Pakistan could end cooperation in war on terror

[muse]

Mushy the US imperial agent

You say this as you sit in the US? For more than 40 years, Pervaiz Musharraf has served Pakistani state and the Pakistani nation.

Either you are deliberately trying to sabotage the thread or you have little idea of what you are talking about - either way, critical thought is ot the same as deragatory speech.

The thread is not about Pervaiz Musharraf, Shah e mardan, Khadim e millat.

 

[maqsad]

You say this as you sit in the US? For more than 40 years, Pervaiz Musharraf has served Pakistani state and the Pakistani nation.

Either you are deliberately trying to sabotage the thread or you have little idea of what you are talking about - either way, critical thought is ot the same as deragatory speech.

The thread is not about Pervaiz Musharraf, Shah e mardan, Khadim e millat.

I'm not sitting in the US working for any imperial agenda. Mushy's mention is highly relevent to this thread because he was the Chief Executive Officer for the last eight years of a US sponsored dictatorship. I am not trying to sabotage this thread but merely pointing to what a big problem Mushy was in the last 8 years and what a disaster he was for Pakistan. I am not alone in my opinion, my opinion is backed very very vocally by more than one General of the Pakistan army along with quite a few analysts so don't try to make it look like I am some lone voice with no idea of this concept.

If you adore and respect Mushy personally then well and good, but if you want to defend him then do so with facts rather than trying to send people on a guilt trip.

 

[muse]

Maqsad

See "Tribute to Musharraf" Thread and educate yourself - about the "vocal" that's not the same as right - and of course the most vocal against him were the religious extremists, are they right in their prescriptions for Pakistan??

 

[maqsad]

Maqsad

See "Tribute to Musharraf" Thread and educate yourself - about the "vocal" that's not the same as right - and of course the most vocal against him were the religious extremists, are they right in their prescriptions for Pakistan??

General Asad Durrani is not a religious extremist. The fact that the religious extremists are the most vocal can be easily explained by Mushy's war on religion which he lost(perhaps deliberately). Obviously if he antagonizes and harasses a certain group then they will have more vocal members among them when it comes to criticism.

I can grab a machine gun and slaughter 500 midgets with downs syndrome, after that if I am put on trial for murder and try to plead for a reduced sentence due to emotional hardhsip or something the most vocal against me will be retards and their sympathisers. Does this mean the retards are wrong and I should be set free?

 

[Spring Onion]

The question is looking more and more like it should actually be Pakistan could end cooperation in war on itself because this is what it is turning into. So many people all over are starting to speculate more and more that the US actually wants to gang up with India and Afghanistan to crack Pakistan into two or more pieces.

Indeed the Zionists plan is to break Pakistan in pieces with help from Hindu Zionists and Afghanistan. The map was was the result of hunderds of years of hate of Zionists towards the Islam and Muslim nations.

But the question is as you are suggesting that Pakistan can not afford to pull out of US WoT, then tell me what solution you have mind for the situation.

What other option we have ???

 

[Spring Onion]

General Asad Durrani is not a religious extremist. The fact that the religious extremists are the most vocal can be easily explained by Mushy's war on religion which he lost(perhaps deliberately). Obviously if he antagonizes and harasses a certain group then they will have more vocal members among them when it comes to criticism.

I can grab a machine gun and slaughter 500 midgets with downs syndrome, after that if I am put on trial for murder and try to plead for a reduced sentence due to emotional hardhsip or something the most vocal against me will be retards and their sympathisers. Does this mean the retards are wrong and I should be set free?

dont talk about Gen (Retd) Assad Durran another Unelected persons hired by Zardari to carry on the same US agenda.

He is the person due to whome we lost our assests in the Norther Alliance in Afghanistan and today we see India more active in Afghanistan.

He is the idiot who broken all the accords made between NA and Pakistan.

 

[Spring Onion]

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.

look at all your posts before this one in this thread which is a contradiction to your above statement.

On the one hand you are saying the Pakistan doesnt have an option to refuse supporting WoT which means whether we like it or not we are going to swollow the bitter pill while on the other hand you are criticising those who did the same out of compulsion back in the year when US attacked Afghanistan and threatened us. Indeed at that time if there was any governement other than the Musharraf, they would also have to go along US in WoT.

We had no option at that time too.

 

[T-Rex]

look at all your posts before this one in this thread which is a contradiction to your above statement.

On the one hand you are saying the Pakistan doesnt have an option to refuse supporting WoT which means whether we like it or not we are going to swollow the bitter pill while on the other hand you are criticising those who did the same out of compulsion back in the year when US attacked Afghanistan and threatened us. Indeed at that time if there was any governement other than the Musharraf, they would also have to go along US in WoT.

We had no option at that time too.

I agree with you hundred percent, but let's talk about the present problem. Is there any news of the Pakistani government and the army taking any firm steps against the US aggressions ? BTW, how are you Jana, haven't talked to you for a while.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

IMO, the UAV attacks are tacitly sanctioned because the GoP does not want to unite the Taliban groups and start fighting both TTP and the currently 'pro-govt.' Taliban, yet it understands that something has to be done about militants who carry out cross border attacks. This is compounded by the sometimes poor intel. the US relies on to select targets, often resulting in collateral damage.

It would be much harder to make the case of fighting the 'pro-govt.' Taliban with the local tribes, since these groups tend to focus their activities primarily in Afghanistan (fighting the 'occupation' etc.) and therefore do not have widespread resentment built up against them, as does the TTP.

Any unilateral initiation of hostilities by the GoP against them would likely end up with the local tribes (that the good Taliban hail from) supporting the Taliban at this point.

On what is to be done - Muses' points are valid. I should point out again that the Baluch Militants initiated a unilateral ceasefire just before the latest expansion of attacks in FATA - coincidence or quid pro quo?

Regardless, I still believe Gen. Kiyani was misled on the issue of SOF raids. US boots on the ground is both unnecessary and inflammatory - lets wait and see if it occurs again.

 

[muse]

Fear of losing and Election politics - in lieu of policy


Fear of losing drove US raid

* US official says US military had the right to go after sponsors of cross-border attacks

WASHINGTON: The United States decision to mount a ground strike inside Pakistan last week reflected fears that terrorists were winning the war against the US-led forces.

A quieter Iraq and a power shift in Islamabad also helped open the way for more US strikes in the mountains between Pakistan and Afghanistan, home to Taliban terrorists and Al Qaeda leaders believed to be plotting new attacks against the West.

“There is no doubt the US patience with Pakistan is running short,” said Andrew McGregor, terrorism editor at the Jamestown Foundation security think tank.

Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mike Mullen said this week, “I’m not convinced we are winning it in Afghanistan. I am convinced we can.” “Frankly, we’re running out of time,” he told a congressional committee.

Sponsors: A senior US official said that the US military had the right to go after sponsors of cross-border attacks, while a senior Pakistani official suggested the US military had misinterpreted complex rules.

“What you’re seeing is an increased activity (by) our troops taking our rules of engagement to them (terrorists in Afghanistan),” the US official said on Tuesday. However, the Pakistani official said, “There are certain circumstances in which a special operation might be required to go arrest someone, but that can’t easily be done in the Tribal Areas.”

A defence analyst involved in discussions with the Bush administration said there was wide concern over Afghanistan nearly seven years after the invasion routed the Taliban government and drove out Osama Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda.

“For the first time since 2002, the US government across-the-board, from the Pentagon to the State Department to the CIA to the White House, share very serious concerns about the direction Afghanistan is going in,” said the analyst, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Former president Gen (r) Pervez Musharraf’s drawn-out resignation, and his replacement by Asif Ali Zardari, has hampered the Pakistan government’s ability to fight terrorists, US officials and analysts said. The Pakistani government had also been unable to sever ties between the military intelligence service, the ISI, with the terrorists, analysts said. A diplomat in Washington, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said personnel changes taking place in Pakistan’s intelligence service would satisfy Washington.

Barack Obama, the Democratic candidate in the November 4 US presidential election, has long called for shifting troops from Iraq and said he would be willing to attack Al Qaeda inside Pakistan without its approval.

His Republican opponent John McCain has also supported sending more troops to Afghanistan and has urged more US-Pakistani co-operation to crush terrorists.

Bush is nearing the end of a presidency largely defined by the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Both remain unfinished, although this year has seen a marked improvement in security in Iraq. Progress against the terrorists in Afghanistan, which depends on clamping down on Pakistan’s safe havens, could bolster Bush’s legacy, said Bruce Buchanan, professor at the University of Texas. reuters

 

[Neo]

Pakistan can not afford to end cooperation is WoT, any hastly taken dicisions will only backfire and it will the end of Pakistan instead. We should look into a more pragmatic approach, start at grass root level.

Pakistanis have problem with US bombings, a lot of civilians are getting killed every week. But as I see it, the US are doing the job for us because we refuse to take on "our brothers"!

I say the hell with this false brotherhood, country comes first and if these socalled taliban loving and harboring brothers become a concern of national security then they don't deserve a place in Pakistan.

If we want US to stop bombing then PA should be sent to fight against the militants, eliminating cross border terrorism. Isolate terrorist cells in FATA and eliminate them one by one. Pre emptive trikes by PAF should be allowed in FATA and Afghanistan with shared intellingence to justify raids.

People need to understand terrorism and talibanism are bigger threat to Pakistan than the USA.

 

[maqsad]

look at all your posts before this one in this thread which is a contradiction to your above statement.

On the one hand you are saying the Pakistan doesnt have an option to refuse supporting WoT which means whether we like it or not we are going to swollow the bitter pill while on the other hand you are criticising those who did the same out of compulsion back in the year when US attacked Afghanistan and threatened us. Indeed at that time if there was any governement other than the Musharraf, they would also have to go along US in WoT.

We had no option at that time too.

I don't see how my posts are a contradiction. Which posts are you talking about, mention the post numbers and quote the text from both posts otherwise don't make things up which you cannot back!

Pakistan does have the option of refusing to support the WOT and it also had that option in 2001 because of being a nuclear power. Neither India nor Afghanistan would have dared to attack Pakistan, a nuclear power just based on some lies that everyone knew were lies. If the US had said they would attack then all GOP had to do was expose all the lies about the 911 attack and refused to grant logistic support. Then GOP could have started a propaganda campaign that exposed the CIA and Mossad. Just the threat of that propaganda campaign alone would have been enough to shut up the US..they would have just fired 50 tomohawks into Afghanistan and then left it and started begging Pakistan to pretend Al Qaida masterminded the attack all by themselves. Pakistan could have granted limited airspace for the US to land some special forces in Afghanistan and guaranteed safe passage(being a neutral country) but that is the most the Pakistan had to offer in 2001. But instead some idiots in the PA and ISI got blackmailed and that stupid idiot traitor Mushy conspired with the CIA to throw the entire blame for 911 on Al Qaida and the Taliban. This was a trap because blaming the taliban and Al Qaida was just step one..step two would be to blame Pakistan for supporting Al Qaida and the Taliban.


And yes even now Pakistan can pull out from the WOT and completely cut it's economic, military and diplomatic ties with the US and survive! There will be a few years of economic shock and some defaulting on loans at first but if the economy is fixed instead of being beaten down to function as a colonial asset then all ecomomic problems will vanish in a decade.

But instead we saw that Mushy brought in Shortcut Aziz to "liberalize" the Pakistani economy and get it ready for rape by foreign and domestic looters. So during the 8 years of Mushy dictatorship he was working hard to give the illusion of economic success while actually making the economy of pakistan more and more into a slave economy, getting pakistan weaker and weaker and making it easier and easier for the breakup and destruction of Pakistan. Luckily when Mushy and Shortcut Aziz had their knife on one of the economic arteries of Pakistan(the steel mills) the duo was stopped and since then there has been a revolution in Pakistan. People got together and overthrew agent Mushy and decided to stop Pakistans war on itself!

Now all the damage will have to be repaired and the deep grave that Mushy and Shortcut Aziz dug for Pakistan is being covered back with dirt. It will take a little time but this fake war will be finished!