20 questions we should be asking after Peshawar

[third eye]

The answers to these lead in all directions .. less within the nation & more within the establishment.

20 questions we should be asking after the Peshawar massacre - Blogs - DAWN.COM

1) The people who did this. Where do they get their money from? Where do they get their weapons?

2) Who provides them refuge? Why do they provide them refuge?

3) Where do they receive the indoctrination that makes them believe that killing children is justified? Which institutions are involved in this indoctrination? Why are these people chosen in particular?

4) If our intelligence is capable of intercepting calls, receiving messages from the Taliban (claiming responsibility), and receiving photos of the men who did this, why don't we question how these communications are possible without providing a lead to finding these people?

5) Why have we not demanded more transparency from our agencies, given the spectacular intelligence failure that this turned out to be?

6) If bombing the Taliban has not resulted in fewer attacks, why do we keep calling for more bombing?

7) Why have we not asked the military to allow media access to Waziristan? Why do we trust everything we are told about Zarb-e-Azb?

8) Most of the men who are the perpetrators of these massacres believe they are going to heaven when they die. Will the death penalty instill any fear in them at all? If they are willing to kill themselves, does being killed by others seem a credible deterrent?

9) Is there a link between the killings of Ahmedis, Hazaras, Christians, Shias, shrine-attendees and the massacre that took place? Is there a common ideology at hand here?

10) Is there a reason that we condemn some of these attacks and not others? Is that why the blame lies on us?

11) Is there a link between the rise of the TTP and the impunity with which groups like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi operate?

12) Why is it that so many of those arrested in terrorist attacks are released soon after?

13) Would having stronger witness programmes, more efficient courts and a corruption-free police system help prevent these men from getting out of jail within days?

14) Should we start thinking about how, if we were not taught to hate Hindus, Shias, and anyone who is not our brand of religion, this attack may not have been a chilling, logical conclusion to a string of such attacks. How can we change the way our schools teach?

15) What are we really trying to achieve when we say these attacks were not carried out by Pakistanis?

16) What are we really trying not to think when we say these attacks were not carried out by Muslims?

17) Is there nothing to be considered between bombing and negotiations?

18) Would bringing schools, water, electricity, roads, and basic respect to the tribal areas be an effective weapon against these terrorists?

19) Would the military changing its policy regarding 'strategic assets' make these terrorists lose their awful potency?

20) Is it possible to critique our military and government's policies regarding the Taliban, even while feeling immense pain for their dead children?

 

[dil_dil]

6) If bombing the Taliban has not resulted in fewer attacks, why do we keep calling for more bombing?

More then 50% decrease after zarb azb was started...

 

[third eye]

6) If bombing the Taliban has not resulted in fewer attacks, why do we keep calling for more bombing?

More then 50% decrease after zarb azb was started...

There are 19 other questions too.

I am unaware of the statistics about the bombings but devastating bombing have happened after the Ops have commenced. So Nos may not matter .

 

[Sliver]

@third eye
There seem to be 2 "Pakistan"s here.
One Pakistan is the normal people - like @Horus @Syed.Ali.Haider etc who just want to make a better living and go on with their lives. They love their country, want Pakistanis to prosper with economic activity, peace and also dream of Pakistan being fore front of the world through science, technology, economy etc
These people send their kids to schools, go to universities, want to get jobs or start companies etc.
Lets call this Normal Pakistan

The other kind is the one that wants "Pakistan" to "dominate" the world too. But how can they without getting something unique and special? so they hijacked the most revered thing for all Pakistanis and nearby regions - Islam. These people send their kids to brainwash camps, get other kids to be brainwashed, extract more and more extremist meanings out of Islam, use the force of the gun to implement it and will not listen to any reason or logic (they will term reason and logic as un-islamic) too.
Lets call this an extremist Pakistan

The normal Pakistan is pained immensely when the actions of the extremist Pakistan are equated with them. They want no part of it and are equally or more disturbed/affected by this extremist Pakistan.

I think the major question that is missing in your 20 questions is - who or what actions from this "Normal" Pakistan are letting the "Extremist" Pakistan thrive? Where do you draw the line that blurs the "Normal" to the "extremist"?

 

[dil_dil]

There are 19 other questions too.

I am unaware of the statistics about the bombings but devastating bombing have happened after the Ops have commenced. So Nos may not matter .

Ofcourse it matter, this psudo journalist want us to believe war against terrorists is worthless.

 

[Screambowl]

Answer to questions 1, 2, 4 and 19

well there is one group HUJI(harkat ul Jihad al Islami) very famous in India for their anti Indian insurgency.

They were once supported by Pakistani Intelligence against soviets. Then Pakistani Intelligence used them in Kashmir for Jehad. So they are highly trained people, and weapon comes from black market in exchange of afeem etc and all most probably(that'S what is thought).

But later this group got divided could be ISI's work, to create Kashmir specific group. One started operating in Kashmir against Indian forces, known as Harkat ul Ansar, remember Maulana Mashood Azhar? He is the Gernal Sec of this group.

HUJI still operates against India , 2013 delhi high court bombing was their work. This Peshawar is also has their involvement. This means after 2013 there is something wrong , they have changed their area of operation towards Pakistan.

 

[third eye]

@third eye
There seem to be 2 "Pakistan"s here.
One Pakistan is the normal people - like @Horus @Syed.Ali.Haider etc who just want to make a better living and go on with their lives. They love their country, want Pakistanis to prosper with economic activity, peace and also dream of Pakistan being fore front of the world through science, technology, economy etc
These people send their kids to schools, go to universities, want to get jobs or start companies etc.
Lets call this Normal Pakistan

The other kind is the one that wants "Pakistan" to "dominate" the world too. But how can they without getting something unique and special? so they hijacked the most revered thing for all Pakistanis and nearby regions - Islam. These people send their kids to brainwash camps, get other kids to be brainwashed, extract more and more extremist meanings out of Islam, use the force of the gun to implement it and will not listen to any reason or logic (they will term reason and logic as un-islamic) too.
Lets call this an extremist Pakistan

The normal Pakistan is pained immensely when the actions of the extremist Pakistan are equated with them. They want no part of it and are equally or more disturbed/affected by this extremist Pakistan.

I think the major question that is missing in your 20 questions is - who or what actions from this "Normal" Pakistan are letting the "Extremist" Pakistan thrive? Where do you draw the line that blurs the "Normal" to the "extremist"?

Thanks to what Zia began, all lines have blurred.

The good ( whom you call ' normal") are being considered bad & the bad ( extremist as you call them) are considered good.

Normal Pakistan , to use your word existed till the late 70's , those living then I am sure were no less patriotic or religious than those in 2015 . Only, they did not were it on their sleeves & went about their lives balancing both.

Pakistan to the world has become an example of a nation not knowing when things were good for them.

They got what they wanted beginning with a separate nation and then worked very hard to both undo & destroy it.

They inherited fertile lands and due to poor water management areas are almost fallow.

Had the best education centers in North India but all that the country is known for is Madarsa education - the fundamentalist kind.

A strategic geographical location has been converted to a virtual ' no mans land' where no one would like to invest , so many excellent opportunities are being lost - Gas transit being one of them.

I could go on & on.

Talk of missed chances..

Ofcourse it matter, this psudo journalist want us to believe war against terrorists is worthless.

Actually, what the journalist is bring out is that the manner in which the nation including the army is fighting the war against terrorism is worthless & self defeating from the beginning.

 

[rezangahir]

ttp= funded by raw. elements within TTp took matter into there own hands. now watch what will happen to india probably another 26/11 that will last for 2 weeks lol bollywood style.

another 26/11 in India? Then Pakistan will probably become a covert Hell designed by Raw which nobody want

 

[45'22']

The most scary question is the number 8

@third eye
There seem to be 2 "Pakistan"s here.
One Pakistan is the normal people - like @Horus @Syed.Ali.Haider etc who just want to make a better living and go on with their lives. They love their country, want Pakistanis to prosper with economic activity, peace and also dream of Pakistan being fore front of the world through science, technology, economy etc
These people send their kids to schools, go to universities, want to get jobs or start companies etc.
Lets call this Normal Pakistan

The other kind is the one that wants "Pakistan" to "dominate" the world too. But how can they without getting something unique and special? so they hijacked the most revered thing for all Pakistanis and nearby regions - Islam. These people send their kids to brainwash camps, get other kids to be brainwashed, extract more and more extremist meanings out of Islam, use the force of the gun to implement it and will not listen to any reason or logic (they will term reason and logic as un-islamic) too.
Lets call this an extremist Pakistan

The normal Pakistan is pained immensely when the actions of the extremist Pakistan are equated with them. They want no part of it and are equally or more disturbed/affected by this extremist Pakistan.

I think the major question that is missing in your 20 questions is - who or what actions from this "Normal" Pakistan are letting the "Extremist" Pakistan thrive? Where do you draw the line that blurs the "Normal" to the "extremist"?

It's quite difficult to say who are the normal people

Here in pdf,I have seen 99percent Pakistanis vouch for the holy war against India

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Full Article;

20 questions we should be asking after the Peshawar massacre
Heba Islam
Updated about 5 hours ago

An army soldier stands inside the Army Public School, which was attacked by Taliban gunmen, in Peshawar, December 17, 2014. —Reuters
For the first 48 hours, I just didn't know how to express what I felt. But I've been thinking, thinking nonstop: How do we reconcile what appear to be completely disparate opinions on how to deal with the massacre, the tragedy that took place on Tuesday in Peshawar?

It seems hopeless.



Also read: Militant siege of Peshawar school ends, 141 killed



The religious folk have one opinion. The liberals another. The leftists yet another. The pro-military ones another.

I've been thinking about what common ground I can find with the people that I don't agree with at all, how to engage with people whose opinions I find sickening, and how to do this without compromising on some very basic principles that I strongly believe in.

People around me have two things to say:

• Bomb these people
  
  
• Hang these people
  

The only thing I can think of right now is challenging the terms of the conversation, by looking at the one common denominator:

No one wants this to happen ever again.



Also read: After Peshawar: Reassessing the terror threat



With this in mind, I thought I'd pose a few questions which no one seems to be asking, but we all should be asking — over and over again — from ourselves, from the politicians, from the media, and from the military. We don't need answers to them just yet. And, it's not like people would agree with all my answers. It's not like I have all the answers either.

But let us ask the questions:

1) The people who did this. Where do they get their money from? Where do they get their weapons?




2) Who provides them refuge? Why do they provide them refuge?




3) Where do they receive the indoctrination that makes them believe that killing children is justified? Which institutions are involved in this indoctrination? Why are these people chosen in particular?




4) If our intelligence is capable of intercepting calls, receiving messages from the Taliban (claiming responsibility), and receiving photos of the men who did this, why don't we question how these communications are possible without providing a lead to finding these people?




5) Why have we not demanded more transparency from our agencies, given the spectacular intelligence failure that this turned out to be?




6) If bombing the Taliban has not resulted in fewer attacks, why do we keep calling for more bombing?




7) Why have we not asked the military to allow media access to Waziristan? Why do we trust everything we are told about Zarb-e-Azb?




8) Most of the men who are the perpetrators of these massacres believe they are going to heaven when they die. Will the death penalty instill any fear in them at all? If they are willing to kill themselves, does being killed by others seem a credible deterrent?




9) Is there a link between the killings of Ahmedis, Hazaras, Christians, Shias, shrine-attendees and the massacre that took place? Is there a common ideology at hand here?




10) Is there a reason that we condemn some of these attacks and not others? Is that why the blame lies on us?




11) Is there a link between the rise of the TTP and the impunity with which groups like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi operate?




12) Why is it that so many of those arrested in terrorist attacks are released soon after?




13) Would having stronger witness programmes, more efficient courts and a corruption-free police system help prevent these men from getting out of jail within days?




14) Should we start thinking about how, if we were not taught to hate Hindus, Shias, and anyone who is not our brand of religion, this attack may not have been a chilling, logical conclusion to a string of such attacks. How can we change the way our schools teach?




15) What are we really trying to achieve when we say these attacks were not carried out by Pakistanis?




16) What are we really trying not to think when we say these attacks were not carried out by Muslims?




17) Is there nothing to be considered between bombing and negotiations?




18) Would bringing schools, water, electricity, roads, and basic respect to the tribal areas be an effective weapon against these terrorists?




19) Would the military changing its policy regarding 'strategic assets' make these terrorists lose their awful potency?




20) Is it possible to critique our military and government's policies regarding the Taliban, even while feeling immense pain for their dead children?
These are some of my questions. If for no other reason than that we cannot see any answers in this dark, depressing time, ask these of yourselves, your military, your government and your media.

Write these questions into newspapers. Call in to your favourite TV pundit. Write a blog. Ask your friends. Ask your family. Share this article so people around you start asking these questions too.

What it is stake you ask? What's the point?

The point is 145 dead people. The stakes are possibly infinite more.

THE END





The comments section of this article has mostly indians there praising her. This article is written by
Heba Islam who is a former Features Editor at Dawn.com and currently completing her Master's from Columbia University.

She tweets @hebaislam


Its not surprising to see her saying things like ''strategic assets'' and all when we know who actually use such words. She really need to stop interacting with indians in America.

 

[gau8av]

19) Would the military changing its policy regarding 'strategic assets' make these terrorists lose their awful potency?

that's the big one

 

[TankMan]

1) The people who did this. Where do they get their money from? Where do they get their weapons?

The answer is very complicated for a pseudo-liberal to understand - its a web of proxies and geopolitics.

For example, Iran supports a few militant groups to keep its interests safe. Nothing wrong with that, that's the way the world works nowadays. But what happens is that when you have militants active, you have a network active. There is no telling which militants have deals with which ones to smuggle weapons etc. They could be using Pakistani militants for it, which means that they get funding in return for their services.

Then we have the Baloch Militants, which are undoubtedly supported by India and undoubtedly do indirectly support TTP.
Then we must look at Afghanistan itself, which is absolutely full of elements that have interests and profits to gain by supporting the militants. Smuggling their drugs (heroin, opium and god knows what else) is most likely one of the most profitable of these interests.

And of course, here's where the famous Haqqani Network comes in. The way they're supposed to be, they don't need any elements from the establishment to help them. They can do their thing just fine, for whoever pays them the most.

2) Who provides them refuge? Why do they provide them refuge?

Firstly, if you have ever seen the Durand line, even on Google Earth, you'd know that they don't need anyone to provide them refuge. They can find their own, very easily.
But for the occasional times when they do need help, like in Zarb-e-Azb now, the aforementioned people who profit from them also help them get refuge.

3) Where do they receive the indoctrination that makes them believe that killing children is justified? Which institutions are involved in this indoctrination? Why are these people chosen in particular?

All the wrong questions. They can receive their indoctrination in a cave or mud hut, they don't need 'institutions'. The maddrassas are usually a front where they recruit people to receive more indoctrination. And no one is 'chosen in particular'. People who have tough circumstances, psychological issues, extremist religious views or any other form of motive go to them themselves. No one needs to chose them. The recruiters just need to make their presence known.

As for the extremist religious views, we have enough political Mullahs and people like Abdul Aziz to cause that.

4) If our intelligence is capable of intercepting calls, receiving messages from the Taliban (claiming responsibility), and receiving photos of the men who did this, why don't we question how these communications are possible without providing a lead to finding these people?

Maybe thats because they did find many leads, which is how they have been able to bomb the living crap out of them for a long time. And how difficult do you think sending images and videos is? Some guy with a USB could sit in a net cafe, get TOR running in seconds and upload/send everything in minutes, then vanish and dump the USB in some gutter.

No one would be able to trace him, not even the CIA / NSA.

5) Why have we not demanded more transparency from our agencies, given the spectacular intelligence failure that this turned out to be?

Because they are Intelligence agencies. 'Transparency' to us means transparency to the whole world, including the terrorists. As for 'intelligence failures', again, author is showing a huge lack of information. Detecting and preventing an operation by seven men from the mountain regions, using extremely little communication or anything else thats detectable is not an easy task at all.

Intelligence agencies alone can't do everything. They need support from law enforcement, authorities like NACTA and hundreds of other components that combine together to form an effective system like the US has, and despite that the US couldn't prevent 9/11 or the Boston bombings.

6) If bombing the Taliban has not resulted in fewer attacks, why do we keep calling for more bombing?

Are you f*cking kidding me? What should we do then, talk to them? Send them roses? Idiotic question. It has devastated them and that is why they are making attacks like this one, out of desperation to strike back, to do some damage because till now all that's been happening is them getting their arses kicked.

7) Why have we not asked the military to allow media access to Waziristan? Why do we trust everything we are told about Zarb-e-Azb?

Finally, one good question. You are the media, why don't you ask the military?

8) Most of the men who are the perpetrators of these massacres believe they are going to heaven when they die. Will the death penalty instill any fear in them at all? If they are willing to kill themselves, does being killed by others seem a credible deterrent?

They may want us to believe that they believe they're going to heaven but the truth is that deep down, they know they're wrong. That's why the two terrorists who were hanged yesterday begged for mercy. And even if some do believe they're going to heaven, killing them means we get rid of them. What else are we supposed to do, hand them back so that they can attack us again? Or waste our resources on keeping these animals alive in secure facilities?

9) Is there a link between the killings of Ahmedis, Hazaras, Christians, Shias, shrine-attendees and the massacre that took place? Is there a common ideology at hand here?

The only ideology here is one of hatred. Thats it. Otherwise the TTP and groups like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi have different political interests, they just use religion-based ideologies to try and achieve their actual goals which are all political in nature.

10) Is there a reason that we condemn some of these attacks and not others? Is that why the blame lies on us?

Unless you've been living on Mars, you'd know we condemn all the attacks. And we condemn those few who do not condemn the attacks, like the Burka Molvi we're trying to get arrested.

11) Is there a link between the rise of the TTP and the impunity with which groups like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi operate?

Yes, the network mechanism I explained earlier applies here too.

12) Why is it that so many of those arrested in terrorist attacks are released soon after?

Because of pseudo-liberals and human rights crybabies not letting us kill them before their friends can manipulate our extremely corrupt and incompetent law enforcement and judiciary to get them freed.

13) Would having stronger witness programmes, more efficient courts and a corruption-free police system help prevent these men from getting out of jail within days?

That's like asking 'would cutting a potato give you a cut potato'? Of course it would.

14) Should we start thinking about how, if we were not taught to hate Hindus, Shias, and anyone who is not our brand of religion, this attack may not have been a chilling, logical conclusion to a string of such attacks. How can we change the way our schools teach?

The first step to this would be looking at the reality. ''OMG all our schools teach is bigotry bla bla bla'' is not the reality.

Yes, religious intolerance is a problem. But schools aren't the main culprits, far from it. It is the maulvis and mullahs that are the culprits here. Sure, improve and regulate education, I am in favor of that, but if you want to reduce religious intolerance, a better approach would be taking care of the preachers first.

Keep in mind that regulating education would at best slightly reduce recruitment for the terrorists because most of their recruits are illiterate.

15) What are we really trying to achieve when we say these attacks were not carried out by Pakistanis?

There is no 'we' saying that. Very few people spin those kinds of webs, and when they do its usually either speculation or about politics (i.e people trying to tell others what they want to hear because that's how they get followers etc.)

16) What are we really trying not to think when we say these attacks were not carried out by Muslims?

That Islam is a problem, which it is not. These people may have been Muslims but what they did was certainly the opposite of Islam.

17) Is there nothing to be considered between bombing and negotiations?

Not unless you want to consider 'sitting around doing nothing' to be an option. If you have any bright ideas, go ahead and share them instead of b*tching that people don't have enough bright ideas.

18) Would bringing schools, water, electricity, roads, and basic respect to the tribal areas be an effective weapon against these terrorists?

Would boiling water give you boiled water? Yes, of course it would.

19) Would the military changing its policy regarding 'strategic assets' make these terrorists lose their awful potency?

No, it wouldn't. Not alone especially. The terrorists don't need any support from the military to have 'awful potency'.

20) Is it possible to critique our military and government's policies regarding the Taliban, even while feeling immense pain for their dead children?

What kind of absolutely bloody retarded question is this? Of course its possible.

These pseudo liberals aren't doing any good writing BS like this. They make people think that these are all 'unanswered questions' despite the fact that one can answer every single one of them by using a little logic and openly-available information.

With this in mind, I thought I'd pose a few questions which no one seems to be asking, but we all should be asking — over and over again — from ourselves, from the politicians, from the media, and from the military. We don't need answers to them just yet.

Right. This little paragraph shows how absolutely retarded this whole thing is. So basically the author is saying that we just need to bash ourselves over the head and question our military non-stop just for the sake of it because we don't even need the answers 'just yet'.

 

[acid rain]

ttp= funded by raw. elements within TTp took matter into there own hands. now watch what will happen to india probably another 26/11 that will last for 2 weeks lol bollywood style.

Hafiz sayeed along with isi have such intentions - and not just because your trained snakes have turned on you but because of the infrastructure available for it. Though a two week attack is just your sick wet dream.

I would fear the aftermath and the consequences of another 26/11 by Pakistan though.

 

[Faiez]

The answers to these lead in all directions .. less within the nation & more within the establishment.

20 questions we should be asking after the Peshawar massacre - Blogs - DAWN.COM

1) The people who did this. Where do they get their money from? Where do they get their weapons?

Firstly, not much money is needed. I'm guessing this entire attack would have cost at the very most $10-20k. Source is donations collected from mosques, madrassas, the recruits own money (from what ever previous job/business he had). Weapons are easy to find/buy, not a problem.

2) Who provides them refuge? Why do they provide them refuge?

All sorts of supporters. Even a few Islamic political parties. Why? Ideology. They think it's the right thing to do.

3) Where do they receive the indoctrination that makes them believe that killing children is justified? Which institutions are involved in this indoctrination? Why are these people chosen in particular?

Madrassas, Mosques, self research, some Islamic "universities".
Officially ISI was involved.
They don't "choose", they get what ever they can get. In recent years, recruitment requirements have become really loose. They don't even care if you have a beard etc...

4) If our intelligence is capable of intercepting calls, receiving messages from the Taliban (claiming responsibility), and receiving photos of the men who did this, why don't we question how these communications are possible without providing a lead to finding these people?

5) Why have we not demanded more transparency from our agencies, given the spectacular intelligence failure that this turned out to be?

4 & 5. "National Security".

6) If bombing the Taliban has not resulted in fewer attacks, why do we keep calling for more bombing?

To stop them from raising an even bigger army that may become a bigger threat in the future.

7) Why have we not asked the military to allow media access to Waziristan? Why do we trust everything we are told about Zarb-e-Azb?

because we ( awam ) are stupid, illiterate and brain washed to believe in everything we're told.

8) Most of the men who are the perpetrators of these massacres believe they are going to heaven when they die. Will the death penalty instill any fear in them at all? If they are willing to kill themselves, does being killed by others seem a credible deterrent?

Death penalty doesn't affect them. Since it's very very rare that they'll be caught alive.
Death penalty currently will be used to kill them so they don't escape from prison as containing so many of them in prisons is difficult.

9) Is there a link between the killings of Ahmedis, Hazaras, Christians, Shias, shrine-attendees and the massacre that took place? Is there a common ideology at hand here?

Offcourse. It's one big militant ideology. Different groups, nationalities, cultures, names, colors, locations, but common ideology.

10) Is there a reason that we condemn some of these attacks and not others? Is that why the blame lies on us?

I can't answer this one.

11) Is there a link between the rise of the TTP and the impunity with which groups like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi operate?

Although the two are separate in that their target areas are different, but they do exchange men regularly. Lashkar-e-Jhangvi is a less hardcore group which operates in cities, killing ahmedis, shias etc.

Sipah-e-Sihabah, also a similar group is yet a lesser hardcore (slightly lesser violent as well perhaps) group that focuses more on propaganda etc.

TTP is a full hardcore fighting arms sort of group that specializes in fighting pakistan army.

They are all fundamentally the same, with a different level of violence. They have always been there since afghan-russian war.

12) Why is it that so many of those arrested in terrorist attacks are released soon after?

I have no idea. Perhaps part of a greater policy to keep the terrorist threat alive so aid from USA keeps flowing. Seems to have worked so far since 9/11.

13) Would having stronger witness programmes, more efficient courts and a corruption-free police system help prevent these men from getting out of jail within days?

Maybe.

14) Should we start thinking about how, if we were not taught to hate Hindus, Shias, and anyone who is not our brand of religion, this attack may not have been a chilling, logical conclusion to a string of such attacks. How can we change the way our schools teach?

Put lesser emphasis on Islamic Studies, Pak. Studies etc. Change school books.

15) What are we really trying to achieve when we say these attacks were not carried out by Pakistanis?

16) What are we really trying not to think when we say these attacks were not carried out by Muslims?

Some were Uzbeks etc I think. And people are unwilling to accept that a pakistani could do such a thing. Same idea with calling them non-muslims, they can't digest the fact that a muslim could do such a thing.

17) Is there nothing to be considered between bombing and negotiations?

Join them in their global jehad perhaps?

18) Would bringing schools, water, electricity, roads, and basic respect to the tribal areas be an effective weapon against these terrorists?

Offcourse. FATA is a neglected area.

19) Would the military changing its policy regarding 'strategic assets' make these terrorists lose their awful potency?

Probably too late for that now.

20) Is it possible to critique our military and government's policies regarding the Taliban, even while feeling immense pain for their dead children?

Offcourse.

Answers in red, underline/italic.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

The answer is very complicated for a pseudo-liberal to understand - its a web of proxies and geopolitics.

For example, Iran supports a few militant groups to keep its interests safe. Nothing wrong with that, that's the way the world works nowadays. But what happens is that when you have militants active, you have a network active. There is no telling which militants have deals with which ones to smuggle weapons etc. They could be using Pakistani militants for it, which means that they get funding in return for their services.

Then we have the Baloch Militants, which are undoubtedly supported by India and undoubtedly do indirectly support TTP.
Then we must look at Afghanistan itself, which is absolutely full of elements that have interests and profits to gain by supporting the militants. Smuggling their drugs (heroin, opium and god knows what else) is most likely one of the most profitable of these interests.

And of course, here's where the famous Haqqani Network comes in. The way they're supposed to be, they don't need any elements from the establishment to help them. They can do their thing just fine, for whoever pays them the most.
View attachment 177718



Firstly, if you have ever seen the Durand line, even on Google Earth, you'd know that they don't need anyone to provide them refuge. They can find their own, very easily.
But for the occasional times when they do need help, like in Zarb-e-Azb now, the aforementioned people who profit from them also help them get refuge.

View attachment 177719

View attachment 177720


All the wrong questions. They can receive their indoctrination in a cave or mud hut, they don't need 'institutions'. The maddrassas are usually a front where they recruit people to receive more indoctrination. And no one is 'chosen in particular'. People who have tough circumstances, psychological issues, extremist religious views or any other form of motive go to them themselves. No one needs to chose them. The recruiters just need to make their presence known.

As for the extremist religious views, we have enough political Mullahs and people like Abdul Aziz to cause that.


Maybe thats because they did find many leads, which is how they have been able to bomb the living crap out of them for a long time. And how difficult do you think sending images and videos is? Some guy with a USB could sit in a net cafe, get TOR running in seconds and upload/send everything in minutes, then vanish and dump the USB in some gutter.

No one would be able to trace him, not even the CIA / NSA.


Because they are Intelligence agencies. 'Transparency' to us means transparency to the whole world, including the terrorists. As for 'intelligence failures', again, author is showing a huge lack of information. Detecting and preventing an operation by seven men from the mountain regions, using extremely little communication or anything else thats detectable is not an easy task at all.

Intelligence agencies alone can't do everything. They need support from law enforcement, authorities like NACTA and hundreds of other components that combine together to form an effective system like the US has, and despite that the US couldn't prevent 9/11 or the Boston bombings.


Are you f*cking kidding me? What should we do then, talk to them? Send them roses? Idiotic question. It has devastated them and that is why they are making attacks like this one, out of desperation to strike back, to do some damage because till now all that's been happening is them getting their arses kicked.


Finally, one good question. You are the media, why don't you ask the military?


They may want us to believe that they believe they're going to heaven but the truth is that deep down, they know they're wrong. That's why the two terrorists who were hanged yesterday begged for mercy. And even if some do believe they're going to heaven, killing them means we get rid of them. What else are we supposed to do, hand them back so that they can attack us again? Or waste our resources on keeping these animals alive in secure facilities?


The only ideology here is one of hatred. Thats it. Otherwise the TTP and groups like Lashkar-e-Jhangvi have different political interests, they just use religion-based ideologies to try and achieve their actual goals which are all political in nature.


Unless you've been living on Mars, you'd know we condemn all the attacks. And we condemn those few who do not condemn the attacks, like the Burka Molvi we're trying to get arrested.


Yes, the network mechanism I explained earlier applies here too.


Because of pseudo-liberals and human rights crybabies not letting us kill them before their friends can manipulate our extremely corrupt and incompetent law enforcement and judiciary to get them freed.

That's like asking 'would cutting a potato give you a cut potato'? Of course it would.


The first step to this would be looking at the reality. ''OMG all our schools teach is bigotry bla bla bla'' is not the reality.

Yes, religious intolerance is a problem. But schools aren't the main culprits, far from it. It is the maulvis and mullahs that are the culprits here. Sure, improve and regulate education, I am in favor of that, but if you want to reduce religious intolerance, a better approach would be taking care of the preachers first.

Keep in mind that regulating education would at best slightly reduce recruitment for the terrorists because most of their recruits are illiterate.


There is no 'we' saying that. Very few people spin those kinds of webs, and when they do its usually either speculation or about politics (i.e people trying to tell others what they want to hear because that's how they get followers etc.)


That Islam is a problem, which it is not. These people may have been Muslims but what they did was certainly the opposite of Islam.


Not unless you want to consider 'sitting around doing nothing' to be an option. If you have any bright ideas, go ahead and share them instead of b*tching that people don't have enough bright ideas.


Would boiling water give you boiled water? Yes, of course it would.


No, it wouldn't. Not alone especially. The terrorists don't need any support from the military to have 'awful potency'.


What kind of absolutely bloody retarded question is this? Of course its possible.

These pseudo liberals aren't doing any good writing BS like this. They make people think that these are all 'unanswered questions' despite the fact that one can answer every single one of them by using a little logic and openly-available information.

Right. This little paragraph shows how absolutely retarded this whole thing is. So basically the author is saying that we just need to bash ourselves over the head and question our military non-stop just for the sake of it because we don't even need the answers 'just yet'.
View attachment 177713

this writer Heba islam should write a comic of her thoughts........i can guarantee she can be a millionaire in just a month.