What's new

Pakistan’s likely next leader is a Taliban sympathizer

Pakistan’s likely next leader is a Taliban sympathizer

PAKISTAN’S PROBABLE incoming prime minister campaigned as a maverick challenging an entrenched and corrupt political elite. But Imran Khan, who on Thursday claimed victory in his country’s parliamentary elections, is not exactly an outsider. He is indeed an enemy of the major political parties that have dominated Pakistani civilian politics for decades — but he is also the favorite of the Pakistani military, whose overweening power the mainstream parties have been trying to curb.

If Mr. Khan takes office, he will have the support of many Pakistanis who want to see reforms that distribute wealth more equally or that disempower the old political dynasties. But he will owe his position largely to the army and its powerful intelligence service, which helped him win so that they can more easily pursue their own interests — which include siphoning off the lion’s share of the national budget, supporting the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan and encouraging other extreme Islamist groups. That means Pakistan, which has been one of the most difficult countries for the United States to work with over the past two decades, is likely to become still more so.

[Barkha Dutt: The biggest game of Imran Khan’s life begins now]

Though no official results had been announced by late Thursday, those reported by local media were close to what the generals were seeking: a solid lead for Mr. Khan, but not enough of one to allow him to form a strong civilian government. The risk for the winners was a popular backlash. So overt and heavy-handed was the military’s intervention in the election campaign, and so questionable the vote count, that some analysts predicted it could trigger sustained unrest. The former governing party of Nawaz Sharif, who was ousted from office by court order a year ago and imprisoned this month, said it would not accept the result.

During his time in office, Mr. Sharif challenged the military’s control of foreign policy, including its insistence on permament hostility toward India and its sponsorship of terrorist organizations. His reward was to be singled out for prosecution on corruption charges. While he was probably guilty of amassing illicit wealth, the court judgments against him were orchestrated by the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency, according to one judge of the Islamabad High Court. According to numerous reports, the military also bribed or intimidated members of Mr. Sharif’s party to switch their support to Mr. Khan and forced Pakistani media to tilt their coverage in favor of his campaign.

Mr. Khan, a former cricket star and playboy who now portrays himself as devoutly religious and a nationalist, seems to have few foreign policy views other than antipathy toward the United States and its war on terrorism; he has endorsed the Taliban cause in Afghanistan. That suits the generals, who, since the Trump administration’s suspension of U.S. military aid, no longer much pretend to comply with U.S. demands to cease support for the group. Pakistan’s de facto rulers now seem to believe that their backing from China, which is investing tens of billions of dollars in the country’s infrastructure, gives them the freedom to pursue their baleful purposes more openly. Mr. Khan’s election is evidence of their renewed ascendance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2d5f74f115d0
Nothing better than american tears #RoShaitanRo:devil:
 
.
Pakistan’s likely next leader is a Taliban sympathizer

PAKISTAN’S PROBABLE incoming prime minister campaigned as a maverick challenging an entrenched and corrupt political elite. But Imran Khan, who on Thursday claimed victory in his country’s parliamentary elections, is not exactly an outsider. He is indeed an enemy of the major political parties that have dominated Pakistani civilian politics for decades — but he is also the favorite of the Pakistani military, whose overweening power the mainstream parties have been trying to curb.

If Mr. Khan takes office, he will have the support of many Pakistanis who want to see reforms that distribute wealth more equally or that disempower the old political dynasties. But he will owe his position largely to the army and its powerful intelligence service, which helped him win so that they can more easily pursue their own interests — which include siphoning off the lion’s share of the national budget, supporting the Taliban in neighboring Afghanistan and encouraging other extreme Islamist groups. That means Pakistan, which has been one of the most difficult countries for the United States to work with over the past two decades, is likely to become still more so.

[Barkha Dutt: The biggest game of Imran Khan’s life begins now]

Though no official results had been announced by late Thursday, those reported by local media were close to what the generals were seeking: a solid lead for Mr. Khan, but not enough of one to allow him to form a strong civilian government. The risk for the winners was a popular backlash. So overt and heavy-handed was the military’s intervention in the election campaign, and so questionable the vote count, that some analysts predicted it could trigger sustained unrest. The former governing party of Nawaz Sharif, who was ousted from office by court order a year ago and imprisoned this month, said it would not accept the result.

During his time in office, Mr. Sharif challenged the military’s control of foreign policy, including its insistence on permament hostility toward India and its sponsorship of terrorist organizations. His reward was to be singled out for prosecution on corruption charges. While he was probably guilty of amassing illicit wealth, the court judgments against him were orchestrated by the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency, according to one judge of the Islamabad High Court. According to numerous reports, the military also bribed or intimidated members of Mr. Sharif’s party to switch their support to Mr. Khan and forced Pakistani media to tilt their coverage in favor of his campaign.

Mr. Khan, a former cricket star and playboy who now portrays himself as devoutly religious and a nationalist, seems to have few foreign policy views other than antipathy toward the United States and its war on terrorism; he has endorsed the Taliban cause in Afghanistan. That suits the generals, who, since the Trump administration’s suspension of U.S. military aid, no longer much pretend to comply with U.S. demands to cease support for the group. Pakistan’s de facto rulers now seem to believe that their backing from China, which is investing tens of billions of dollars in the country’s infrastructure, gives them the freedom to pursue their baleful purposes more openly. Mr. Khan’s election is evidence of their renewed ascendance.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.2d5f74f115d0
phuck you:D . dont care what usa or india thinks
 
.
They ask us to take actions against Talibans and they themselves want to sit with the Talibans for peace talks and negotiations

Hypocrisy fcuks
 
. .
They ask us to take actions against Talibans and they themselves want to sit with the Talibans for peace talks and negotiations

Hypocrisy fcuks
Maybe - just maybe - had you taken action against the Taliban, no peace talks would have been required at all.

And having a peace negotiation with the Taliban is different than justifying and supporting their violence on the basis of religion.

The US is trying for the peace negotiation with the taleban. You - I mean IK who is the Prime Minister of Pakistan - on the other hand justified Taliban's violence on the basis of religion.

So that's the difference.
 
.
Maybe - just maybe - had you taken action against the Taliban, no peace talks would have been required at all.

And having a peace negotiation with the Taliban is different than justifying and supporting their violence on the basis of religion.

The US is trying for the peace negotiation with the taleban. You - I mean IK who is the Prime Minister of Pakistan - on the other hand justified Taliban's violence on the basis of religion.

So that's the difference.

We are already taking the required actions against the Talibans we (Pakistan) is the most that faced terrorism here... And BTW US and NATO forces are sitting in Afghanistan for so long they can take actions against them why won't they take actions against them ??

When did he justify that Talibans voilence??
 
.
We are already taking the required actions against the Talibans we (Pakistan) is the most that faced terrorism here... And BTW US and NATO forces are sitting in Afghanistan for so long they can take actions against them why won't they take actions against them ??

When did he justify that Talibans voilence??

Thank you for your calmed reply. I was hoping that you will start abusing me, but gladly I was wrong.

Anyway, the actions you have taken were against the terrorists who were attacking Pakistan (good and bad terrorists?), but not those who are attacking US Afghanistan (or possibly India). I mean that is why you have trouble relationship with the US off late.

For IK, check this:

Imran Khan says Taliban's 'holy war' in Afghanistan is justified by Islamic law

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/14/imran-khan-taliban-afghanistan-islam
 
.
Thank you for your calmed reply. I was hoping that you will start abusing me, but gladly I was wrong.

Anyway, the actions you have taken were against the terrorists who were attacking Pakistan (good and bad terrorists?), but not those who are attacking US Afghanistan (or possibly India). I mean that is why you have trouble relationship with the US off late.

For IK, check this:

Imran Khan says Taliban's 'holy war' in Afghanistan is justified by Islamic law

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/14/imran-khan-taliban-afghanistan-islam

Why would I abuse you??

Well if a country comes to your homeland and wants to extract your minerals and says we lost so much in war against you and your minerals will repay that what would you do?? Each and everytime they negotiate with Talibans their condition to clear their land and take the US and NATO forces even Obama planned to do so but then comes Trump

And Talibans were once freedom fighters for the US and helped them to fight against Russia
 
.
Thank you for your calmed reply. I was hoping that you will start abusing me, but gladly I was wrong.

Anyway, the actions you have taken were against the terrorists who were attacking Pakistan (good and bad terrorists?), but not those who are attacking US Afghanistan (or possibly India). I mean that is why you have trouble relationship with the US off late.

For IK, check this:

Imran Khan says Taliban's 'holy war' in Afghanistan is justified by Islamic law

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/14/imran-khan-taliban-afghanistan-islam
If you have Problem with Taliban go and Fight them our Forces are only for our security
we did enough its time for US and her Lackeys to man up and clean the mess they created
Americans have Tried their best to defeat Taliban by Spending 1 trillion USD and sending hundreds of thousands troops but all in vain If americans cant do it we cant either Its time for cow peoples to send theri invisible hanuman commandos and liberate Afghanistan from clutches of Islamic terror Afghanistan(which isnt terror according to US)
 
.
Why would I abuse you??

Well if a country comes to your homeland and wants to extract your minerals and says we lost so much in war against you and your minerals will repay that what would you do?? Each and everytime they negotiate with Talibans their condition to clear their land and take the US and NATO forces even Obama planned to do so but then comes Trump

And Talibans were once freedom fighters for the US and helped them to fight against Russia
I have seen posters abusing me for stating a simple fact that Imran Khan was justifying Taliban's violence. Anyway, I was wrong about you so let's leave it there.

Well if a country comes to your homeland and wants to extract your minerals and says we lost so much in war against you and your minerals will repay that what would you do?? Each and everytime they negotiate with Talibans their condition to clear their land and take the US and NATO forces even Obama
That means that negotiation should take place and correct things if they have gone wrong, isn't it? I guess that's what the US is trying to do, i.e. negotiations.

But Imran Khan justified Taliban's violence based on religion. They are the UN designated terror group. Imran Khan could have just asked for the negotiation to take place, and no one would have said anything. But he justified the UN designated terror group, that is the difference.

And Talibans were once freedom fighters for the US and helped them to
That's alright. People who were once friends turn into Enemies, it's not something new.

we did enough

maybe you did not, that is why taleban are still not finished.
Americans have Tried their best to defeat Taliban by Spending 1 trillion USD and sending hundreds of thousands troops but all in vain If americans cant do it we cant either
Americans werent able to do it because Taliban go and hide in Pakistan with the silent approval from the establishment? That is what the US accuse you of. And may be that is why you have troubled relationship with the US in the first place.
 
.
But Imran Khan justified Taliban's violence based on religion
Imran khan didnt justified anything he just spoke the universal truth which made many squeal like pigs
"It is very clear that whoever is fighting for their freedom is fighting a jihad …

They are the UN designated terror group
proof? where is the proof?

maybe you did not, that is why taleban are still not finished.
maybe cow people should finish the job whole world world is unable to do

Taliban go and hide in Pakistan
tell me more jokes
DjJLKRLW0AA-nWJ.jpg


I have seen posters abusing me for stating a simple fact that Imran Khan was justifying Taliban's violence. Anyway, I was wrong about you so let's leave it there.


That means that negotiation should take place and correct things if they have gone wrong, isn't it? I guess that's what the US is trying to do, i.e. negotiations.

But Imran Khan justified Taliban's violence based on religion. They are the UN designated terror group. Imran Khan could have just asked for the negotiation to take place, and no one would have said anything. But he justified the UN designated terror group, that is the difference.


That's alright. People who were once friends turn into Enemies, it's not something new.



maybe you did not, that is why taleban are still not finished.

Americans werent able to do it because Taliban go and hide in Pakistan with the silent approval from the establishment? That is what the US accuse you of. And may be that is why you have troubled relationship with the US in the first place.
so after controlling over 40% territory they still need to hide in Pakistan i wonder once they leave for Pakistan who controls those territories
and where do the Talban in Eastern Afghanistan go? do they fly all the way over government-controlled Territories into pakistan
 
. .
Imran khan didnt justified anything he just spoke the universal truth which made many squeal like pigs
"It is very clear that whoever is fighting for their freedom is fighting a jihad …
That becomes very subjective. Taliban are UN designated terrorists, justifying their violence based on religion is wrong.

proof? where is the proof?
I have the proof but just like you did yesterday, I would say "use Google."
maybe cow people should finish the job whole world world is unable to do
Who are the cow people?

tell me more jokes
It was just my assumption. And I am not uncomfortable to say that I could be wrong.

so after controlling over 40% territory they still need to hide in Pakistan i wonder once they leave for Pakistan who controls those territories
and where do the Talban in Eastern Afghanistan go? do they fly all the way over government-controlled Territories into pakistan
Frankly I did not understand what do you want to say here. Are you referring to the part where I said that taleban are hiding in Pakistan with the silent approval of the establishment? if that is not true then why do you think that Pakistan has a troubled relationship with the US now?

Is Iran india's friend or foe?
Iran is a dear friend. So is Israel. any problem between Iran and Israel is for them to solve and I really hope that this will be resolved soon.
 
.
That becomes very subjective. Taliban are UN designated terrorists, justifying their violence based on religion is wrong.


I have the proof but just like you did yesterday, I would say "use Google."

Who are the cow people?


It was just my assumption. And I am not uncomfortable to say that I could be wrong.


Frankly I did not understand what do you want to say here. Are you referring to the part where I said that taleban are hiding in Pakistan with the silent approval of the establishment? if that is not true then why do you think that Pakistan has a troubled relationship with the US now?


Iran is a dear friend. So is Israel. any problem between Iran and Israel is for them to solve and I really hope that this will be resolved soon.
you dont have any idea what you are talking about
stop wasting our time
India is a super and Modi is left wing Liberal Secular Intellectual
now buzz off
 
.
Iran is a dear friend. So is Israel. any problem between Iran and Israel is for them to solve and I really hope that this will be resolved soon.


By the same logic any problem between US, Northern Alliance, Nato and Afghan Taliban is to be sorted out by them and not Pakistan, why the duck people's brain stop functioning when it comes to Pakistan. How hard is it to accept that Pakistan will work for its own interests and won't do anyone's bidding anymore. Which country on Earth got its military bases, settled areas, mosques and markets bombed just because US invaded its neighboring country?
 
.
Back
Top Bottom