What's new

Pakistan - Doomsday Reporting

S-2 talk like a true republican , lol
----- but sir , Isnt pakistan also paying for this cash which the GOP is getting. and how much of this money is going in to - Pakistani peoples hand or where United states is intending to ?



as for We like our ways better and really wish that you'd listen to others a bit more
i think the GOP may sing what ever tune but it will follow what Americans do in the region. The war With No End Yet in Sight .
the intangible truth is that : They have to follow american With or without the Will of its own or the will of pakistanis.
 
"S-2 talk like a true republican..."

No. I'm a neo-conservative libertarian.

"how much of this money is going in to - Pakistani peoples hand or where United states is intending to..."

Probably not enough. I'd prefer all civil aid by ourselves and others to be directed to Baluchistan, FATA, NWFP, and N.A. That's where the need is most evident. It's also where the aid would have the greatest difficulties being administered for reasons of security. So much so that it may be moot to really consider the net impact any such civil aid can now have. Security is an absolute pre-requisite and, sorry, but no Mullah Faizullah, et al will be administering U.S. dollars locally throughout SWAT.

Then there's the culture of aid. Globally, we've very few nations OR NGOs that do this particularly well. Agendas are narrow and often don't reflect ground realities nor adhere to host nation requirements and needs. Efforts typically lack synchronization and even basic coordination. Often the disconnect between host nation governments and their own local administrations is poor.

Then there's the odious spectre of graft and corruption. What's the grease that cuts through the friction? Usually he who is greased is the source of friction. How much has been drained through the ages throughout the globe at the detriment of these innocent poor and mankind as a whole?

How many future Einsteins starved to death to build a Dubai palace?

"The war With No End Yet in Sight ."

Cute but rare is the successful counter-insurgency that ends quickly. No nation knows this better than India and her myriad insurgencies seemingly interminable.

"the intangible truth is that : They have to follow american With or without the Will of its own or the will of pakistanis."

No. They have recourse and may exercise it. Nor is the dance fully finished before we begin openly stepping on toes.
 
Boring....boring..........we have been hearing this for decades.
I think what the so called expertt-fortune tellers mean by the fall of pakistan is that pakistan will tell the US to fcuk off and wont fight its silly war for them.

Send more yankee fodder for the taliban to feed on........JIHAD FOR PEACE.
 
i dont know how many more thread will be opened on the very same topic. everyone has been sayin this since 1980s but so far we are still standing. im sorry that wish of some of u guys is still to come true
 
"...this is just an assumption by somebody based on their own rationale and holds no ground."

There is no prediction of such "assumption" by these officials. To that end, their credibility already exceeds yours.:agree:

There IS, however, deep concern. Underscoring the deep concern of these particular officials from CENTCOM, SOCOM and an undersecretary for defense are the intelligence collection resources of our government.

Hardly an assumption but certainly based upon more than singular rationale by those far more informed than you.

Thus the grounded traction is great indeed. It is a warning and expression of concern.

these same idiots said there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq:pop:
 
i dont know how many more thread will be opened on the very same topic. everyone has been sayin this since 1980s but so far we are still standing. im sorry that wish of some of u guys is still to come true

Can somebody not merge all the "Pakistan is a failed state and about to collapse in 6 minutes" into one post?
I come across this thread every second week and its getting really boring.
 
"...if USA wants to solve Pakistan`s problem, solve it Pakistan way..."

No. We can afford a lot in this world but not the cost of your politicians. Too expensive for too little performance.

We like our ways better and really wish that you'd listen to others a bit more. If you did, perhaps making deals like SWAT would never have happened. It's not like your leadership wasn't warned what would happen on a SWAT deal nor like you hadn't precedence of previous deals in SWAT going to sh!t.

Nope. In your wisdom...:crazy:

Take our money with our conditions and adhere faithfully to those standards or lose it. Or don't take it at all.

I could care less.



S2 u r a military man so no criticism over ur style of thinking and mentality- judging every thing with performance objectively.

u might have a lot of knowledge in strategic and tactic terms, but when it comes to measuring performance with effectiveness where human beings are involved on general terms, it goes out of your scope- with respect.

for your knowledge(this might be boring for u)

No. We can afford a lot in this world but not the cost of your politicians. Too expensive for too little performance

Edwards (1980) described a three tier model known as APAC, APSS, and APPP, out of the three tier approach, the first tier APAC- Auditing of personal activities and cost, Can be used for objective analysis only to certain extent

&

Marchington M (2005) argues though a lot of researches have been carried out to find the link between SHRM and performance, but it is difficult to draw generalized conclusion, due to the principle differences as follows

 The nature and type of HR Practices examined
 The proxies developed for each of these practices
 The measure of performance used
 The sector in which the study has taken place
 The methods of data collection
 The respondents from whom the information has been sought

Yet with these principle differences, Marchington M (2005) argues that if there is to be link found between performance and HRM then Best Practice model will be the most appropriate with the following “differing principles”

 Employment security and internal labor markets
 Selective hiring and sophisticated selection
 Extensive training, learning and development
 Employee involvement, Information sharing and worker voice
 Self managed teams/team working
 High compensation contingent on performance
 Reduction of status differential/harmonization

and this list can go longer and longer if you want, but the fact remains, that measuring performance in any case is more of a subjective(to every individuals criteria of thinking) rather than objective.

Plus in your country it might be `Resource based strategy`(a lot of freedom to operate and decide on active thinking, taking responsibility) but in my country it is `best fit model`- (where we just follows the instruction set by old writers, no freedom but programmed computers)

we need to understand this first as we operate on different cultures, mentality and operations. and to this date measure of effectiveness might be different for you as per us

We like our ways better and really wish that you'd listen to others a bit more. If you did, perhaps making deals like SWAT would never have happened. It's not like your leadership wasn't warned what would happen on a SWAT deal nor like you hadn't precedence of previous deals in SWAT going to sh!t.

we have been listening you since 9/11, and look where we end up now. how much you want us to listen u, its time that u listen us. this is us who have suffered suicide attacks, civil war type situation, anarchy, we never had it before your instructions sir.
on the other hand SWAT deals, you never know what the result gonna be alike, if it keeps intact for longer period of time- we can establish intelligence with the help of u-CIA and RAW to keep these people in constant check and stop it spreading it to other parts of the country. for me this is wisdom, a different definition (attacking contraries with out reason-Wisdom?) might best suit u

Take our money with our conditions and adhere faithfully to those standards or lose it. Or don't take it at all.

Thank you very much Sir for lending us financial hand. and i deeply appreciate that, and also acknowledge, that this comes with the tax of hard earned cash of yours, Americans are probably providing this money with their blood stains on it, but don't forget, we also paid the price(if you want to consider that), and God knows how much we have to pay yet as per your instructions sir.

but again thank you very much, not the government but the general public of Americans for helping us:agree:(though i disagree on the hard liquid cash:disagree:)

We can afford a lot in this world but not the cost of your politicians.

and that's the reason i disagree above, and totally agree with my politician that they are incompetent and greedy. to solve it give us economic boosters- access to trading, less tariffs rather than cash

savy :coffee:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pakistan will fall,pentagon predicts grim future for pakistan,Pakistan is a failing state,
All of this is nothing to worry about The US of A needs to think before they speak they know that pakistan will fall because they are the ones who tied our feet together with a rope when we were'nt looking.

Anonyomous man............
 
Some interesting thoughts on subjective performance models and tracking-

"...that measuring performance in any case is more of a subjective(to every individuals criteria of thinking) rather than objective."

I'm not certain I agree. We've baskets of NGOs, for instance, of similar size, scope, and allocated monies, that could be objectively studied to isolate best practices. As many share the same objective countries, any efforts (and I'm sure they've already been made but it's totally late and I NEED bed) would likely only be further enhanced.

Still, I'm prepared to acknowledge that subjective scrutiny is required to reach beyond unique local variances to any model.

"we need to understand this first as we operate on different cultures, mentality and operations. and to this date measure of effectiveness might be different for you as per us"

Ummm...we're not considering aid to you for the first time and while I may appear the pinnacle of an "insensitive and ugly American" our diplomats and military professionals generally exhibit a degree of adroitness not found with myself.:agree: There's greater nuance and sophistication in our perceptiveness, I believe, than commonly granted.

"we have been listening you since 9/11, and look where we end up now."

If you insist. Many of us consider that you've not done a particularly good job of listening and have resorted to some old and troublesome habits that has made our mission far more difficult and, in turn, complicated life immeasurably for your citizens.

"we never had it before your instructions sir."

We've never issued such instructions, sir, before 9/11 either. Nonetheless, there we are and there you are. That your porous borders proved impossible to stop the retreat of the defeated taliban army onto your soil wasn't really America's fault.

We are indeed sorry that those men retreated faster than we could catch them. They've been our nemesis from your soil since.

"Thank you very much Sir for lending us financial hand. and i deeply appreciate that, and also acknowledge, that this comes with the tax of hard earned cash of yours, Americans are probably providing this money with their blood stains on it..."

Certainly it's provided with the sweat of their labor but, you're welcome.

"we also paid the price(if you want to consider that), and God knows how much we have to pay yet as per your instructions sir."

Yes indeed. Many of your soldiers and citizens have died. All on your lands. That speaks volumes when considering suffering. Others suffer too from these shared enemies on your lands. The afghan people in particular. They remain an identified target of these men and suffered grievously as a result of the protected status of these militants within the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan.

"to solve it give us economic boosters- access to trading, less tariffs rather than cash..."

Perhaps somebody can explain the nuances of the textile industry. I know ours is destroyed. I wonder how we approach others heavily engaged here such as Indonesia, India, Malaysia, Egypt, Colombia, etc.

I may need more work here and look forward to the provided education that some may offer. Thanks.

Just a simple ex-soldier, don't you know.;)
 
I'm not certain I agree. We've baskets of NGOs, for instance, of similar size, scope, and allocated monies, that could be objectively studied to isolate best practices. As many share the same objective countries, any efforts (and I'm sure they've already been made but it's totally late and I NEED bed) would likely only be further enhanced.

Still, I'm prepared to acknowledge that subjective scrutiny is required to reach beyond unique local variances to any model.

i agree that we need no model here, and probably these model suite best to organisations then countries, and i m also in favor of NGOs(mostly run by American and UK charities, thank you sir again) and others but they might do the job, but not the job well done :tup: (again performance vs effectiveness as per US requirements)

If you insist. Many of us consider that you've not done a particularly good job of listening and have resorted to some old and troublesome habits that has made our mission far more difficult and, in turn, complicated life immeasurably for your citizens.


i agree but the way you do is vital sir, Leopold J (2004) and Cappelli P (2008): argues, in uncertain/dynamic environment, Organizations fails because of not "change driven" (honest communication,adaptable, flexible)

Bomb back to stone age, was not the right kind of instructions to start with sir, this wont sit well with leader as leader don't take orders/instructions. but to talk to leader u have to rather sit with them, try to make them understand the situation, win over confidence, an honest communication in other words an effective CHANGE MANAGMENT process with ISI could have done the job in the past. instead of being arrogant, proud(as it was likely facing a minnow Pakistan)


We've never issued such instructions, sir, before 9/11 either. Nonetheless, there we are and there you are. That your porous borders proved impossible to stop the retreat of the defeated Taliban army onto your soil wasn't really America's fault.

We are indeed sorry that those men retreated faster than we could catch them. They've been our nemesis from your soil since.

Sir with respect, they constantly cross borders not as a one off issue, also not all of them get killed in Afghanistan by ur forces and vice versa, numbers are left for which also cross border to spread menace in Pakistan. so this becomes collective & mutual problem as we do not ask permissions to step in Afghanistan to operate, then u must not desire for one, lets work together sir

i also agree that these people is causing the ultimate probelms for Afghan people, and i do apologise for this.

Islamic Emirate of Waziristan.

this is funny, i am floored laughing

"to solve it give us economic boosters- access to trading, less tariffs rather than cash..."

Perhaps somebody can explain the nuances of the textile industry. I know ours is destroyed. I wonder how we approach others heavily engaged here such as Indonesia, India, Malaysia, Egypt, Colombia, etc.

I may need more work here and look forward to the provided education that some may offer. Thanks.

Just a simple ex-soldier, don't you know.;)

The discussion on your textile industry will take us out of the scope of this discussions, but for the time being just understand that reasons of ur industry demise was that u outsourced ur business too much that u lost ur competencies seeking competitive advantage(mainly in cost, but lesser in quality), and this result in loss of jobs and economic sector

but if u want to learn from past experience, ur industry sector can be revived by Absolute and comparative advantage theory by working with Pakistan (no detail on absolute and comparative advantage theory here)but for the note(if MOD allows me), i would like to raise ur eye brow that Tariffs on Pakistan textile industry export to US is 10% (Quoting IBA Karachi, 2008) where as the others u mentioned receive 2.5%. and this is what i call nuance. this wont work in any body`s favour(Pakistan & US relationship and trust) let alone that we are friends in any special cause, and will also help Pakistan becoming a failed state

we are friends(if Americans consider us) and the front runners in WOT, then we should get at least the same amount of tariffs(2.5% not 10%), if not 1 or 0% to be justified. and this is where my first economic booster comes to play, let alone the others as out of scope

think about it, and perception would change dramatically and we will build trust between us, instead of cash, which will take us no where except temporary lift up or bubble economy i call it.:pop:
 
Kerry: Pakistan needs more urgency in terror fight

By NAHAL TOOSI, Associated Press Writer Nahal Toosi, Associated Press Writer – 2 hrs 32 mins ago

ISLAMABAD – A top U.S. senator on Tuesday urged Pakistan to "ratchet up" its sense of urgency in battling the spreading militancy in its northwest, even as the government defended a deal to impose Islamic law in a swath of the region to achieve peace with the Taliban.

John Kerry expressed reservations about the peace pact in the Swat Valley, hours after a hard-line cleric who mediated the deal indicated it will protect militants accused of brutal killings from prosecution.

Kerry, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, is spearheading a bill to increase nonmilitary aid to Pakistan, a multi-billion dollar effort to strengthen sectors such as the economy and education in part to lessen the allure of extremism in the impoverished Muslim-majority nation of 170 million.

The senator told reporters in Islamabad that the Pakistani government had to make some "basic decisions," including where and how much of its army it will deploy against al-Qaida and Taliban fighters, who are primarily based along its northwest border with Afghanistan.

The army has tens of thousands of troops in the northwest, but has long devoted far more resources to its eastern border with longtime rival India.

"I don't think that the effort has been resourced the way that it needs to be either in the personnel or the strategy," Kerry said, adding later, "The government has to ratchet up the urgency."

Pakistan's beleaguered, U.S.-allied government has tried both carrots and sticks in dealing with the insurgency, even as it has been distracted by a host of issues, including a faltering economy and political feuds.

In Swat, a scenic valley that once attracted legions of tourists, 18 months of bloodshed prompted the provincial government in February to agree to impose Islamic law there and in surrounding areas to achieve peace. The Taliban agreed to a cease-fire.

After weeks of foot-dragging, Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari approved the regulation late Monday only after Parliament voted unanimously to adopt a resolution urging him to sign it.

The deal covers the Malakand division of Pakistan's North West Frontier Province, a largely conservative region which stretches north along the Afghan border for hundreds of miles. The Swat Valley section lies less than 100 miles (160 kilometers) from the capital, Islamabad, and is believed to be largely under Taliban control.

Defenders say the deal will drain public support for extremists who have hijacked long-standing calls in Swat for reform of Pakistan's snail-paced justice system.

But critics worry it rewards hard-liners who have beheaded political opponents and burned scores of schools for girls in the name of Islam — and that it will encourage similar demands in other parts of the nuclear-armed country.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said the Obama administration believes security cannot be brought about with "less democracy and less human rights" and said strict Islamic law in the Swat Valley "goes against both of those principles."

"We're disappointed that the parliament didn't take into account the legitimate concerns around civil and human rights," he said.

Hard-line cleric Sufi Muhammad brokered the deal, whose terms remain murky. Asked Tuesday in a television interview if the new courts would hear complaints from Swat residents about the militants, Muhammad strongly suggested they could not.

"We intend to bury the past," Muhammad told the ARY channel, sitting off-screen because he considers photographic or TV images to be against Islam. "Past things will be left behind and we will go for a new life in peace."

Asked if the Taliban would enjoy such immunity, a provincial government minister only pleaded for calm so that peace could take hold.

"Everyone should understand what we have gone through and what kind of hardship people in Swat have suffered," Wajid Ali Khan said. "We can look into any disputes and controversy at some later stage."

Federal Information Minister Qamar Zaman Kaira said Tuesday that the pact was little more than a tactical maneuver in the country's "long war" with extremists.

"Those people who want to hijack Pakistan and destabilize Pakistan, they used (the demand for speedy justice) as a propaganda tool," Kaira said. "We have taken that idea out of the hand of the exploiters."

He insisted the deal would not lead to a version of Islamic law like that upheld by the former Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

A spokesman for the Taliban said the militants would cooperate. If the law is quickly implemented, "the world will see how much peace and prosperity comes to this region," said Muslim Khan.

He announced late Tuesday that the militants would observe a ban on the "unnecessary" display of arms in Swat.

Many observers, however, doubt the Swat Taliban's ambitions end at the valley's borders.

Taliban militants from Swat recently made a violent push into the neighboring Buner region, and Muhammad has repeatedly denounced Pakistan's democratic system as being against Islam — a view shared by the extremist groups blamed for the country's rising violence.

___

Associated Press writers Zarar Khan and Asif Shahzad contributed to this report.

Kerry: Pakistan needs more urgency in terror fight
 
NEHRU IS DEAD YET HIS DREAM LIVES ON NOTHING mORE THEN INDIAN wet dream :rofl:
 
"Bomb back to stone age, was not the right kind of instructions to start with sir"

I find Richard Armitage a right honorable man and he's determinedly denied uttering any such phrase-

Armitage Denies "Stone-age" comment-NPR

I believe it was a P.R. ploy by your government to assuage your citizens ever-so-tender sensibilities with allying yourselves to America.

After all, we were about to stomp all over your protege and a Pakistani populace and army that had achieved strategic advantage in Kabul while standing off the Indians in your eastern mountains would be none-too-happy about this rapid turn of events.

"...numbers are left for which also cross border to spread menace in Pakistan."

Indeed they return to sanctuary in the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan.

"as we do not ask permissions to step in Afghanistan to operate, then u must not desire for one, lets work together sir"

We cannot. We've asked that you contribute additional forces to man more checkpoints similar to the new facility at Torkum but you cannot manage to find the troops. This is disheartening.

Recently, we tried to coordinate a joint operation through Bajaur/Konar but your army refused to consider such. We'd very much like to work together.

You very much like us to work apart...together.:agree:

Quite the conumdrum.

I'll broadly share what little I know off the cuff about our trade relationship that you might have a point of departure. We are your largest trading partner...by far. Near double, I believe to the UAE or around 21% to 12-14% (CIA factbook maybe). IIRC about 60% of that was textiles. That suggests a massive amount of textile related goods. Maybe too much for our market to absorb while offering related access to competitors.

Too, while hardly our place, is it possible that you've read somewhere that we may be wishing to coercively reshape your export base away from an over-dependancy upon textiles towards greater diversification of products and markets.

Finally, what element of your A.Q. Khan embargo legacy may these tariffs reflect? I ask in all honesty and have not, to date, researched these elements to grasp the rationales to these barriers.

Hopefully, as I spent considerable time discussing these issues back in grad school I'll be able to quickly come up to speed if this discussion takes off...I think...sorta, hope,...maybe...:agree:
 
Back
Top Bottom