Pakistan could end cooperation in war on terror

[Kharian_Beast]

What exactly are you saying, that pakistan will be forced to continue a war on itself?

Do you even understand what is going on? Proxy wars is the "in thing" right now and you can't really use nukes on scattered resistance since the pure concentrated force of nukes is made more for attacking battle formations with thousands of soldiers in a small space.

No general sahib, I don't know what's going on


I'm saying don't expect hordes of Americans to come radiation-free into Pakistani soil is all I'm saying. Tell them to keep their wonderful map and accompanying article to teach their low achieving students some basic geography and grammar. That article was uncle zion speaking with clenched teeth and hot air, nothing more. Remember, a fatal miscalculation on their part...that their actions would divide people. It's done the opposite as pointed out above by another gentleman. They are making this their last "hurrah" for global dominance. They also have more enemies than friends at this point.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

... why would Afghanistan get Kashmir? This is puzzling. Where is China, Russia, India in all of this? I read the article, they act like Iran was going to give up strategic area to the Arabs do you really think America would get this far without their own borders being torn up

Afghanistan gets the NA's, not Kashmir.

Why would Russia and China give a ****? Did you see anyone making a sincere effort in 1971 to come to Pakistan's assistance?

Hypothetically speaking - the question isn't about militarily making Iran or Pakistan give up the territory - its about destabilizing countries enough to where government institutions are overwhelmed with threats of one sort or another.

Parts of the country can then be broken off by supporting insurgent groups, even if they do not have popular support, since the absence of the writ of the Govt. means whoever else has the guns commands loyalty and power.

 

[muse]

Not to mention Nato - but note that there is considerable disagreement with this policy - "political" elements in the US defence establishment are desperate to be seem pursuing more war war than jaw jaw, you will also note the caution intelligence agencies have advised.

For me, a new administration in the US can not come soon enough. While the election could have provided a more informed discussion of the US policy, it has all come to a closet Muslim (and black at that - is there any other kind) and a former beauty queen (who still looks good, even if she is eager to do more of God's work). Alas

 

[Kharian_Beast]

Afghanistan gets the NA's, not Kashmir.

Why would Russia and China give a ****? Did you see anyone making a sincere effort in 1971 to come to Pakistan's assistance?

Hypothetically speaking - the question isn't about militarily making Iran or Pakistan give up the territory - its about destabilizing countries enough to where government institutions are overwhelmed with threats of one sort or another.

Parts of the country can then be broken off by supporting insurgent groups, even if they do not have popular support, since the absence of the writ of the Govt. means whoever else has the guns commands loyalty and power.

I'm not talking about China and Russia coming in to aid Pakistan, I'm talking about Russia and China exhibiting an offensive stance in their respective regions of influence, which very well cover these new borders and I'm not too sure they'd wait till America was done carving up half the earth. They know America is coming after them sooner or later. They just know we are in line first

Destabilizing a country enough to do what? Have people carry out plebiscites the world over to carve up borders? And have UN christen these new lands with formal ceremonies? Please this is unrealistic. They couldn't even break Somalia and still can't, let alone Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. Things will remain status quo until someone slips...who do you think is more capable of slipping at this point?

Insurgencies may rise but that is only when bastard relationships are formed without approval of the people and full disclosure of the situation at hand.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Don't underestimate US and NeoCon hubris.

I say that we better be prepared for the worst, and be found overreacting, rather than underestimate and be found wanting.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

Don't underestimate US and NeoCon hubris.

I say that we better be prepared for the worst, and be found overreacting, rather than underestimate and be found wanting.

What can Pakistan do to counter this then, in your opinion. What do you think, and the rest of you guys as well, is crucial step # 1 for Pakistan to take at this time?

Personally I think it is to get the international community involved against such wreckless American behavior. The world is still not 100% uniform there are differing opinions and each nation will have a decision to make if it wants to sanction this "blood border" bluster or not. There are dozens of nations involved. Imagine the potential for building alliances RIGHT NOW!

 

[muse]

1. Insist that Afghanistan hand over BLA leadership.
2. Insist that RAW and it's allied middle eastern intelligence agency operations out of Afghanistan cease.
3. Tell the whole world that if there is another US incursion or even a single Pakistani soldier killed in US action, cooperation will cease, drone will be targetted.

And offer to cooperate even further if these conditions are met.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

1. Insist that Afghanistan hand over BLA leadership.
2. Insist that RAW and it's allied middle eastern intelligence agency operations out of Afghanistan cease.
3. Tell the whole world that if there is another US incursion or even a single Pakistani soldier killed in US action, cooperation will cease, drone will be targetted.

And offer to cooperate even further if these conditions are met.

2/3 involve the word "insist". These are no guarantees and probably will not be met. Let's assume those guidelines were not met, and 4 Pakistani's die in a drone attack while engaged with taliban. This becomes the trend for the next few months.

What next?

 

[muse]

Kharian

We have already an agreement with the US with regard to the Drones - the drone are effective, unfortunately there is also collateral damage - but a sad truth is that collateral damage is very difficult to avoid, regardless of whether these are US or Pakistani or drones from Mars.

We agreed to this because these drones are "Effective" in eliminating terrorists.


"Insist" - non negotiable. BLA and activities aimed at destabilizing Pakistan out of Afghanistan MUST cease - this not negotiable.

Letting the world know what are red lines lines will clear the air between us, NATO and the US.

And now for the carrot - can we cooperate further? yes, it will require a stable political and economic situation in Pakistan, but we can move further numbers of police and solders and set up a governmental infrastructure in the Waziristan agencies and in the agencies in pakhtunkwa. Willful implementation and projection of the government is essential and made easier if the political and economic situation were to stabilize - allowing activities aimed at destabilizing Pakistan from Afghanistan is a hostile act and must cease.

 

[maqsad]

3. Tell the whole world that if there is another US incursion or even a single Pakistani soldier killed in US action, cooperation will cease, drone will be targetted.

Sorry but you are thinking here like someone who is planning defence for a country that takes pride in nurturing it's own technology. Drones cannot be targetted because either they will come inside flying too low for radar or more likely, much more likely, missiles will just be fired from within Afghanistan.

Yes I know missiles can be shot down but to do so you need intercepting missiles and because of the low-tech culture of the Pak military they have not nurtured indigenous technology, TOT etc with the result that if Pakistan wants a missile defence shield of even the lowers caliber it has to extend a begging bowl to the United States itself.

For 3 to be feasable requires a revolution in thought, respect for technology and education and a purging of the "shopping cart junkies" out of the pak military.

 

[Kharian_Beast]

Kharian

We have already an agreement with the US with regard to the Drones - the drone are effective, unfortunately there is also collateral damage - but a sad truth is that collateral damage is very difficult to avoid, regardless of whether these are US or Pakistani or drones from Mars.

We agreed to this because these drones are "Effective" in eliminating terrorists.


"Insist" - non negotiable. BLA and activities aimed at destabilizing Pakistan out of Afghanistan MUST cease - this not negotiable.

Letting the world know what are red lines lines will clear the air between us, NATO and the US.

And now for the carrot - can we cooperate further? yes, it will require a stable political and economic situation in Pakistan, but we can move further numbers of police and solders and set up a governmental infrastructure in the Waziristan agencies and in the agencies in pakhtunkwa. Willful implementation and projection of the government is essential and made easier if the political and economic situation were to stabilize - allowing activities aimed at destabilizing Pakistan from Afghanistan is a hostile act and must cease.

What if it is not in the US's interests to know what our red lines are, or to even let us establish that in this early yet fragile stage? What if it is not in the US's interests to cooperate with Pakistan? I mean like most of you have pointed out they are the ones who drew that map and published it in the defense journal not Pakistan. Showing any carrot to them right now is too early. Right now should be SOTEE phase, even a low level stick approach until we can better realize our leveraging situation.

 

[maqsad]

Kharian

We have already an agreement with the US with regard to the Drones - the drone are effective, unfortunately there is also collateral damage - but a sad truth is that collateral damage is very difficult to avoid, regardless of whether these are US or Pakistani or drones from Mars.

It should be very easy in theory to cancel this agreement. The US complains that they cannot trust the Pakistan military with sensitive information because there are too many moles in ISI and PA and FC especially so that is why Langley fires missiles without consulting Islamabad.

So basically they are saying "we want you to agree with us that we have the right to blow up anyone, anywhere in your country because we suspect you won't be quite as passionate about pressing that button as we are here at langley". This is disgraceful and preposterous and the agreement should be torn up on this implied premise alone! The problem is the beggarlike dependence the Pak army has adopted towards the US. This disgraceful dependence is what needs to be ended first but people like Mushy have been doing the exact opposite--sabotaging pakistan's economic independence for 8 years.

 

[muse]

Drones cannot be targetted because either they will come inside flying too low for radar or more likely, much more likely, missiles will just be fired from within Afghanistan

Pakistan do not have a problem with the drones - we have agreed to their use and you entirely mistaken if you think these drones cannot be targetted.

Back to the drones -- The drone attacks are in agreement with and with the permissionof Pakistani authoriies -- Pakistani authorities have made a mistake by not taking ownership of these attacks - again, primarily because of political considerations.

 

[maqsad]

Right now should be SOTEE phase, even a low level stick approach until we can better realize our leveraging situation.

If Mushy the US imperial agent along with other traitors had not sabotaged the economy of pakistan and made it into a colony of the US/G7/GCC then that would be a realistic proposal. But thanks to the twofaced sellouts and traitors the US practically has a knife on Pakistan's economic jugular.

 

[maqsad]

Pakistan do not have a problem with the drones - we have agreed to their use and you entirely mistaken if you think these drones cannot be targetted.

Back to the drones -- The drone attacks are in agreement with and with the permissionof Pakistani authoriies -- Pakistani authorities have made a mistake by not taking ownership of these attacks - again, primarily because of political considerations.

This is a fancy way of saying that the US puppet Mushy made a secret backroom deal with some unknown entities to allow them to murder anyone they pleased in western pakistan. There are people who say this is part of a multipronged attempt to break pakistan up into pieces.

These drones are targetting people that the CIA/Pentagon wants and are NOT targetting people that sane and loyal people in the PA/ISI would want targetted. In fact the pentagon has come out and said straight up that they don't trust the ISI or the PA with the target information because they would flat out refuse to conclude the missions!

Do you know what this means? It means that Mushy and his cabal agreed to allow the CIA and pentagon to kill certain targets which the rest of the armed forces do not want touched! So this controversial deal of allowing Americans remote controlled slaughtering privileges do not have popular support in the pakistani public nor in the armed forces! This is how bad it is.