What's new

PM refuses to reveal ‘understanding with Saudi rulers’

Well, Saudi Arabia is playing games on Syria and Iran is now playing on Houthis. Between Saudi Arabia and Iran is fighting over Iraq situation. They are very ignorant and prides, not our problems.

Go read namaz, dua's and seek protection on our own country Pakistan and respect other people including Shia or anyone. Shia has nothing to do with Iran/Saudi Arabia governments, okay?

Be a good Muslim man
I try to be good Muslim every yes I commit sins but never proud of them and try to correct myself, sometimes I succeeded and sometimes I fail but I keep trying. As far as this things is concerned Iran has to stop backing Houthis or it will not end good for Iran and that is clearly visible when pretty much entire Muslim world on one side and Iran on the other its clear Iran would end up on bad side.
 
Some fairly relevant points you have raised. But with diametrically opposite views and a history of hate between the Houthis and Saudi Arabia, peace is a long way off. The air war is a complete waste and it will have little affect on the Houthis unless it is followed up by a ground offensive. No war has been won by air power alone. And getting involved in a ground offensive will result in another Vietnam. Overall, the situation doesn't look good and it may be years before a settlement is reached.

You are right if you want to be pessimistic. I personally believe that the hatred was fabricated somehow and has causes that should be dealt with, for the sake of the Houthis themselves and the Yemenis and Saudis on the other hand.

The main Idea is to prevent any incursion into KSA. The unfortunate air strikes were conducted to cut off supply lines of the rebels and destroy their main infrastructure which is not much, 'cause they are guerrilla not a regular army.

Their won't be any land invasion of Yemen, but maybe clashes near the borders if some Yemeni rebels manage to reach there, which will be suicidal in my opinion, first due to the firepower they will face from land, air and maybe sea, second that will anger most Muslims, because the obvious target of the rebels will be their sacrosanct holy places land...
 
Only basic principles needed to be discuss in parliament. Debating details of defence and foreign policy are inapproperiate.
Iran has not supported houthi publically hence we should not worry about iran.

:o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o:

PM refuses to reveal ‘understanding with Saudi rulers’
LAWMAKERS OPPOSE BOOTS ON YEMEN SOIL | Says not in a hurry to join coalition but Saudi sovereignty to be protected | Iran should be involved in debate | Shah suggests in-camera session

April 08, 2015
SHARE :
pm-refuses-to-reveal-understanding-with-saudi-rulers-1428450826-4298.jpg

Javaid-ur-Rahman
ISLAMABAD - Opposition Leader in the National Assembly Khurshid Shah Tuesday said there could be an in-camera debate at the joint session of the Parliament if it was not possible for the government to disclose details about its recent commitment with Saudi Arabia.
Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif, on the insistence of the opposition to share details, clarified that it was not appropriate to disclose details owing to sensitive nature of the matter. “It is essential to take care of the matter owing to its sensitive nature,” said Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif in a brief statement, apparently mentioning the government’s compulsion for not sharing the details.
The prime minister, however, said the government would conceal no facts from the Parliament and respect the suggestions of lawmakers. “We need your valuable suggestions as policy will be formulated on these lines,” said the prime minister.
He further said the government was awaiting response of the Turkish leadership about their meeting with Iran and Saudi Arabia. “Pakistan and Turkey would jointly consult the leadership of Indonesia and Malaysia to find out ways to avoid turmoil in Yemen,” he said, reiterating Islamabad would help KSA in case of any threat to its integrity. He categorically made it clear that the government had not so far taken any decision on the Yemen issue.
Taking the floor, Opposition Leader Syed Khurshid Shah floated a suggestion to hold an in-camera session to share details about its specific assistance for Saudi Arabia. “The opposition will surely support the government in the larger national interest,” he added.
The lawmakers from treasury and opposition benches came up with different suggestions to resolve the tense situation in the Arab countries. PPP Senator Farhatullah Babar, on his turn, called for supporting Saudi Arabia, pursuing the policy of non-interference and assuming the role of a mediator in peacemaking in the strife-torn Yemen.
“Without boots on the Yemen soil, Pakistan should assist Saudis in logistics, intelligence sharing, security of key installations, training in mountain and difficult terrain warfare and medical assistance,” he said, suggesting this limited assistance to the kingdom should be accompanied by a balancing act through quick dialogue with Iran on border security and bilateral talks on Afghanistan. “It is not in our national interests to be used by any Middle East country for posturing against Iran,” he said.
Babar said Pakistan was the biggest contributor to UN peacekeeping troops and called for UN peacekeeping in Yemen. “This will enable us to have our troops in Yemen, but only for peacekeeping and under the UN.”
“An immediate ceasefire and humanitarian assistance must also receive priority as delay will not only result in a human catastrophe but also defeat the very purpose of the ongoing operation in Yemen,” he said, adding the crisis in Yemen was basically political that called for a political solution and not a military response.
“The intervention in Afghanistan in the 80s in the name of Islam earned some dollars, but brought a huge devastation in the form of drugs, Kalashnikov culture, refugees and rise of militancy,” he said.
After 9/11, he said, Pakistan allowed its airbases on a telephone call to be used for strikes against Afghanistan. As a result, we got some 20 billion dollars, but lost over 56,000 citizens and soldiers, and suffered heavy material losses. “The situation in Yemen is a war between different tribes. Saudi Arabia was not attacked; it was Yemen that was attacked,” he said. “We should not repeat the mistakes we committed in the past; these issues were discussed earlier. Let’s try and move forward as indicated by the PM,” Babar said. The PPP leader said no one would refuse Saudi Arabia’s request outright, but there was a consensus that Pakistan did not want to be part of a distant war.
Taking the floor, Senator Mushahid Hussain said that it should not be treated as a sectarian conflict. “It is a Middle East proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Pakistan should avoid getting entangled in the Yemen conflict as it was not its own war,” he opined.
Giving his suggestions, the PML-Q senator said China and the UN should play a role in ceasefire in Yemen. He added Pakistan and Turkey should jointly co-host Saudi Arabia and Yemen for negotiations.
Jamaat-e-Islami chief Sirajul Haq spoke about repercussions of wars. “It is a great game as Yemen issue did not arise all of sudden,” he said, adding Pakistan should play a reconciliatory role in the conflict. He backed defence of Saudi Arabia. “The government should form a parliamentary delegation and send it to the Arab countries to discuss the situation,” he said, adding it should not be made a sectarian issue. Pakistan should prevent Saudi Arabia from waging a war against Houthi rebels in Yemen.
National Party (NP) lawmaker Hasil Bizenjo said it was not a matter of the Muslim Ummah but of Arabs. There was a need to resolve it with diplomatic channels, he added.
A senior ANP MNA opined Pakistan should go for reconciliation rather than sending troops as it might prove dangerous for the country.
Agencies add: Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif said his government is “not in a hurry” to join the Saudi-led coalition fighting rebels in Yemen, as he sought parliamentary backing for any decision to send troops.
Nawaz Sharif asked the lawmakers to advise the government on the difficult issue of sending troops for this war. “We are not in a hurry, we will take all your good points,” he said.
“I am not saying that you should decide based on the government’s policy, you should guide the government. Leaders should tell us what to do. What stance should Pakistan take?” he said, adding “the entire nation has its eyes on the joint session.”
“I assure you that whatever is decided by this assembly will be implemented,” he said.
PM Nawaz Sharif called for Iran to be involved in a debate on security in Yemen.
Not a single MP spoke in favour of sending troops. “Iran should also join the discussion and evaluate whether their policy is correct or not,” the PM said. “If we get involved in Yemen, a huge blaze will once again erupt in our country,” veteran opposition lawmaker Ghulam Ahmed Bilour told parliament. “My army is not a rent-an-army.”

he needs to answer why saudis game 1.5 billion dollar, were they to supply army. he also needs to explain why is it our concern, Pakistan is not nawaz sharif's or anyone's prostitute that they can take her for a ride.
 
Only basic principles needed to be discuss in parliament. Debating details of defence and foreign policy are inapproperiate.
Iran has not supported houthi publically hence we should not worry about iran.

I think in a democracy you need to say why you are intervening and what is being gotten.

How else are you going to prevent Nawaz Sharif and army brass from pocketing money and throwing a bunch of army jawans as cannon fodder in Yemen ?
 
:o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o::o:



he needs to answer why saudis game 1.5 billion dollar, were they to supply army. he also needs to explain why is it our concern, Pakistan is not nawaz sharif's or anyone's prostitute that they can take her for a ride.


There is an underlying difference here which rarely gets noticed, a pattern, see the thing is when Uncle Sam has to do a misadventure, they install a dictator well a head of landing their rednecks into a foreign soil, nothing gets debated in Parliament, one person decides and formulates the policy. No politician especially IK makes a fuss about it. But when it comes to a country that has brotherly relations with us, that has supported us pretty much, we get these talks and difference of opinions and blah blah blah. Why cannot we Bargain reasonably with keeping our individual interests out of it and Egos and political scoring at the door of parliament?
 
There is an underlying difference here which rarely gets noticed, a pattern, see the thing is when Uncle Sam has to do a misadventure, they install a dictator well a head of landing their rednecks into a foreign soil, nothing gets debated in Parliament, one person decides and formulates the policy. No politician especially IK makes a fuss about it. But when it comes to a country that has brotherly relations with us, that has supported us pretty much, we get these talks and difference of opinions and blah blah blah. Why cannot we Bargain reasonably with keeping our individual interests out of it and Egos and political scoring at the door of parliament?

going to war is no joke, especially for someone else and when that someone else is a headless horse.

Pakistan must watch its interests, not because nawaz sharif is son of House of Saud that we should send our troops and military power to their ambitious agenda to kill other muslims.
 
going to war is no joke, especially for someone else and when that someone else is a headless horse.

Pakistan must watch its interests, not because nawaz sharif is son of House of Saud that we should send our troops and military power to their ambitious agenda to kill other muslims.

Where were these voices in Uncle Sam's case? That adventure costed us 50K civilians of our own, missing people, innocent people in detention camps of Abu Gharib and Afghanistan, continuous embarrassment of violation of our sovereignty, attacks on our sensitive installations, free visas for any tom dick and harry.

We were left with insurgencies, which we dealt ourselves, corrupt governments to facilitate Uncle Sam's interests, and we were promised Coalition support fund to burn our own country which International world sees as aid to us. Where the hell were these sane voices at that time? Why nobody thought interests of Pakistan at that time?
 
CCDPBbXWIAA9f7P.jpg


Dr. Shireen Mazari: in Sept 1970, Brig Ziaul Haq used Pak troops against Palestinians, till to date we face fallout..

A must listen speech of Mazari. she is spot on, we still get referred to be as butchers of Palestinians... :(
 
180 000 000 : 1
^Yeah, there's a problem here.

CCDPBbXWIAA9f7P.jpg


Dr. Shireen Mazari: in Sept 1970, Brig Ziaul Haq used Pak troops against Palestinians, till to date we face fallout..

A must listen speech of Mazari. she is spot on, we still get referred to be as butchers of Palestinians... :(
Indeed it is. As much as I may not like her, she has some extremely valid points.
 
CCDP3v1W4AASYMi.jpg


Dr. Shireen Mazari: Pakistan should oppose this 'coalition of the willing' , against Yemen

Dr. Shireen Mazari in NA: Pakistan should push for UN peace enforcement force, for Yemen, if the case goes to UN SC

Dr Mazari in NA: Turkey & Iran have said they want to bring an end to Yemen conflict through diplomatic means, Pakistan should join talks

Dr Mazari in NA: In Yemen, bodies lying on road, but GCC countries blocking resolution for humanitarian assistance

Shireen Mazari in NA: Yemen war is not our war, our army should not be sent there, holy places in Saudia are safe
 
Bunch of Somalis with RPGs take out USA Black Hawk Downs and Kill over Dozens of Pakistanis and Americans
but think of Yemen as 1000 Multiply Somalia plus Afghanistan, if you do not believe me than let Pakistan Army come in body bags if they ever landed in Yemen
 
There is an underlying difference here which rarely gets noticed, a pattern, see the thing is when Uncle Sam has to do a misadventure, they install a dictator well a head of landing their rednecks into a foreign soil, nothing gets debated in Parliament, one person decides and formulates the policy. No politician especially IK makes a fuss about it.
Where were these voices in Uncle Sam's case? That adventure costed us 50K civilians of our own, missing people, innocent people in detention camps of Abu Gharib and Afghanistan, continuous embarrassment of violation of our sovereignty, attacks on our sensitive installations, free visas for any tom dick and harry.

If you implying about our role on the War on Terror than unless you were living under a rock Imran Khan was perhaps the only mainstream politician actively voicing his opposition to our policy
That includes him opposing sending our troops to the tribal areas
That includes him protesting against drone strikes and raising this issue in the public domain not only in Pakistan but also internationally
Hence the label Taliban Khan
Now before you label me his fanboy i want to make it clear that i disagreed with his stance and believe he was incredibly naive about it calling it a foreign war
His strong opposition led to the confusion among our population regarding dealing with the TTP
But thankfully he has now changed his position
 
If you implying about our role on the War on Terror than unless you were living under a rock Imran Khan was perhaps the only mainstream politician actively voicing his opposition to our policy
That includes him opposing sending our troops to the tribal areas
That includes him protesting against drone strikes and raising this issue in the public domain not only in Pakistan but also internationally
Hence the label Taliban Khan
Now before you label me his fanboy i want to make it clear that i disagreed with his stance and believe he was incredibly naive about it calling it a foreign war
His strong opposition led to the confusion among our population regarding dealing with the TTP
But thankfully he has now changed his position

I would prefer to live under a rock than to become a Patwari, Jiyala, Karkun or Dancing tabdeeli Razakar.

And you missed my point altogether party. I don't know what made you justify actions of Imran Khan but that much I know he supported Musharaf too. And raising voice for drone strike is nothing special he did only.
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom