Why Our Media is sleeping?

[muse]

I have to disagree.......Al-Qaidas war is worldwide.....Baitullah or Fazlullah war is against the pak govt and mullah omars war is for afganistan and against NATO-US

Recall we are talking about the ideas that animate these groups, not the scope of their operations or the locations of their operations.

Baitullah and Mullah Omar support the Pakistani regime?? Please clear your head, they are killing Pakistani soldiers. Don't confuse yourself, if you allow yourself to be terrorized, that is to say, you accept that these ***** can kill Pakistani soldiers, be in rebellion and at the same time support the Pakistani state, well, that is the confusion we are talking about.

A pro-Pakistani government in Afghanistan?? Sure, ofcourse we all realize thatthe American and his Afghans have tried to be cleaver by half - they are essentially arguing that unless they see changes in our behaviour they will create unfavorable circumstances for us in Afghanistan - a version of coersive diplomacy we have seen before. And ofcourse it is regretable.

However; Pakistan need not be an entity that is being acted upon, it can also secure autonomy of action in Afghanistan -- there is more to Afghanistan and to it's various ethnicites than Talib or NA and even with these, there are various divergences that can prove fruitful.

The American will leave, as sure as the sun rises in the East, we will still be left with a problem of this ridiculous Islamist Maoist ideology. Will The Talib regardless of where they become a force, be acceptable?? As we have seen, a fire in a neighbor's house can soon spread, caring about others is much like caring for oneself.

 

[tabby]

Well dabong
I didnt get u completely but if i remember properly then Pakistan is one of the only three countries that recognised the taliban govt in Kabul...So calling them terrorists at that time doesnt arise.N we ve turned against Taliban only after 9/11..Please let me know if m wrong..thanks

 

[s90]

Dawn News is the best

 

[dabong1]

Recall we are talking about the ideas that animate these groups, not the scope of their operations or the locations of their operations..

The taliban is nationalistic in its outlook with even mullah omar admitting they where fighting for there culture and homeland with islam being bought into the equation to justify there actions and to have a wider pool to recruit from.
How many non afghans would fight for the taliban if was about culture ans nationhood.

Baitullah and Mullah Omar support the Pakistani regime?? Please clear your head, they are killing Pakistani soldiers. Don't confuse yourself, if you allow yourself to be terrorized, that is to say, you accept that these ***** can kill Pakistani soldiers, be in rebellion and at the same time support the Pakistani state, well, that is the confusion we are talking about. ..

I never said Baitullah supported pakistan.
Please tell me one instance where mullah omars taliban attacked the pak army?
The way you are trying to lump the terrorists under Baitullah and the freedom fighters of the taliban into one cosy group is flawed.....as flawed as the US grouping every islamic org into one cohesive group that is on some worldwide jihad to take over the world.

A pro-Pakistani government in Afghanistan?? Sure, ofcourse we all realize thatthe American and his Afghans have tried to be cleaver by half - they are essentially arguing that unless they see changes in our behaviour they will create unfavorable circumstances for us in Afghanistan - a version of coersive diplomacy we have seen before. And ofcourse it is regretable...

And we should do the same back........totally back the taliban in our "version of coersive diplomacy".
From the start pakistan went along with the US and what did we get?

However; Pakistan need not be an entity that is being acted upon, it can also secure autonomy of action in Afghanistan -- there is more to Afghanistan and to it's various ethnicites than Talib or NA and even with these, there are various divergences that can prove fruitful....

True... but the main point goes to back to when the taliban was in power we had a stable border.....we backed the US and got a unstable border.

The American will leave, as sure as the sun rises in the East, we will still be left with a problem of this ridiculous Islamist Maoist ideology. Will The Talib regardless of where they become a force, be acceptable?? As we have seen, a fire in a neighbor's house can soon spread, caring about others is much like caring for oneself.

The fire did not spread when the taliban where in charge......it only started to spread when the US came into the country.

 

[dabong1]

Well dabong
I didnt get u completely but if i remember properly then Pakistan is one of the only three countries that recognised the taliban govt in Kabul...So calling them terrorists at that time doesnt arise.N we ve turned against Taliban only after 9/11..Please let me know if m wrong..thanks

Please do tell me where and when mullah omar said that the people should back baitullah.....if anything he has asked taliban members to kill baitullah and co.

The problem is when we confuse the two groups thinking they are all taliban when that is not the case.

We have not turned against the taliban we have turned against those groups that do not follow state policy.

 

[muse]

The taliban is nationalistic in its outlook with even mullah omar admitting they where fighting for there culture and homeland with islam being bought into the equation to justify there actions and to have a wider pool to recruit from.
How many non afghans would fight for the taliban if was about culture ans nationhood.

Sir, Mullah Omar changed the name of the Afghan Republic to Islamic Emirate, it is a reflection of his devotion to "nationalism"? He gave Afghanistan over to every variety of Islamist insurrectionist group, be they Chechen, IMU or AQ, Lashkar e this and Jaish e that -- these he did in the name of "nationalism"?? Much like to write out of conviction??

the main point goes to back to when the taliban was in power we had a stable border.....we backed the US and got a unstable border.

Sir, I recommend you stick with tea. If you did know anything of the border at that time you would not have written this. The border became destabilized since the Soviet invaded and Pakistan responded. The world was not born yesterday, some of us were active then as now.

we should do the same back........totally back the taliban in our "version of coersive diplomacy".

It would be emotionally satisfying - but if we are proud, if we have a sense of our place in the world, why not the Afghan and the US - anyway, there is not much to coerse them about - these are desperately poor people, poorer even thus, just imagine how poor and desperate that must be -- and remember that they are Muslims.

There are better ways, coersion is always available and between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the senior partner is always Pakistan - Please remember these are Muslims, and not just that there is not a single place in Afghanistan, from the north to the South, from the East to the West, where Urdu is not spoken or understood, where Afghans who have spent long years in Pakistan will not be found, where compalints about Pakistani police abound (yeah, they can take a number and get to the back of the line, behind Pakistani citizens, as far as the police go) - but you will also discover love of Pakistan, love of friends and experience in Pakistan -- Don't sell the Afghan short, try and understand their compulsions. And we are Pakistani, we will not be better if those who are our own, suffer, this is not acceptable to us.

The fire did not spread when the taliban where in charge......it only started to spread when the US came into the country.

This both incorrect and unfair. Pakistan achieved a great victory with the defeat of the Soviet, but it was not without cost, see, that border, it's more imagination than reality - you cannot have instability on one side and not on the other - why? because they are connected, goods and people people move across that border as if there is no border. Afghan Kuchi will summer in their home locations raising their sheep, come winter they will be in Pakistan - no passport, no visa, no nothing but freedom of movement. there will be weddings and people will cross from both sides, as will goods.

It will be winter and to escape perhaps Jalalabad? but then for shopping , on to Peshawar -- see, it's all connected, even when it is not - you have to experience it to understand and I think I have not done a good job at conveying the interconnectedness of this.

 

[waraich66]

Baitullah is agent but mullah omer is jehadi mullah both are wrong.

 

[dabong1]

Sir, Mullah Omar changed the name of the Afghan Republic to Islamic Emirate, it is a reflection of his devotion to "nationalism"? He gave Afghanistan over to every variety of Islamist insurrectionist group, be they Chechen, IMU or AQ, Lashkar e this and Jaish e that -- these he did in the name of "nationalism"?? Much like to write out of conviction??.

Pakistan and iran changed there names to "islamic" for political reasons more then islamic reasons...the same way afghanistan did.

The people that the taliban where helping where the same people that helped the taliban......it might be wrong but understandable.

Sir, I recommend you stick with tea. If you did know anything of the border at that time you would not have written this. The border became destabilized since the Soviet invaded and Pakistan responded. The world was not born yesterday, some of us were active then as now. .

I know fully well like most people that the border became destabilized when the Soviet invaded but calmed down during the rule of the taliban and became unstable again when the US attacked.

It would be emotionally satisfying - but if we are proud, if we have a sense of our place in the world, why not the Afghan and the US - anyway, there is not much to coerse them about - these are desperately poor people, poorer even thus, just imagine how poor and desperate that must be -- and remember that they are Muslims..

Nothing to do with emotion but tactics........if the US is going to let anti pak forces operate from afghanistan then we should do the same........give as good as you get.

There are better ways, coersion is always available and between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the senior partner is always Pakistan - Please remember these are Muslims, and not just that there is not a single place in Afghanistan, from the north to the South, from the East to the West, where Urdu is not spoken or understood, where Afghans who have spent long years in Pakistan will not be found, where compalints about Pakistani police abound (yeah, they can take a number and get to the back of the line, behind Pakistani citizens, as far as the police go) - but you will also discover love of Pakistan, love of friends and experience in Pakistan -- Don't sell the Afghan short, try and understand their compulsions. And we are Pakistani, we will not be better if those who are our own, suffer, this is not acceptable to us. ..

I want the pushtoon part of afghanistan to merge with the NWFP and call it pushtoonastan that be another memeber of the pakistani federation.

This both incorrect and unfair. Pakistan achieved a great victory with the defeat of the Soviet, but it was not without cost, see, that border, it's more imagination than reality - you cannot have instability on one side and not on the other - why? because they are connected, goods and people people move across that border as if there is no border. Afghan Kuchi will summer in their home locations raising their sheep, come winter they will be in Pakistan - no passport, no visa, no nothing but freedom of movement. there will be weddings and people will cross from both sides, as will goods...

How much trouble did we have on the border when the taliban was in charge is the question.

It will be winter and to escape perhaps Jalalabad? but then for shopping , on to Peshawar -- see, it's all connected, even when it is not - you have to experience it to understand and I think I have not done a good job at conveying the interconnectedness of this.

I have been to the border and have met the taliban on a few occassions...all pre 9-11.......things have changed most likelly since i last went.

 

[dabong1]

Baitullah is agent but mullah omer is jehadi mullah both are wrong.

Have to disagree about mullah omar.

 

[waraich66]

Have to disagree about mullah omar.

Why ?

He got golden opppurtunity to build that nation but traped in the hand of jehadi mullahs and Al QAIDA and killed many Afghans hazaras and shia muslims destroyed statu of budah ,islam dont allow these actions.

 

[dabong1]

Why ?

He got golden opppurtunity to build that nation but traped in the hand of jehadi mullahs and Al QAIDA and killed many Afghans hazaras and shia muslims destroyed statu of budah ,islam dont allow these actions.

The taliban just got control of aghanistan before they where attacked by the US so how do you expect them to have built the country?

The taliban attacked all groups that would not side them.....shia,nonshia,tajik,pushtoon ect.

The statue of buddah was destroyed becauce the UN was willing to spend millions on the up keep of the statue but had no money to give to the taliban for social issues......thats the reason why they destroyed it.
It was wrong for them to do it but the bullsh*t story about them destroying it for no reason is a lie.
It was a stupid move by the taliban as it was a trap laid by the US to make the taliban look bad which they fell into head first.
Dont forget Yvonne Ridley if you want to know how the US plays dirt tricks.

 

[muse]

And now for something different - not really:




Fantasising about FATA



Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Farhat Taj

In her article on Jan 28 Shireen Mazari argues that the people of FATA support the militants because they see the Pakistani army as fighting America's war. This is the most absurd thing I keep hearing from people who clearly have little idea about the culture and people of FATA. My question to them is a simple one: if the Taliban militants are so popular, how does one explain the formation of so many anti-Taliban tribal armies all over FATA?

The Taliban have target killed the leaders of those armies, which according to the popular Pakhtun perception, was with the tacit consent of the intelligence agencies. How could the people of FATA support those who have assassinated their entire tribal leadership and have massacred so many young men of the tribal armies?

How come the people of FATA support the Taliban who have replaced their Pakhtunwali with a Taliban order? The residents of FATA are not ready to surrender their Pakhtun way of life and therefore are bearing the brunt of Taliban savagery.

Under the code of Pakhtunwali, an outsider may go to FATA wearing an culture specific to his or her own culture without inviting any sanction from the tribes. This is because members of the tribes will understand that the outside is from a different culture and would hence respect the outsider for what he or she is. However, under the Taliban, the same person, especially a woman, venturing into FATA, without a burqa or similar attire would be liable to be punished with lashes.

Also, it may come as a surprise to many readers that in FATA's culture the drum and dance have always played an important role. However, since the Taliban's occupation of the area, these two age-old traditions have been banned. Hence, only outsiders who are not well-informed would think that the local people would be supporting the occupiers who have replaced their melodious Pashto music with jihadi anthems that are played loudly throughout the region.

The common perception among all Pakhtuns, including those in FATA, is that the Taliban are "strategic assets" of the military establishment and have been given a free hand by the establishment to eliminate all those Pakhtuns who dare to challenge them. Many Pakhtuns see what is happening between the military and the Taliban in FATA as instances of "friendly fire." The belief is that, by doing so, they both get what they want – the Taliban, a terrorised population on whom they can implement their jihadi agenda and the establishment gets to play its power games vis-a-vis regional and international powers. From what one reads and hears, it seems that most analysts in the media are either not aware of this reality, or deliberately hide it from their readers/audience.

People believe that the army is perfectly capable of crushing the Taliban but that the will is lacking. Many people in FATA and other parts of the NWFP I have met in recent weeks and months as part of my ongoing research have said that they don't see much difference between Baituallah Mehsud and Fazllulah on the one hand and the senior and retired leadership of the establishment.

To go back to Ms Mizari's article, she criticises the US drone attacks, calling them a violation of our national dignity and sovereignty. However, the matter is far more complex and not as black-and-white an issue as she is making it out to be. Many people are of the view that many of the drone attacks have hit precise targets and have succeeded in eliminating foreign militants such as Arabs, Uzbeks, Tajiks and Afghans – as well as local Taliban. There have also been some civilian deaths but most people seem more concerned with the militants who die. In any case, if more terrorists are killed than civilians, then most people seem satisfied with the attacks.

It may be very difficult for some people (read: our armchair analysts) to belief this, but the fact of the matter is that most people of FATA are fed up with the occupation of their homeland by the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists and they are actually happy to see them killed – even if that happens to be by US drones!

In any case, many of the residents of the region do not exactly see the drone attacks as a violation of our national sovereignty. And their reasoning is quite straightforward; they say that long before the drones came, much of FATA had been ceded by the state to the militants. And they say that when this was happening – engineered or otherwise – why wasn't much fuss made about the loss of national sovereignty by anybody then? In this context, the people see, for instance, drone attacks by the US on South Waziristan as a matter not between Washington and Islamabad but between Washington and Baitullah Mehsud. For Pakistan to have a say in it, the territory must be retaken by it. Thus, the question of violation of the national dignity and sovereignty of Pakistan does not even come up, as long as the area is under the occupation of the Taliban.



The writer is a research fellow at the Centre for Interdisciplinary Gender Research, University of Oslo, and a member of Aryana Institute for Regional Research and Advocacy. Email: bergen34@yahoo.com

 

[SSGPA1]

GEO is one the most corrupt organizations in Pakistan!

They are serving the interests of enemies of Pakistan.

Managers at GEO don't know the source of funds!

All media outlets need to go through audits.

 

[muse]

It may be very difficult for some people (read: our armchair analysts) to belief this, but the fact of the matter is that most people of FATA are fed up with the occupation of their homeland by the Taliban and Al Qaeda terrorists and they are actually happy to see them killed – even if that happens to be by US drones!

In any case, many of the residents of the region do not exactly see the drone attacks as a violation of our national sovereignty. And their reasoning is quite straightforward; they say that long before the drones came, much of FATA had been ceded by the state to the militants. And they say that when this was happening – engineered or otherwise – why wasn't much fuss made about the loss of national sovereignty by anybody then? In this context, the people see, for instance, drone attacks by the US on South Waziristan as a matter not between Washington and Islamabad but between Washington and Baitullah Mehsud. For Pakistan to have a say in it, the territory must be retaken by it. Thus, the question of violation of the national dignity and sovereignty of Pakistan does not even come up, as long as the area is under the occupation of the Taliban.

tsk, tsk

What manner of treachery is this -- "People" of Weeranistan do no twant their homes and lands occupied by Talib and AQ? Sacrilage,? Can u feel all that bass in the *** hon?

 

[S-2]

One and the same-

"And their reasoning is quite straightforward; they say that long before the drones came, much of FATA had been ceded by the state to the militants. And they say that when this was happening – engineered or otherwise – why wasn't much fuss made about the loss of national sovereignty by anybody then? In this context, the people see, for instance, drone attacks by the US on South Waziristan as a matter not between Washington and Islamabad but between Washington and Baitullah Mehsud."

Baitullah Mehsud...isn't he the president of the Islamic Republic of Pashtunistan? I've read that name before somewhere.

"For Pakistan to have a say in it, the territory must be retaken by it. Thus, the question of violation of the national dignity and sovereignty of Pakistan does not even come up, as long as the area is under the occupation of the Taliban."

Yup. On the first day, the taliban arrived...and the GoP smiled and it was good.

Now they're not smiling. It'll take war to reclaim what the militants believe is their's by right and which they'll affirm by force of arms. Talking will gain nothing in SWAT and it sure as hell won't here. You've no leverage to compel the militants to view matters more amenably.

Like Afghanistan, they believe that they're holding all the cards.