We salute Pak fight against terror: Israel

[muse]

Whatever happened to "don't curse the darkness, light a candle" ---- Be fair, you want people in the West to support Arabs and pakistanis and such even as these populations continue to hold attitudes that do not endear them to the West??

Be fair, we all have to step back from the kinds of polarized positions we hold, that if we want the support of others

 

[Leviza]

Just some questions
Why Israel wants to get approved by Pakistan ?
Why They want to have link with Pakistan ?
What is in it for Israel?
Is it because only 2 countries in the whole world as based on idealogical nature? Pakistan is in the name of Islam and Israel in the name of Jews

Last question why it is illegal for a Jews to take interest from a Jew where they are allowed to take interest from others....???

 

[Vinod2070]

It's easy to feel generous and compassionate if someone else has to pay the price.

Just as it is easy to want war when someone else has to fight it.

 

[SQ8]

Not to be off topic or anything..
But then again.. what the difference here.. anyone who is accused of uttering a syllable that people term anti-Islam.. is first sent to court..and if he/she lives..is shot dead by masked men.

So the organization of the west.. is pretty comparable to the organization of these uber-fanatic nutjobs..
Like the west they are prone to switching their statements.. and.. are hell bent on disturbing the peace
Its unfair accusing the west for supporting Israel as it does on such an organized level.. and not realizing we have the worse side of the same coin within us.
================================================================================
Would.. Jinnah if he lived as long as Nehru... recognized Israel?
Since now it has become the norm to bash the very man that founded the nation..
Would Paleedistan have had a diplomatic presence in Tel Aviv?
perhaps taking the role of the sympathetic mediator that never was..
A nation that understood the plight of the Palestinians.. but was not Arab and so would have had better luck negotiating with the Jewish entity?

Bhutto's mingling with the PLO.. may have come useful later...
with diplomatic presence.. perhaps .. we could have had a greater role in Palestine...
Becoming a facilitator.. for both aid and progress there.. while.. aggressively negotiating with Zion...

The cost of the above?.. chronic association with the American camp.. .. a possible insurgency by uber-fanatics..ongoing but under control..
A more dispropotiante society? maybe the eruption of the misled ideology that has occurred in the past ten years.. would have happened earlier?

In the end..
would diplomatic relations with Israel have been beneficial?.. yes..
They would have.. but to what extent.. to Turkey's extent.. or a more reserved stance?
Would there not be efforts by the west to "entice" leaders that would be more pro-Israel than ever before.. case in point Mr Musharraf
in an effort to promote security for the Zionist nation.. temporarily if need be.. and create opportunities for instability in pakistan..

after all.. an unstable Pakistan is what allows operations like Mr Davis's to continue with more abandon..
And gives Fox news, BBC.. and everybody else.. a nice look at the "true" side of Islam as they want to show.
providing the boogeyman that is a Islamic extremist..shown on tv.. that the western public would see killed rather sportily..
If that need to kill such extremists.. lands the west in an oil rich nation, a strategic outpost overlooking trade routes and/or sea lanes.. or secures a perceived threat to the nation of Israel.. is sheer coincidence..
Oh look.. I found a conspiracy..

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Quaid e Azam Sahib had the option to do so; these were 2 newly formed countries formed on similar grounds --under different circumstances of course

the pressing issue is the formation of a just, 2-state solution. Easier said than done. Camp David was the closest there ever was to peace. In hindsight, perhaps it should have been accepted.

Jerusalem should be jointly administered, perhaps. But to say israel has no right to exist is a bit childish in the sense that you cant wish it away. It's a reality you'll just have to accept.

whether you like it or not; be realistic

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Are we so desperate for praise that we will take it from a two-timing country like Israel?

There are many in Pakistan who are angry at the Arabs for their misdeeds in Pakistan. Indeed, I am one of them.

But we must never make the mistake that Turkey did in the 1950s when they got cozy with Israel just because the Arabs backstabbed the Ottomans and then supported Greece on Cyprus. Look how Israel repaid them -- as soon as Turkey dared stand up to them, their lobbies in the West kicked into action. The US Congress and media are full swing into the Armenian genocide thing. The Europeans passed a resolution making it a crime to deny the Armenian genocide.

The message is crystal clear: anyone who dares oppose Israel will be demonized in the West.

My friend... You speak with insight and wisdom...

 

[Muhammad-Bin-Qasim]

Quaid e Azam Sahib had the option to do so; these were 2 newly formed countries formed on similar grounds --under different circumstances of course

the pressing issue is the formation of a just, 2-state solution. Easier said than done. Camp David was the closest there ever was to peace. In hindsight, perhaps it should have been accepted.

Jerusalem should be jointly administered, perhaps. But to say israel has no right to exist is a bit childish in the sense that you cant wish it away. It's a reality you'll just have to accept.

whether you like it or not; be realistic

It will go away in the same way the Crusaders were sent away... The Kingdom of Jerusulam was a reality for a hundred years... there is nothing childish about it... It is real men who dream of justice in the midst of a sea of tyranny!!!

 

[T-Faz]

Since you are clearly reluctant to getting to the point.
Let me guess with foreign war you meant the Russian war???
What alternative approaches, you may have preferred?

Alternative approach, how about no interference in their war at all, what was the benefit in it for us after all.

Keep in mind we neither had finance and neither did we had weapons to halt the march of Russian bear.

The Soviets were not coming into Pakistan anyway and if they wanted to, no amount of weapon or money would have been able to stop them

Every resistance to invasion in Islamic state has religious angle to it and this is very legitimate.
What more do you see religious in our society?

Thats probably due to the fact that political Islam is a factor in the invasion.

Some people are reporting Pakistan is nothing close to being religious while you are stating religon is a state policy!!! which is a news to a Pakistani like me!

It is Islamic Republic isn't it, we do have a state religion and its partial laws, is this also news to you.

hence I asked which state policy and you refereed to undescribed foreign wars!!

The policy of using Islam for e.g. Jihad in Afghanistan to Jihad in Kashmir against infidels.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

the soviets whole-heartedly supported india during our wars with them. Pakistan wanted revenge; and didnt want USSR at our doorstep

the blowback effects are still being felt today from 1980s; In hindsight, the soviet empire would have collapsed regardless, but at the time we could not accept them (especially being indian allies) at our doorstep. It was a calculated decision and a humanitarian one; though today we seem to be seeing history repeated again, albeit in a different form and garb.

the campaign against them IMHO wasnt the problem; it was the policies and actions (read INACTION) subsequent to withdrawal which I have a problem with.

 

[T-Faz]

While i respect individual point of view so let me say that;
I have guess that you fed up from current situation of religious affairs in society. One of reason actively playing in your posts. Of course religion is personal matter and on individual level we have not to discuss religion, but where discussion on national level then we can't say and step away that religion is person matter.

Religion has become a tool in the hands of tyrants so to end the religious tyranny, we must limit religion to a personal capacity.

Pakistan came into existence on Islamic ideology an in whole world Pakistan & Israel two states came into existence on religious ideology and you know it (no need to repeat).

Pakistan came into existence as a state for the Muslims of India, not on the Islamic ideology, had it come in the latter form, it would have been an Islamic Dominion, not just the Dominion of Pakistan. This line was uttered by Zia and his children mention this many times over, perhaps you should read history again.

You also know, how religion play active role in our social, political and government affairs and i think you will not deny. To eradicate religion from politics unachievable in our country as deepest religious penetration. You know how in USSR communist separate religion even from social affairs? Close all religious points/places. It was a crime to hold religious sign in your pocket or to wear it. They design society where religion is eliminated and there were even no role in family relation. Yes this was communism. Today after more than 70 years generation developed, for them religion doesn't an essential part of life, so as in politics it is normal to think beyond the restrictions of religion. You must agree that this current social or political attitude didn't develop in days. May be you like such attitude?

Irrelevant and shortsighted argument.

Interesting that current government make ever thing to re establish connection between religion & politics (government), in simple meanings they want to show christian oriented society. & we (not me) in reverse mode.

Christian oriented?

What makes you say that?

Jewish, they proud to be Jewish, none of matter how their religion is pure or original, there are also so many man made (more than 60%) religious laws but they didn't speak against religion then why we?

They don't go around bombing their own people because of religious differences, they don't kill their own leaders who comment on their religion, they don't do much of violent stuff we like in the name of religion.

You have to correct you dictionary that radicalization only in our religion but it injected for political & for international geostrategic purposes specially pointed against Islam. Where our Islam is most peaceful and friendly religion where God itself declared that there is no strictness in Islam so question to you why there need to show yourself or use term MODERATE MUSLIM or MODERN ISLAMIC STATE?????????

So Islam is the most peaceful and friendly religion but you need to enforce it with strict laws like Hudood ordinances, Blasphemy laws and what now.

You are contradicting yourself.

What Pakistan facing our own mistakes, i discussed it in a thread (Hero of Afghan war General Akhtar Abdul Rehman) and i will give you link.

This hero of yours called Rehman made billions out of the Afghan war and gave us all the ills in our society. You should look into his role at the Ojhri camp blast.

Excuse me, It not the sin if i have leaning to my religion, the religion who preach peace, patience & tolerance.

Where is peace, patience & tolerance in our country?

Even in Russia a Muslim can say itself a Muslim openly wear Islamic sign but i saw so many Israeli origin Jews who didn't wear David star because they face hate from people.

Is that something worth gloating over?

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistans-war/91906-foreign-espionage-network-pakistan.html

I hope you find what you required from me but still if there rose any question then you can ask again directly or by PM.

Source is not reputable.

You called it credible source? What guaranty that there hasn't any extra addition?

Thus the debate.

Let for some time we hold our ties in privy mode, then bilateral and then afterword.

Sure.

Don't cover all economical, industrial, social progressive aids and military funds in dust of radicalization. Once again as you stated that we are an independent state so we had and have total right not to let this destructive forces let into our body and we have to filtrate every help, aid

.

What destructive force, the mullahs, extremists and militants are already in our country.

Yes, when you concern over regional relations & strategies you must put in mind that Arabic states are on Israel's front and we as Islamic state will look first for our Muslim states in case of choice. As we also dependent on Arab states in some percentage of our resources.

Why should we care about the Arabs?

I am Pakistani & by religion Muslim, believer of Islam which preach humanity, peace & patience. It is enough, we have not to criticize others as we have no right for this.

Where is the humanity, peace & patience in Pakistan Pakistani?

I already answered you about Arabs in above & as true Pakistani i don't want to create 10 enemies at cost of one friend. As responsible regional country i ever prefer Pakistan to take step with other close relation countries. In collaboration, as company.

But the Arabs have not really hurt its enemies in any way what so ever where as Israel knows how to hurt.

 

[T-Faz]

the soviets whole-heartedly supported india during our wars with them. Pakistan wanted revenge; and didnt want USSR at our doorstep

It was our fault as we allied ourself with the US and ignored Soviets, this is as early as the creation of Pakistan when Liaqat Ali Khan flew to US and did not accept the invitation from the Soviets. We then allowed US to fly their spy planes from Badaber Airbase and the Soviets found out, naturally you expect them to side with our enemies.

The Soviets would not have crossed into Pakistan, that was not their objective, they used to stop at the border whenever they came close to it even when they knew of our involvement in the Afghan war.

the blowback effects are still being felt today from 1980s; In hindsight, the soviet empire would have collapsed regardless, but at the time we could not accept them (especially being indian allies) at our doorstep. It was a calculated decision and a humanitarian one; though today we seem to be seeing history repeated again, albeit in a different form and garb.

We could have pursued a non-aligned policy like India but we were too proud and in awe of US, this policy of ours to align with them was a bad decision. It was a calculated decision, Zia would not accept anything less than a few billions a year for supporting the Mujahids. It was not a humanitarian but a strategic one, my family members spent time in the american compounds where they formulated the plans for the guerilla war so I am privy to knowledge of the decision to go to war.

the campaign against them IMHO wasnt the problem; it was the policies and actions (read INACTION) subsequent to withdrawal which I have a problem with.

What happened, happened, but we still haven;t learned from our mistake.

 

[MyPakistan1947]

Pakistan came into existence as a state for the Muslims of British-india.

 

[Vinod2070]

It was our fault as we allied ourself with the US and ignored Soviets, this is as early as the creation of Pakistan when Liaqat Ali Khan flew to US and did not accept the invitation from the Soviets. We then allowed US to fly their spy planes from Badaber Airbase and the Soviets found out, naturally you expect them to side with our enemies.

The Soviets would not have crossed into Pakistan, that was not their objective, they used to stop at the border whenever they came close to it even when they knew of our involvement in the Afghan war.

We could have pursued a non-aligned policy like India but we were too proud and in awe of US, this policy of ours to align with them was a bad decision. It was a calculated decision, Zia would not accept anything less than a few billions a year for supporting the Mujahids. It was not a humanitarian but a strategic one, my family members spent time in the american compounds where they formulated the plans for the guerilla war so I am privy to knowledge of the decision to go to war.



What happened, happened, but we still haven;t learned from our mistake.

Really refreshing to see such rare objectivity.

Zia was in it mainly for money (more than the peanuts he was initially offered) and goodies.

Even to assume that Pakistan had the resources to take on the USSR (let alone the other stuff that is required) is to live in a fool's paradise.

Pakistan was a staging ground for the USA to play its geopolitical games against USSR and avenge Vietnam. It was paid duly for that role.

Of course, there being no free lunch and the short sightedness of the leaders, there has been hell to pay later.

 

[Developereo]

Just as it is easy to want war when someone else has to fight it.

Who's advocating war? I made my position clear:

The only equitable solution is to let the refugees return to their homes and live next to the Jews.

And the best way to achieve that is to educate the Israelis to acknowledge their own past.

 

[Developereo]

I love these people who say we should have relations with Israel because we will be able to help mediate a solution. If USA, Egypt and Turkey were not able to 'mediate' a solution, what makes anyone think Pakistan will have any impact?

There may or may not be reasons to have diplomatic relations, but let's not try to fool anyone by saying we will 'mediate'.