Pakistan: We Will Have Our Vengeance

[OTTOMAN]

Recent attacks on students in Kenya reminds me of Peshawar. Only cowards attack the unarmed!

All evidence of Peshawar attack linked to Afghanistan... which is defecto state shared among U.S., Iran and Indians.

 

[Psychic]

Pakistan did more to shape events in Afghanistan in the 1990s than any other foreign country. And before that in the 1970s and 1980s it was Pakistan that directed the hundreds of millions of dollars from itself and abroad to the religious extremists in the mujaheddin who became the Taliban and sheltered al-Qaeda.

You have any problem with that?
Every body was involved in the Afghan mess. USA, Pakistan, Arabs, Indians, Iranians, Soviets.
You do every thing for your interests, we do the same.
An American should be the last one lecturing us after all those same mujaheddin are equivalent to your founding fathers.

 

[lasttry]

Vengeance is laughable. Radio mullah is still preaching hatred and Pakistani society seems to have no guts to take his ilk on.

 

[Psychic]

I agree!
ZuH added fuel to fire.

Bhutto would have done the same. It is not about faces, it is about policies and after all Bhutto had initiated the policy to support Afghan resistance in 1975 against their government. Bhutto was a "civilian dictator" of Pakistan.
He had been charming the people of Pakistan into believing him since the 60's.

Pakistan had no other option but to drive a hostile Soviet union out of Afghanistan by hook or crook. The commie Afghans were also hostile towards Pakistan and had been supporting the Baluch insurgencies and Pakhtoonistan movement even when Pakistan tried to establish friendly relations with them.

If you think about it from the perspective of Pakistan then you realize that the political and geographical realities did not allow any other option.

 

[Echo_419]

Going on in full swing !

Good also are these Z-10s Boeing acquired for these operations

 

[Levina]

Bhutto would have done the same. It is not about faces, it is about policies and after all Bhutto had initiated the policy to support Afghan resistance in 1975 against their government. Bhutto was a "civilian dictator" of Pakistan.
He had been charming the people of Pakistan into believing him since the 60's.

I see things differently!
Bhutto had his issues, but in international community he's a secular internationalist. At the same time getting associated with ZuH is considered a stigma...or so I read. I would call Bhutto a lesser evil of the two. The proof to this would be that every year death anniversary of Bhutto is commemorated while Zia's go unnoticed (my personal observation). Somehow I hold ZuH's regime responsible for allowing an aggressively conservative Islamism to take center-stage in Pakistani society. ZuH's policies had long-term consequences for terrorism, but back in those days, they strengthened ZuH's religious clout while ensuring that the Pakistani economy could be kicked into overdrive without disruptions(which is why Pak's GNP grew to be the highest in the world back then). Had Bhutto remained in power for longer then Pakistan might have been more secular today.

Pakistan had no other option but to drive a hostile Soviet union out of Afghanistan by hook or crook. The commie Afghans were also hostile towards Pakistan and had been supporting the Baluch insurgencies and Pakhtoonistan movement even when Pakistan tried to establish friendly relations with them.
If you think about it from the perspective of Pakistan then you realize that the political and geographical realities did not allow any other option.

Baluch got Saddam's support too, because he assumed Baluch issue would spread into rival Iran.
I see Pakistan's intervention in Afghanistan as something that helped ZuH to strike freindship with US and western countries, till then he was not recognised by these countries, ergo he saw Soviet attack as an opportunity to turn things in his favor. He was anti-communist and Islamist.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Good also are these Z-10s Boeing acquired for these operations

Combat testing/evaluation... Yes.

Boeing? Do you mean the Viper deal?

 

[Echo_419]

Combat testing/evaluation... Yes.

Boeing? Do you mean the Viper deal?

Sala a Iphone ka auto correct
Being*

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Sala a Iphone ka auto correct
Being*

Same problem here .

 

[Psychic]

I see things differently!
Bhutto had his issues, but in international community he's a secular internationalist. At the same time getting associated with ZuH is considered a stigma...or so I read. I would call Bhutto a lesser evil of the two. The proof to this would be that every year death anniversary of Bhutto is commemorated while Zia's go unnoticed (my personal observation). Somehow I hold ZuH's regime responsible for allowing an aggressively conservative Islamism to take center-stage in Pakistani society. ZuH's policies had long-term consequences for terrorism, but back in those days, they strengthened ZuH's religious clout while ensuring that the Pakistani economy could be kicked into overdrive without disruptions(which is why Pak's GNP grew to be the highest in the world back then). Had Bhutto remained in power for longer then Pakistan might have been more secular today.


Baluch got Saddam's support too, because he assumed Baluch issue would spread into rival Iran too.
I see Pakistan's intervention in Afghanistan as something that helped ZuH to strike freindship with US and western countries, till then he was not recognised by these countries, ergo he saw Soviet attack as an opportunity to turn things in his favor. He was anti-communist and Islamist.

I partially agree with what you have said esp the Saddam part.
As for greater or lesser evil I disagree.
You probably look at it from democracy vs dictatorship perspective.
Bhutto was a hawk during Ayub's time and after he got into power, he messed up our economy by his stupid nationalization policies. He was no less than a dictator. He became a tyrant who subdued his opponents by using state agencies (FSF). These people are snakes and are masters of lies and deception.
He did Islamization, started Afghan resistance, used state torture and even ordered troops to fire at innocent protestors. Now their party people blame ONLY Zia for these things and naive people who are unaware of our history believe it. This is a part of our history but as CoD game says " History is written by the victor" so thats why you donot see Zia's death anivarsery or other popularity stuff.
Bhutto was among one of the worst things ever happened to Pakistan.
As far as aggressive Islam is considered, anyone in power at THAT TIME would have done more or less the same things(Afghan war).
Zia stayed away from many messy things like Iran Iraq war. Instead of being hawkish, he went to India to watch cricket match at a critical time thus we saw how things normalised after that. I doubt that Bhutto would have gone to India at that time.

 

[Levina]

I partially agree with what you have said esp the Saddam part.
As for greater or lesser evil I disagree.
You probably look at it from democracy vs dictatorship perspective.
Bhutto was a hawk during Ayub's time and after he got into power, he messed up our economy by his stupid nationalization policies. He was no less than a dictator. He became a tyrant who subdued his opponents by using state agencies (FSF). These people are snakes and are masters of lies and deception.
He did Islamization, started Afghan resistance, used state torture and even ordered troops to fire at innocent protestors. Now their party people blame ONLY Zia for these things and naive people who are unaware of our history believe it. This is a part of our history but as CoD game says " History is written by the victor" so thats why you donot see Zia's death anivarsery or other popularity stuff.
Bhutto was among one of the worst things ever happened to Pakistan.
As far as aggressive Islam is considered, anyone in power at THAT TIME would have done more or less the same things(Afghan war).
Zia stayed away from many messy things like Iran Iraq war. Instead of being hawkish, he went to India to watch cricket match at a critical time thus we saw how things normalised after that. I doubt that Bhutto would have gone to India at that time.

I see Zia as a hypocrite who on one side professed his love for Islam, and on the other side he was involved in the massacre of innocent Palestinians during the Black September Tragedy of 1970, while he was serving in Jordan. I have heard many Pakistanis blaming him for AK-47 culture and the heroine culture (some say it has become a synonym to the name of Pakistan, any person who gets caught at any airport in the world for trying to smuggle this drug is likely to be a Pakistani or traveling from Pakistan... ).
Bhutto had his issues, but Zia's blunders stand out.

 

[WAJsal]

I see Zia as a hypocrite who on one side professed his love for Islam, and on the other side he was involved in the massacre of innocent Palestinians during the Black September Tragedy of 1970, while he was serving in Jordan. I have heard many Pakistanis blaming him for AK-47 culture and the heroine culture (some say it has become a synonym to the name of Pakistan, any person who gets caught at any airport in the world for trying to smuggle this drug is likely to be a Pakistani or traveling from Pakistan... ).
Bhutto had his issues, but Zia's blunders stand out.

Don't get your mind into Pakistani politics if you want to survive,especially the past , so messed up.

 

[Psychic]

I see Zia as a hypocrite who on one side professed his love for Islam, and on the other side he was involved in the massacre of innocent Palestinians during the Black September Tragedy of 1970, while he was serving in Jordan. I have heard many Pakistanis blaming him for AK-47 culture and the heroine culture (some say it has become a synonym to the name of Pakistan, any person who gets caught at any airport in the world for trying to smuggle this drug is likely to be a Pakistani or traveling from Pakistan... ).
Bhutto had his issues, but Zia's blunders stand out.

Zia carried on the "legacy" but we couldn't afford a hostile Soviet Union in our west. It was inevitable.

As far as Palestenians are concerned, being a Palestenian does not give you a right to bully the country which gave you refuge.
The PLO just made a state within a state in Jordan. Took law in their hands and even started to collect tax and extorted money. Moreover they caused troubles for Jordan by launching cross border attacks. Though u can debate about civilian deaths or so but it was aftereffect.

Zia at that time was just an advisor in Jordan and involved in operational planning only.

 

[Levina]

Don't get your mind into Pakistani politics if you want to survive,especially the past , so messed up.

Indeed!
Pakistan has been a testing ground for dictators and dynastic politics.

 

[doppelganger]

THIS IS THE FIRST POST I LIKED OF BRADAR ZARVAN. WHAT IS GOING ON?? IS IT THE END OF DAYS??

No, no, he has been changing for some time now. Like a pupa into a butterfly.

A god sign for Pakistan.