's a whole other world. You think they care about change while they openly fund terrorist groups in the ME? Has the US payed for it's crimes in Iraq while they so easily shame others?

 

[Joe Shearer]

1) That is exactly what i am saying. Thank you for putting it simply. This is the grim reality of today's world. Nations have done much worse AKA USA.\

2) Openly they say this stuff but behind closed doors it's a whole other world. You think they care about change while they openly fund terrorist groups in the ME? Has the US payed for it's crimes in Iraq while they so easily shame others?

If you see someone pissing on the street, do you get out of your car, stand next to him and join him?

Will you wake up?

 

[barbarosa]

Why Kerry demand for do more where they failed along with their 48 western allies.
They failed in Syria Iraq Afghanistan and will be not success in future.

 

[WaLeEdK2]

If you see someone pissing on the street, do you get out of your car, stand next to him and join him?

Will you wake up?

Many nations already have. Will you understand? The world isn't all peachy and rainbows. And at this point there is nothing that can change that. Things are only going to get worse. Now we will see who can and will weather the storm.

 

[xyxmt]

You don't get to decide what constitutes a terrorist.

actually they do because they are the one.
As far as Kerry and US, they are butt hurt that Pakistan doesnt care much about them anymore...they cant stand the fact Pakistan broke the relationship first

 

[airmarshal]

What has usa done in Afghanistan, peanuts after so many years they still can't control Afghanistan , how is it possible to cross into India with its so called laser walls and lights lit up at night at the border.

why do you think they came to control Afghanistan? That was not the aim. The aim was to set up a post here regardless of what hell hole Afghanistan remains or becomes.

Isnt it interesting to note that under American occupation, Afghanistan has become a sanctuary of all types enemies of Pakistan? Isnt this one of the objectives of American occupation to destabilize Pakistan? Which ever region America has landed its forces after 9/11, it has brought havoc to the region and nothing else. Learn from America how to use proxies.

 

[shahzadaf]

Next time Kerry calls, don't pick up.

 

[Nicky G]

Those 3 groups you have listed are not going anywhere. To some extent Pakistan has taken action against them but not to the point where it will get rid of them. Why should we get rid of them if they aren't attacking us? That is flawed logic at best. It is a fairly simple concept. Don't touch me and I won't touch you. The ONLY reason Pakistan has had terrorism is because of involvement in the war. Before that things were relatively stable. US pressure is not going to change our stance on Kashmir. India can dream at best. But again terrorism has drastically reduced in Pakistan and continues to do so.That is our only concern. If terrorism increases in Kashmir against India then there is no need to change the status quo. Either way if you listen to at 38:52 he said that Pakistan should continue the good work. India has said to do more.

A fair represenation of the Pak mentality, its establishment anyway. India has and will continue to tailor its response accordingly.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Many nations already have. Will you understand? The world isn't all peachy and rainbows. And at this point there is nothing that can change that. Things are only going to get worse. Now we will see who can and will weather the storm.

<sigh>

You just don't get it, do you?

It's about Pakistan's health and well-being, not India's. Nobody likes to be blown up. But that doesn't mean that we can't handle our casualties and continue. We've shrugged off worse, much worse, in the last sixty-dd years; we don't need to prove anything, or haven't you been looking out of the window?

The world was never peachy and rainbows for us. We had a bad neighbour. Somewhere on the forum, there is a thread by a young Kashmiri journalist who visited Pakistan and met lots of people. One common theme among the Pakistanis was that having gone through a bad period when religiosity gone mad had taken over the country, when hate for India was the single dominant theme of conversation and when terrorism was rampant, far more than today, every sensible Pakistani was DETERMINED not to return to that ever again. It's you and your people who don't want to return, and quite right too.

So, welcome, good neighbour_former_bad_neighbour. Clean up the rest of your act; you've already made a good start, don't mess it up striking poses that only harm you and amuse everyone else.

 

[Usman Saghir]

How he dares? This is not what Pakistan's militancy deserves because we have sacrificed a lot so far since 2000

 

[war&peace]

Kerry needs to purge his brains of all the crap he gets when in India.. He needs a treatment asap.

 

[tarrar]

This is the effect of massive Indian lobbying in US. Pakistan today does not care what US says, as Pakistan has accomplished with US & allies couldn't till date accomplish.