RAW network in Afghanistan behind Pak destabilisation

[dabloo]

There is a difference between supporting a freedom movement in Kashmir to get India to comply with the UNSC resolutions and the conditions of partition to allow a referendum to determine the final status of disputed territory, vs Indian sponsoring of violence and destabilization in East Pakistan and FATA/Baluchistan, which were/are both undisputed parts of Pakistan.

So no, the comparisons you make are not correct.

Please,

Help me, I want to knoe whether this UN resolution was only for India, or for both countries.

And what about Shimla Agreement, had you heard this word before.

Please comment.

Regards

Dabloo

 

[donrahul]

In India's case, it has actually gone 'whining' to the world about taking 'collective action, because her leadership does not have the cojones to take Pakistan on her own.

When was the last time Pakistan mounted a diplomatic offensive to get the world to act on behalf of her against Indian sponsored terrorism in Baluchistan and FATA?

The only nation we have approached with evidence on this issue is the US, since, for all intents and purposes, she alone controls Afghanistan

I surely agree that netas here, dont have the balls.. But the country(pakistan) still needs more proof's b4 going ballistic with the diplomatic offensive. Which I am sure that the country does not have.

Collective action!! Yes.. Pakistan is a nuclear armed country.. Unless we have the diplomatic strength and support to carry out the plans(whatever it is. I am not implying anything here) what ever that undertaken by us will surely fizzle out..

 

[dabloo]

In India's case, it has actually gone 'whining' to the world about taking 'collective action, because her leadership does not have the cojones to take Pakistan on her own.

When was the last time Pakistan mounted a diplomatic offensive to get the world to act on behalf of her against Indian sponsored terrorism in Baluchistan and FATA?

The only nation we have approached with evidence on this issue is the US, since, for all intents and purposes, she alone controls Afghanistan

Who had stopped you to approach other countries with Evidence gainst RAW.

You approached US with evidence and still they said nothing to INDIA, well i will die with surprise, because USA is the only country , which is alway looking into some way to put pressure on other country,either using Amnesty, UN or TOW

Thanks
Dabloo

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Please,

Help me, I want to knoe whether this UN resolution was only for India, or for both countries.

And what about Shimla Agreement, had you heard this word before.

Please comment.

Regards

Dabloo

Check the UN resolutions thread. It has been 'commented upon'.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Who had stopped you to approach other countries with Evidence gainst RAW.

You approached US with evidence and still they said nothing to INDIA, well i will die with surprise, because USA is the only country , which is alway looking into some way to put pressure on other country,either using Amnesty, UN or TOW

Thanks
Dabloo

Of course they said nothing - this was while the US was arm twisting the NSG to grant India a waiver for the Nuclear deal to build a strategic partnership with her.

Beyond that there is no point in 'whining to other countries'. The only country that can do anything about Indian sponsored terrorism in Pakistan is the country controlling the territory out of which said terrorism is taking place, which in this case is Afghanistan controlled by the US.

 

[dabloo]

Check the UN resolutions thread. It has been 'commented upon'.

Ok,

I will through it and will post my comment on it.

What about SHIMLA AGREEMENT.

Regards

Dabloo

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Ok,

I will through it and will post my comment on it.

What about SHIMLA AGREEMENT.

Regards

Dabloo

Also answered - follow links from a couple of Halaku Khan's posts to that argument. Shimla requires respecting the Charter of the UN, you cannot do that while ignoring the UNSC resolutions.

 

[slugger]

'Precedence' does not equate with your statement of the PA being present in Afghanistan now.

Precedence, when taken and considered along with the statement

Intertwined and blurred demarcation between the "2 elements" :wink: :wink:

opens up a whole new big can of worms

The New Yorker...

You only have to google Kunduz airlift or Airlift of evil to get your dose of news from other sources

Or how about reading from the writings of a fellow Pakistani
Descent into Chaos: The United States and the Failure of Nation Building in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Central Asia

Mr. Ahmed Rashid writes about the "Airlift of Evil" in the most eloquent manner

P.S: embedding book covers from Amazon..What is the need

 

[Lockheed F-16]

The Raw is destabilizing Pakistan since 9/11. Therefore the bomb attack on ther Indian embassy was necessary and a strong signal from ISI to RAW.

The ISI is always a step further than RAW.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Precedence, when taken and considered along with the statement

"intertwined and blurred demarcation between the "2 elements" :wink: :wink:"

opens up a whole new big can of worms

Precedence does not imply anything, as has been pointed out - the second statement purports to support a weak argument of precedence, with another weak argument of 'blurred demarcation'.

Institutional Pakistani support for the Taliban factions has not existed for a long time now (though speculative rumor mills in the media occasionally make a fuss about it to explain away US failures in Afghanistan), except for where we used some breakaway factions to fight off the TTP terrorists.

The flow of weapons, materials, drugs and money fueling the insurgency in Afghanistan and Pakistan now goes through a corridor protected by India's erstwhile buddies from the Afghan civil war, the Northern Alliance leadership, through the CAR's, Russia and Europe

Neither the PA, nor any proxies it is actively supporting, are involved in Afghanistan at the moment.

You only have to google Kunduz airlift or Airlift of evil to get your dose of news from other sources

Again, precedence is not a valid argument.

 

[dabloo]

The Raw is destabilizing Pakistan since 9/11. Therefore the bomb attack on ther Indian embassy was necessary and a strong signal from ISI to RAW.

The ISI is always a step further than RAW.

Thanks God,

Atleast one pakistani agrees that ISI ws behind Indian Embassy bombing.

Thanks friend, you made my day.

ok bye everybody, leaving for home.

See you tommorrow.

Regards

Dabloo

 

[slugger]

any opinion that goes against your stand is brushed off as

speculative rumor mills

Neat

Again, precedence is not a valid argument.

They were not airlifted back to be court martialled in Pakistan
Their continual presence in your military setup warrants a closer scrutiny and "questioning" by those paying millions of dollars and hardware for your upkeep

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

any opinion that goes against your stand is brushed off as

Neat

I have yet to see a piece that provides credible evidence that Pakistani institutions are actively supporting Taliban operations in Afghanistan.

Even US complaints have primarily centered around 'inaction' (which I believe is completely defensible from the Pakistani POV in some cases, as has been explored on other threads), and not around active institutional support for insurgents they fight.

They were not airlifted back to be court martialled in Pakistan
Their continual presence in your military setup warrants a closer scrutiny and "questioning" by those paying millions of dollars and hardware for your upkeep

They were airlifted with full knowledge of the high level officials in the US - Rumsfield is criticized by some for allowing this. I believe it was the correct thing to do. The Taliban did not carry out 911, nor is there any evidence indicating they knew about the plan. The Taliban's fault was that they did not hand over the people the US was demanding quickly enough.

Pakistan owed it to her former clients to give them a shot at surviving. I support that airlift.

Their continued presence in Pakistan does very little tangibly for the insurgency in Afghanistan or Pakistan, which remains localized and in the hands of local commanders hailing from the myriad tribes.

You see the same structure in Pakistan - B Mehsud may be the head of the TTP, but he has very little actual control over the multiple Taliban groups formed from the various tribes and under different commanders - they will follow him only so long as their interests are the same.

 

[notorious_eagle]

Thanks God,

Atleast one pakistani agrees that ISI ws behind Indian Embassy bombing.

Thanks friend, you made my day.

ok bye everybody, leaving for home.

See you tommorrow.

Regards

Dabloo

Every sane person knows that ISI was behind the embassy bombing, but this was needed to give India a warning to back off. RAW has taken cover inside Afghanistan to try and destabilize Pakistan. This response was needed, hats off to ISI.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Every sane person knows that ISI was behind the embassy bombing, but this was needed to give India a warning to back off. RAW has taken cover inside Afghanistan to try and destabilize Pakistan. This response was needed, hats off to ISI.

Sorry, but what evidence do you have to back up this assertion?