What's new

Lahore Police Academy crises over | One gunman, five collaborators arrested

7b87078fee283a35d84c0238b5c2e55b.jpg

Pakistani paramilitary soldiers arrest a militant near the site of a police training center in Lahore.

NOW this piece of **** feels like crying. Where exactly were his feelings when he probably was busy firing indiscriminately at any living thing that came across his path? Pathetic degenerates!

I HOPE WE PAKISTANIS ARE NOW FULLY SATISFIED! GIVING REFUGE TO ANYONE WHO IS A MUSLIM IN OUR COUNTRY - HUM KO AB DUNYA KI THEK-E-DARI KHATAM KARNI CHAI HAI AND LOOK AFTER OUR OWN!!!:pakistan:
 
I do not think the argument is over collectively punishing the refugees, but of repatriating those in refugee camps back to their homeland now that the civil war there has largely ended.

In addition, after most of the refugees have been repatriated, perhaps some 'amnesty scheme' can be initiated wherein those Afghans (and any other aliens) living illegally in Pakistan, but able to show that they have assets and/or a means of livelihood in Pakistan that will not make them a burden on the State, are put through a process to become Pakistani citizens.

But just continuing with the refugee camps and the current illegal aliens is not an option anymore.

More importantly, local law enforcement HAS to be beefed up, in terms of equipment, training, resources, numbers, compensation and there can be no more 'no-go' areas anywhere.

AM - REMEMBER THE "WELLCOME MAT" ARGUMENT! WE DONT HAVE ANY LEFT!
COME ON MAN - BLACK OR WHITE - NO IN-BETWEEN!
 
Yes it does. It's called Birthright citizenship almost all countries grant citizenship to people that are born on its soil. You're the first person I heard say Pakistan doesn't grant birthright citizenship, please provide a link proving it.

Your anger and frustrations are understandable in this context, but they're not good in assessing such big issues of national interest. Nation issues are almost and always taken seriously considering the long-term interests of the country. And taking the pragmatist approach, I think sending millions of refugees back to a war-zone would create more hatred and differences between two nations and peoples that are distinctly closer in religion and somewhat culture.


I dont have a link but my friend and I was discussing the law a few weeks back and he was against it and as you can tell I was for it. Pakistan doesn't allow citizenship to people born to refugees. You can go ask an Afghan refugee family in Pakistan they will tell you.

I think it'll be in Pakistan's best interst to first send all the Afghan refugees back to Afghanistan and then build a huge wall on the Pak-Afghan border so the ill-wishers of Pakistan never set foot inside Pakistan again.
 
To me Pakistan and Pakistanis come first.

Today in Lahore an Afghan national was caught with grenades and was trying to attack a Pakistani police helicopter.

Millions of Afghan refugees live all over Pakistan.

Pakistan welcomed these Afghan refugees while they insult our nation and carry their Afghan flag over our cities.

Today we have terrorism, food shortages, over-population. Pakistan is going through one of its worse crisis in history. Enough is enough, no nation would ever have welcomed so many refugees for such a long period of time especially when some of them murder innocent Pakistanis, create ethnic tensions in our major cities, and try to weaken Pakistan.


Your anguish is understandable, but you (GOP) cannot punish all Afganis or push them back across border. This will create more chaos and haters and militants seems to succeeding in their motives despot their loss in Lahor....... Hope you do not want this to happen:disagree:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I do not think the argument is over collectively punishing the refugees, but of repatriating those in refugee camps back to their homeland now that the civil war there has largely ended.

What about the US-Afghan-Taliban war? Can anyone be justified to be repatriated back to a war zone?

Once a country is declared safe, refugees should go back. But not when a war is on.

That is defeating the purpose of making them refugees in the first place.
 
What about the US-Afghan-Taliban war? Can anyone be justified to be repatriated back to a war zone?

Once a country is declared safe, refugees should go back. But not when a war is on.

That is defeating the purpose of making them refugees in the first place.

Yes should is your operative word, reality is they do not or will not.
 
AM - REMEMBER THE "WELLCOME MAT" ARGUMENT! WE DONT HAVE ANY LEFT!
COME ON MAN - BLACK OR WHITE - NO IN-BETWEEN!

If the statistics on the number of illegal aliens in Pakistan, from Afghanistan especially, are correct, we really do not have the resources to go after all of them and forcibly deport them.

It would be far more feasible to empty out the refugee camps first (concentrated, localized populations), and give the remainder the option to voluntarily declare their assets, businesses and register themselves with the State, pay taxes, fees what have you, and then go after the rest.

Sure many illegal aliens won't register themselves, for various reasons, and the State will still have to go after them, but we reduce our workload this way bu legalizing those who are willing to owe allegiance to the State of Pakistan and contribute as productive citizens.
 
One thing that interreges me is the constant reference to some foreign hand, implying a national government, behind all attacks, this one, the one against the crickets, and Mumbai.

Why must it be a foreign hand? By now most of the established terrorist groups should be able to execute these attacks with out any so called govt base help.

This is what I would call an issue that is constantly ignored.
These groups have both money and the necessary weapons. Also they have the people and time to plan them.
These are not big battles so one does not have to be a brilliant tactician.
 
One thing that interreges me is the constant reference to some foreign hand, implying a national government, behind all attacks, this one, the one against the crickets, and Mumbai.

Why must it be a foreign hand? By now most of the established terrorist groups should be able to execute these attacks with out any so called govt base help.

This is what I would call an issue that is constantly ignored.
These groups have both money and the necessary weapons. Also they have the people and time to plan them.
These are not big battles so one does not have to be a brilliant tactician.

You call it easy to take on a police HQ or a presidentially escorted target?
 
Yes should is your operative word, reality is they do not or will not.

That does happen. And time will tell how many get sent back. Some will voluntarily go back when the war is over.

But sending them to a warzone is outrageous. That is collective punishment, was my main point.
 
Paramilitary troops charge towards the site of a shooting at a police training centre in Lahore.
 
You call it easy to take on a police HQ or a presidentially escorted target?

I think in both cases security was lax. Well, in the former it wasn't necessarily lax, but obviously not designed keeping in mind an attack of the fashion that occurred.

And you yourself argued that many of the terrorist attacks are carried out by Pakistanis, so the existence of sympathetic elements within the LEA's and SF's cannot b ruled out.

The series of suicide bombings against ISI personnel in 2007 for example. One that occurred at the gate to the Rawalpindi Garrison involved the use of coded signals only known by high ranking officers to gain access into the area. The bomber was prevented since the signals were changed the day before.

Moles obviously exist, and nothing in these attacks, nor the ones in Mumbai, has been exceptional, other than the impact they have had.
 
A Pakistani paramilitary force officer rushes to the compound of a police training school on the outskirts of Lahore, Pakistan
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom