What's new

Pakistanis lose, US wins

Any resolution anywhere (including Pakistan) that declared Mukti Bahini as a terrorist organization. On the other hand, TTP, AT, Let, JeM .....etc etc are all declared terror outfits


So while making statements feels nice, they carry credibility only if they are backed by facts.

So it is necessary to pass resolutions to call a monkey a monkey even though it has all the physical and apparent characteristics of being a monkey. :lol:

As you said classical distinction of good and bad terrorist. It works with both of us. :)
 
Last edited:
I think it's just a statement to cool down some american hot heads. An operation in these conditions isn't realistic. I don't think that we are so far this desperate to obay or do which ever thing we are asked for, even if we have some idiot leaders in power.
 
Under the disguise of these TTP and extremist are operating professional hired guns of CIA and blackwater. We must comb our security apparatus carefully to flush out these traitors
 
So it is necessary to pass resolutions to call a monkey a monkey even though it has all the physical and apparent characteristics of being a monkey. :lol:

As you said classical distinction of good and bad terrorist. It works with both of us. :)

That way I can say Areesh is a terrorist (going by some of your posts here ) or you could call me one. However for an organization /person to be accepted as a terrorist, some credible organization needs to identify it as a terrorist. I am not aware of what kinds of terrorists you have seen in your neigbourhood, but my understanding is that terrorists dont have a different appearance from non terrorists and are not so clearly identifiable as a monkey is among men. However I will yield to your judgement in this since your country has a much wider variety of terrorists that you can study..:azn:

---------- Post added at 03:48 AM ---------- Previous post was at 03:47 AM ----------

Under the disguise of these TTP and extremist are operating professional hired guns of CIA and blackwater. We must comb our security apparatus carefully to flush out these traitors

Not fair.. How can you deny Mossad and RAW this honor..?? You just mentioned CIA and Blackwater :rofl:
 
NATO trucks dont pay any toll tax. Read the article I provided in my previous post.

Seriously, don't you think GOP should be blamed for that, on what pretext they have been given exemption of tax. Are they getting same benefits as PA?
 
This thread makes no sense. Pakistan loses ? Loses what by trying to clear out terrorists ? The mentality here is baffling at times.

You dont know what Pakistani people have gone through in these past few years since war OF terror have been brought into our homeland.


So far Afghan Taliban has never attacked our cities, but when the Pakistani army fight Afghan Taliban they will attack our people in our major cities like TTP did when Pakistani army went to fight them in South Waziristan and Swat.

It will take a miracle for Pakistan army to battle TTP, Al Qaeda, Afghan Taliban, Haqqani network, continue with flood relief, keep our cities safe, and keep our eastern borders with india under control all at the same time.

Our most dangerous enemy, the TTP, will then get stronger if other groups unite with it against Pakistan army.

And U.S. is not even providing the weapons Pakistan army have asked for to fight these highly trained extremists.
 
I will ignore the jibes since they seem like the output of a troubled mind. However, didnt I recently read about how both AT and TTP are working in coordination.? Actually if I was an Indian who hated Pakistan so bad, I would have loved that Pakistan is making this distinction. The same distinction has got you where you are and the situation down this road isnt too rosy either.

Thats what all the best was for..:tup:

Dont pretend to be a friend of Pakistanis in this forum when all you bharatiis make up scenarios of ways to destroy Pakistan in your bharati forums.


We know the mentality of indians. It will be a dream come true for indians if Pakistanis fight with each other and destroy their country on their own.

As your indian defence analyst said:

Stable Pakistan not in India’s interest
 
You people want US to give all their money to you? Why is US giving military aid .... It contains the transit fee too.
 
That way I can say Areesh is a terrorist (going by some of your posts here ) or you could call me one.

If you behave like one. Kill innocents, acquire path of violence and militancy, than obviously I can call you a terrorist. You can say the same to me if I do anything like that.

I am not aware of what kinds of terrorists you have seen in your neigbourhood, but my understanding is that terrorists dont have a different appearance from non terrorists

Non terrorists don't kill common people, they don't pick up weapons and start killing people of other ethnicity. So they have different appearance.


are not so clearly identifiable as a monkey is among men.

Obviously they are.

However I will yield to your judgement in this since your country has a much wider variety of terrorists that you can study..

Talking about terrorism India itself has faced and is facing so many militant organizations in different part of the country that you shouldn't have any difficulty in studying them. Looks like you aren't a good student or your study is only bound to Pakistan and those who commit violence against Pakistan.:lol:

:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
If you behave like one. Kill innocents, acquire path of violence and militancy, than obviously I can call you a terrorist. You can say the same to me if I do anything like that.

The Kashmiri "Freedom Fighters" fit the above requiremets perfectly.


Non terrorists don't kill common people, they don't pick up weapons and start killing people of other ethnicity. So they have different appearance.

So again by this criteria Mukti Bahini were not terrorists.
 
The Kashmiri "Freedom Fighters" fit the above requiremets perfectly.




So again by this criteria Mukti Bahini were not terrorists.

Your post reaffirmed exactly what I have been saying. The perfect distinction of good and bad terrorists. It works with both Pakistanis and Indians. ;)
 
Pakistanis lose USA Wins - It's rather early for such accounting, lets focus on understanding events before we pronounce ourselves on them:

U.S.-Pakistan Strategic Dialogue
Posted: 25 Oct 2010

What began last week as a strategic dialogue between US and Pakistani civilian and military leaders ended in strategic disconnect. Despite the US State Department’s efforts to make Washington’s relationship with Islamabad less one-dimensional – 13 working groups discussed development issues as wide-ranging as water and women’s empowerment – security issues remained the focus of high-level exchanges.

This dialogue aimed to smooth tensions heightened by NATO incursions into Pakistan, and Islamabad’s subsequent closure of supply routes to Afghanistan. Such meetings were conceived as an opportunity for the allies to communicate openly and frankly, thereby strengthening the partnership. While there was much plain speaking from both sides last week, the two governments now find themselves at cross-purposes, less strategically aligned than before on the security front.

The US last week articulated what it expects from Pakistan when it asks its ally to “do more”: crack down on the Haqqani group in North Waziristan, launch operations against Al Qaeda in Balochistan, allow US Special Forces more flexibility within Pakistan to target militants, and halt terror attacks in both India and Afghanistan.

Pakistan, too, made demands in its own interest. They reiterated the call for a Pakistani role in negotiations with the Afghan Taliban, with little or no Indian involvement (the US has begun to acquiesce to this status quo, starting with its help in brokering a transit trade agreement between Islamabad and Kabul, but not New Delhi, this summer). The Pakistani delegation also emphasized the need for Washington to balance its bilateral relations with Islamabad and New Delhi, thus securing a promise from President Barack Obama to visit Pakistan in 2011.

Given these diverging priorities, the question is how the allies will proceed from this point on.

Pakistan will be hard-pressed to comply with US demands. The army is stretched too thin to launch effective operations in North Waziristan, particularly after the diversion of 70,000 troops for flood relief efforts. The US expectation that the Pakistan Army focus on targeted operations against militants is therefore reasonable.

But it is unlikely that Pakistan will go after the Haqqani network until it has a better sense of what the ruling order in a post-US-withdrawal Afghanistan may look like. The Pakistani Taliban’s announcement on Sunday that they will seek sanctuary in Afghanistan in the event of a Pakistan Army attack will further complicate matters: the last thing Pakistan wants to do is antagonize militants who will soon be politically rehabilitated.

Conducting operations in Balochistan – where separatists wage a low-level insurgency – is equally tricky. Pakistan’s civilian government takes credit for promoting Baloch development and righting historic wrongs by its passage in 2009 of legislature that will ensure equitable resource distribution to the province. In its current fragile state, the government will be reluctant to undermine those gains by sanctioning military incursions into the province
.

Similarly, Islamabad cannot risk bearing the brunt of soaring anti-American sentiment among the Pakistani public by agreeing to expanded US Special Forces operations within national borders. Even before the dialogue concluded, Pakistan rejected US requests to deploy more CIA personnel within the country.

Pakistanis also believe that the US has not provided Islamabad –– or for that matter, Rawalpindi, where the Pakistan Army is headquartered –– enough incentives to take on the risks that increased counterterrorism cooperation entails. The belief that the US takes a “transactional” approach to Pakistan – offering the least amount possible for maximum returns – endures.

Last week’s much touted $2 billion security assistance package will thus be seen for what it is: a 30 percent increase and extension of the existing Foreign Military Financing program. The Obama administration’s decision, announced during the dialogue, to cut off aid and training to Pakistan Army units accused of conducting extrajudicial killings of terror suspects will also have repercussions. The perception will be that Washington takes away with one hand what it gives with another. Moreover, Pakistan will take note of the US’s repeated rejection of its request for a civilian nuclear technology deal akin to the one inked with India.

As such, the third installment of the strategic dialogue served only to highlight the differences that endure between Islamabad and Washington.

Huma Yusuf is a columnist with Pakistan’s Dawn Newspaper, and the Pakistan Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.


can you say SNAFU?
 
If you behave like one. Kill innocents, acquire path of violence and militancy, than obviously I can call you a terrorist. You can say the same to me if I do anything like that.



Non terrorists don't kill common people, they don't pick up weapons and start killing people of other ethnicity. So they have different appearance.




Obviously they are.



Talking about terrorism India itself has faced and is facing so many militant organizations in different part of the country that you shouldn't have any difficulty in studying them. Looks like you aren't a good student or your study is only bound to Pakistan and those who commit violence against Pakistan.:lol:

:rolleyes:


Plain and simple.. Which world body calls Mukti Bahini a terrorist organization? Name a couple please.. Even if it is from Pakistan, as long as it is internationally accredited. If it was, then Pakistani leadership wouldnt have gone and apologised to Bangladesh for 1971. It would have been the other way round.

That way in this forum, even US and NATO at times are called terrorists, but its only Pakistan that is taken to task on its support for terror groups..

Bluster is fine, but really doesnt achieve much..:azn:
 
Dont pretend to be a friend of Pakistanis in this forum when all you bharatiis make up scenarios of ways to destroy Pakistan in your bharati forums.


We know the mentality of indians. It will be a dream come true for indians if Pakistanis fight with each other and destroy their country on their own.

As your indian defence analyst said:

Stable Pakistan not in India’s interest

Never pretended to be Pakistan's friend. Dont intend to start now. Pakistan and India are each other's biggest external enemies at this time and i dont see that changing for a foreseeable future. Still, I dont hate the common people of Pakistan who have no axe to grind against India and they are the ones who suffer from the suicidal policy of good terrorist-bad terrorist distinction by Pakistani elite.
 
Back
Top Bottom