Perhaps the idea should be to accept that Pakistanis are very happy with the animalism and barbaric ideals of the Taliban as long as they supposedly conform to "Quran and Sunnah". Simply because people are afraid to question who came up with the particular interpretations of the Quran and Sunnah as purported and are willing to sacrifice all human rights as long as it gets them close to these prophetic Taliban and salvation in God.
A divided nation | Peace or War with Taliban?
- Thread starter jaibi
- Start date
Perhaps the idea should be to accept that Pakistanis are very happy with the animalism and barbaric ideals of the Taliban as long as they supposedly conform to "Quran and Sunnah". Simply because people are afraid to question who came up with the particular interpretations of the Quran and Sunnah as purported and are willing to sacrifice all human rights as long as it gets them close to these prophetic Taliban and salvation in God.
Informant
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2013
- Messages
- 4,436
- Reaction score
- -5
- Country
- Location
Zarvan is a POS that loves to take it up his bum from mehsud guys. Hope he gets droned. There i said it what everyone wants to, there is a limit to listen to one's opinions but downright supporting them is where i draw the line. POS.
DESERT FIGHTER
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jan 1, 2010
- Messages
- 46,973
- Reaction score
- 95
- Country
- Location
He justified suicide bombing,terrorist attacks several times.. heck he even justifies yazid and how he is respectful... its because of people like him our country is in deep mess..
Capt.Popeye
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2010
- Messages
- 11,937
- Reaction score
- 12
The State that Mohammed Ali Jinnah wanted was certainly not a Theocratic State. If at all; it approximated a Secular State. He wanted a State where a particular religious community and its followers would be in a dominating majority "but it would allow other people of the minority to survive and live in Peace and Dignity".
Did that happen? Even the members of that dominating religious majority community are at loggerheads amongst themselves as to who among them is a "real follower and who is not"!
And for the poor unfortunates among the rest of the populace; Jinnah was the last protector that they could have ever had.
Would have Jinnah ever have been tolerant or even comfortable with the "Directives Resolution", the "Hudood Ordinance" or the Blasphemy Laws for instance?
Jinnah was essentially more Secular in his outlook that you can ever fathom. It seems that you are geeting bamboozled by the argument of some that: Secularism=Atheism; a false propaganda that has been propagated time and again.
Last edited by a moderator:
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
Our confusion stems from the exploitation of religion. Many of my friends ask me that Taliban is demanding that Sharia Law should be imposed on Pakistan. We are Muslims so what is wrong in that.
My reply has always been that Pakistan was a State for the subcontinent Muslims, it was never meant to be a State with Sharia Law. The parties that wanted Sharia Law such as Jamaat Islami strongly opposed creation of Pakistan. The Pakistan which resulted in the sacrifice of millions of our forefathers was always meant to be a democratic federal State with full freedom of everyone to practice whatever religion they believed in; spelled out clearly in the Quaid’s speech of 11th August 1947.
Nevertheless since anti Pakistan parties such as JI are now in forefront of Pakistani politics and have been in power during the 11 years of the bigot Zia (may he rot in hell) and now in KPK with the confused Imran Khan, enemies of Pakistan are now the most vociferous in Pakistani politics. Who could have believed it even 10 years ago if someone would have suggested that all political parties would consider butchers, cutthroats and outright criminals as stake holders and that GOP would be in the hands of the people who say?
“YOU KILL WE TALK”
Here is an article on the criminal activities of TTP.
Criminality & terrorism
HUMA YUSUF
Published 2013-10-28 07:43:26
MORE than 10 members of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) faction led by Hakeemullah Mehsud have reportedly been killed in Karachi since August.
According to news reports, these deaths are the result of clashes with the TTP faction loyal to Waliur Rehman, the TTP commander who was killed by a drone strike earlier this year.
This infighting is sparked by tussles over extortion funds collected by the various TTP factions operational in the city. It is the latest sign not only of how well entrenched the TTP are in Karachi (as in other cities), but also that they’re here to stay.
Given the atrocities the TTP regularly commits, it is not surprising that the organised criminal dimension of its operations is often overlooked. But this dimension is significant. TTP militants have long flocked to Karachi to regroup, shop
, smuggle weapons, seek medical treatment, and even work seasonal jobs.
A few years ago, the group reportedly began fundraising in the city through high-stakes kidnappings for ransom and bank robberies. Now, it is a major criminal contender in the city, controlling numerous neighbourhoods and running brutal extortion rackets, announcing its demands to businessmen through two bullets wrapped in a piece of paper.
Which begs the question, how will the TTP’s forays into organised crime feature in the proposed peace talks with the government? Talk of talks has until now focused on issues of the Sharia and sovereignty — that is, the TTP’s demands that Pakistan abandon its Constitution and democratic system in favour of rule by Sharia law, and that the government put an end to US drone strikes in Fata.
If recent history is anything to go by, peace talks, if they do take place, are likely to result in a deal whereby the TTP agrees to stop targeting state security forces in exchange for the cessation of military operations (and perhaps drone strikes) in areas where it dominates. There has been no mention of the TTP halting its criminal activities in Karachi or other cities, either as a condition or concession.
This is ill-considered. As the government seeks to engage the TTP, it cannot separate the group’s jihadi and criminal activities. To begin with, recognising that the TTP has taken the shape of a mafia in Pakistan’s urban centres could help clarify thinking around the proposed talks. Would the state negotiate with criminal elements? Would the population be as supportive of government overtures to criminals as it has been of rabid ideologues?
By only engaging the TTP’s demands regarding drone strikes and Sharia law, the government risks sanctioning the group’s criminal activities. This would be a very dangerous precedent since — make no mistake — the TTP in the shape of a criminal syndicate is here to stay in our cities.
In Karachi, TTP factions hailing from South Waziristan, Swat and Mohmand are said to have systematically taken control of certain areas by killing ANP leaders and anti-Taliban elders, and then collecting a ‘terror tax’ — protection money in their parlance — from the traumatised residents who remain. Such an entrenched and lucrative presence will not be easily surrendered.
Moreover, in the (unlikely) event that the TTP does scale down terror activities such as suicide bombings and ambushes against security personnel, its leadership will probably focus on consolidating urban criminality. This means a lose-lose scenario for Pakistan: increased criminality in our rapidly growing and increasingly fragile cities will lead to localised strife (such as the turf wars that plague Karachi), economic paralysis, the further collapse of law enforcement agencies, and, ultimately, the weakening of the state through criminal rather than militant means.
And let us not be naive: what will the TTP do with funds generated from growing criminal activities in increasingly affluent cities (if not continue with its campaign against the Pakistani state)? The group has already made its ambitions of waging global jihad clear.
If the TTP’s criminal activities are allowed to flourish, we can expect to see more attempts such as the attempted bombing of New York’s Times Square. The consequences for Pakistan of a successful international terrorist attack are terrible to contemplate.
For the reasons outlined above, it is time our government and media addressed the TTP’s criminal deeds alongside its acts of terrorism. The absence of this discussion shows how the TTP has managed to shape the narrative around its growing criminality to its advantage, as it has on other matters.
The group continues to deny that it is extorting funds or robbing banks, saying these activities are carried out by others in the name of the Taliban in order to defame the group. Too many Pakistanis have believed the group when it has denied responsibility for brutal attacks (including, the bombing at All Saints Church in Peshawar), so their gullibility on the TTP’s criminal acts is to be expected.
There is, of course, one other way in which the TTP’s criminal activities could feature in proposed talks. Until now, the group has not made any demands the government can easily fulfil. By some perverse calculation, the group may ask that the state turn a blind eye to its criminality in exchange for the cessation of terrorist attacks. In the short term, this may seem like a good bargain. But in the long term, it would be tantamount to surrender. As weak and befuddled as our government is, it must not ignore the criminal element of the overall threat posed by the TTP.
The writer is a freelance journalist.
huma.yusuf@gmail.com
http://dawn.com/news/1052331/criminality-terrorism
My reply has always been that Pakistan was a State for the subcontinent Muslims, it was never meant to be a State with Sharia Law. The parties that wanted Sharia Law such as Jamaat Islami strongly opposed creation of Pakistan. The Pakistan which resulted in the sacrifice of millions of our forefathers was always meant to be a democratic federal State with full freedom of everyone to practice whatever religion they believed in; spelled out clearly in the Quaid’s speech of 11th August 1947.
Nevertheless since anti Pakistan parties such as JI are now in forefront of Pakistani politics and have been in power during the 11 years of the bigot Zia (may he rot in hell) and now in KPK with the confused Imran Khan, enemies of Pakistan are now the most vociferous in Pakistani politics. Who could have believed it even 10 years ago if someone would have suggested that all political parties would consider butchers, cutthroats and outright criminals as stake holders and that GOP would be in the hands of the people who say?
“YOU KILL WE TALK”
Here is an article on the criminal activities of TTP.
Criminality & terrorism
HUMA YUSUF
Published 2013-10-28 07:43:26
MORE than 10 members of the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) faction led by Hakeemullah Mehsud have reportedly been killed in Karachi since August.
According to news reports, these deaths are the result of clashes with the TTP faction loyal to Waliur Rehman, the TTP commander who was killed by a drone strike earlier this year.
This infighting is sparked by tussles over extortion funds collected by the various TTP factions operational in the city. It is the latest sign not only of how well entrenched the TTP are in Karachi (as in other cities), but also that they’re here to stay.
Given the atrocities the TTP regularly commits, it is not surprising that the organised criminal dimension of its operations is often overlooked. But this dimension is significant. TTP militants have long flocked to Karachi to regroup, shop
, smuggle weapons, seek medical treatment, and even work seasonal jobs.A few years ago, the group reportedly began fundraising in the city through high-stakes kidnappings for ransom and bank
robberies. Now, it is a major criminal contender in the city, controlling numerous neighbourhoods and running brutal extortion rackets, announcing its demands to businessmen through two bullets wrapped in a piece of paper.Which begs the question
, how will the TTP’s forays into organised crime feature in the proposed peace talks with the government? Talk of talks has until now focused on issues of the Sharia and sovereignty — that is, the TTP’s demands that Pakistan abandon its Constitution and democratic system in favour of rule by Sharia law, and that the government put an end to US drone strikes in Fata.If recent history is anything to go by, peace talks, if they do take place, are likely to result in a deal whereby the TTP agrees to stop targeting state security forces in exchange for the cessation of military operations (and perhaps drone strikes) in areas where it dominates. There has been no mention of the TTP halting its criminal activities in Karachi or other cities, either as a condition or concession.
This is ill-considered. As the government seeks to engage the TTP, it cannot separate the group’s jihadi and criminal activities. To begin with, recognising that the TTP has taken the shape of a mafia in Pakistan’s urban centres could help clarify thinking around the proposed talks. Would the state negotiate with criminal elements? Would the population be as supportive of government overtures to criminals as it has been of rabid ideologues?
By only engaging the TTP’s demands regarding drone strikes and Sharia law, the government risks sanctioning the group’s criminal activities. This would be a very dangerous precedent since — make no mistake — the TTP in the shape of a criminal syndicate is here to stay in our cities.
In Karachi, TTP factions hailing from South Waziristan, Swat and Mohmand are said to have systematically taken control of certain areas by killing ANP leaders and anti-Taliban elders, and then collecting a ‘terror tax’ — protection money in their parlance — from the traumatised residents who remain. Such an entrenched and lucrative presence will not be easily surrendered.
Moreover, in the (unlikely) event that the TTP does scale down terror activities such as suicide bombings and ambushes against security personnel, its leadership
will probably focus on consolidating urban criminality. This means a lose-lose scenario for Pakistan: increased criminality in our rapidly growing and increasingly fragile cities will lead to localised strife (such as the turf wars that plague Karachi), economic paralysis, the further collapse of law enforcement agencies, and, ultimately, the weakening of the state through criminal rather than militant means.And let us not be naive: what will the TTP do with funds generated from growing criminal activities in increasingly affluent cities (if not continue with its campaign against the Pakistani state)? The group has already made its ambitions of waging global jihad clear.
If the TTP’s criminal activities are allowed to flourish, we can expect to see more attempts such as the attempted bombing of New York’s Times Square. The consequences for Pakistan of a successful international terrorist attack are terrible to contemplate.
For the reasons outlined above, it is time our government and media addressed the TTP’s criminal deeds alongside its acts of terrorism. The absence of this discussion shows how the TTP has managed to shape the narrative around its growing criminality to its advantage, as it has on other matters.
The group continues to deny that it is extorting funds or robbing banks, saying these activities are carried out by others in the name of the Taliban in order to defame the group. Too many Pakistanis have believed the group when it has denied responsibility for brutal attacks (including, the bombing at All Saints Church in Peshawar), so their gullibility on the TTP’s criminal acts is to be expected.
There is, of course, one other way in which the TTP’s criminal activities could feature in proposed talks. Until now, the group has not made any demands the government can easily fulfil. By some perverse calculation, the group may ask that the state turn a blind eye to its criminality in exchange for the cessation of terrorist attacks. In the short term, this may seem like a good bargain. But in the long term, it would be tantamount to surrender. As weak and befuddled as our government is, it must not ignore the criminal element of the overall threat posed by the TTP.
The writer is a freelance journalist.
huma.yusuf@gmail.com
http://dawn.com/news/1052331/criminality-terrorism
BATMAN
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2007
- Messages
- 29,895
- Reaction score
- -28
- Country
- Location
^^ I'm sorry but.. you completely ignored the 'frontier gandhi' and his hate towards Quid-e-Azam and Pakistan, but thank God he was kicked on his face by the very same congress, which again has owned them.
The people who lead Jamat Islami are not here and were probably part of British plan.
What I don't understand, why the haters of Pakistan and Quaid are not challenged by pro Pakistanis and today's Muslim League.
The people who lead Jamat Islami are not here and were probably part of British plan.
What I don't understand, why the haters of Pakistan and Quaid are not challenged by pro Pakistanis and today's Muslim League.
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
You are right as usual. Bacha Khan was for union with India. No excuses, it just slipped my mind and I apologize for this omission of history.
Your question is valid and I have pondered about it as well. I think the main reason is that the generation; that was actually active in Pakistan movement; like my late father who were young men during the 30’s and early 40’s; had passed away by the late 70’s and early 80’s.
New generation has grown up without experiencing the colonial rule. Now independence is taken for granted and the deep insult you felt in the era where a local man was treated subordinate to any ‘Gora’ has disappeared. With disappearance of colonial rule and the generation that really made Pakistan; deep love for Pakistan has also disappeared and replaced with ethnic, linguistic, religious & sectarian rivalries.
Religious parties’ resurgence really came with the Afghan jihad when Islam was exploited with the help of JI & Deobandi parties, with the weapons & money coming from CIA. This provided opportunity to the anti-Pakistani forces to grow powerful and drag Pakistan into the mess we are in.
PeaceGen
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,889
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
It seems the people here understand the great threat the TTP poses to Pakistan.
So why do you allow your government to hold peacetalks with them at all?
Why not make sure the TTP can't even preach their politics as they do now in their madrassas? Coz I think that's their achilles heel and the only real path (that i can see) to eliminating the threat they pose to you (and the rest of the world btw, noting copycat factor happening with for instance alShabaab in Africa).
And I think the Pakistani military is capable of making that happen (takeover of taliban religious schools), for instance by setting up secure bases in taliban areas with helicopter pads, to quickly shuttle rapid response forces to backup the bodyguards of the moderate imams you have teach at those taliban religious schools. You can keep the entire setup secure with help from US drones. It might be a significant investment for you (truly!) respectable Pakistani moderates (we can talk about those blasphemy laws getting reduced from bodily punishments to (hefty) fines in some other thread some other time, it's not a very high priority for me), but it'll be a much better investment than letting your military leaders pick fights with the Indians (and Chinese too?) and then deny they were the ones starting it. shifting your military's focus to neutralize the taliban threat (with as little civilian casualties in taliban country as humanly possible, or your effort will backfire bigtime for sure) will ensure their funding stays at levels that can also deal with actual foreign aggression, if that ever happens.
So why do you allow your government to hold peacetalks with them at all?
Why not make sure the TTP can't even preach their politics as they do now in their madrassas? Coz I think that's their achilles heel and the only real path (that i can see) to eliminating the threat they pose to you (and the rest of the world btw, noting copycat factor happening with for instance alShabaab in Africa).
And I think the Pakistani military is capable of making that happen (takeover of taliban religious schools), for instance by setting up secure bases in taliban areas with helicopter pads, to quickly shuttle rapid response forces to backup the bodyguards of the moderate imams you have teach at those taliban religious schools. You can keep the entire setup secure with help from US drones. It might be a significant investment for you (truly!) respectable Pakistani moderates (we can talk about those blasphemy laws getting reduced from bodily punishments to (hefty) fines in some other thread some other time, it's not a very high priority for me), but it'll be a much better investment than letting your military leaders pick fights with the Indians (and Chinese too?) and then deny they were the ones starting it. shifting your military's focus to neutralize the taliban threat (with as little civilian casualties in taliban country as humanly possible, or your effort will backfire bigtime for sure) will ensure their funding stays at levels that can also deal with actual foreign aggression, if that ever happens.
Last edited by a moderator:
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
A very good analysis of Pakistan vis-a-vis Taliban.
Ayaz AmirFriday, November 01, 2013
Pakistan’s problems are unfixable, my considered opinion after working journalism’s fields for over 30 years. Not that the problems are complicated or unique. They certainly are not. Only this that the jokers entrusted by us through the ballot box, or selected by Providence in its infinite mercy, with the task of fixing them are, well, jokers. See the light of intellect shining from their countenances and few other conclusions are possible.
People who find it hard to unlock YouTube, to give an absurd example, because they are afraid of their walking shadows and fear that by removing this ban they would be tempting the furies, how on earth does anyone expect them to sort out other problems? Calibre and capacity…that is the leading Pakistani problem: the deficit of ideas more alarming than the power deficit or our skewed balance of payments.
This inadequacy is not specific to the Sharifs or the other lumberjacks cluttering the political spaces. This cuts across the social and political spectrum. A nation of nearly 200 million souls – a tribute to the one thing in which we excel, our powers of procreation – a burden on the planet, but a mass which is directionless because of the leadership shortage.
Take any subject – school curriculums, the funny history we teach in our classrooms, and the history morons or illiterates we produce as a result, our starved social sectors, the attention we don’t pay our doctors (which is why, given the first opportunity, they run off to Saudi Arabia), our drains and water courses choked by that invention of the devil called the plastic shopper, or anything else, the medium of instruction, a common education policy, talking to the Taliban, recognising the extremist threat for what it is, etc, etc. To set any of them right you need decisions to be taken and the thought made flesh, crowned by action.
In other words, you need leadership. This can be leadership of any kind – political, military, bureaucratic, or even theocratic as in the case of Iran – but there has to be a driver running the train, a helmsman on deck to steer the ship over the waters, a conductor to lead his orchestra, a captain to lead his team. None of this is profound stuff…it’s very, very basic. But in Pakistan we just don’t seem to get it. From a pool of mediocre choices we select the worst examples of mediocrity expecting them to perform miracles. When that doesn’t happen we become cynical or frustrated.
Cynicism as an intellectual pose only the well-heeled can afford, scanning your morning newspaper as you sip your coffee and allowing yourself a cynical curl of the lips as you see the mug-shots on parade, and of course some kind of crystal glass and amber liquid to go with it as evening falls. For those without such advantages frustration is the next best option. And the way things are going, frustration is on the rise. Anyone can see it.
A growing youth population and not much to look forward to in life…it’s hard to beat this as a method of generating discontent. Happening to drive through Lahore Cantt some weeks ago I suddenly came across thousands of youngsters, some from as far away as Khushab and Sargodha, standing in line. To test their luck for 26 posts of upper division clerks in the Cantt’s garrison schools, and every second guy standing there was an MA or an MBA. Next time any police jobs are advertised just see the multitudes turning up for the 100 or so jobs on offer, again graduates and MAs desperate to make the grade.
But all said and done we have to be grateful to the present ruling lot who are proving to be the last nail in the coffin of Pakistani illusion-making. With president Zardari around, Punjab took mental refuge in the notion of a Sharif victory, convinced that everything would turn around and better days were at hand. Now that the Sharifs, in near record time, are proving the hollowness of their triumph, the space of illusion has shrunk, and if the gods are kind very soon it would have disappeared altogether.
Imagine the lifetime spent in disabusing ourselves of the competing attractions of the PPP and the PML-N. Tired of one set of jokers the voting public would plump for the other, and so the political see-saw would go up and down, the Bhuttos and the Sharifs deriving sustenance and oxygen from the mutual dictatorship of their mediocrity and ineptitude, to say nothing of their talent for mind-boggling corruption. With the swift defrocking of the present dispensation, the swinging of the pendulum should cease. This game has run its course. There are no more illusions it can yield.
We have seen the retreat of military rule. We have seen the arrival of democracy. For the first time in our history we have had a peaceful democratic transition. We have seen the rise and fall of the PPP and now we are seeing the dimming of that other beacon of hope, the PML-N. We have even tasted the fruits of that wonder, the independence of the judiciary. From one set of illusions we have travelled to another and we have arrived at the journey’s end of illusions…or at least of those illusions with which we have lived so long. The old cups lie shattered, all the old wine is either drunk or split. A new maikadah (tavern) is waiting to be raised.
But from where come the new tavern-keepers? Who steps into the breach, what fills this gaping void? The Taliban have taken the measure of us, they have tested what there is of the Pakistani state and their appetites are whetted, their ambitions aflame. Like the invading armies of old who came over the Hindukush mountains, through the Khyber Pass, drawn as if by a magnet to the riches of India, they sense their opportunity in the confusion we have made of our republic. So our problem becomes one of holding the line. What armies do we raise to stop their advance? What walls do we erect to keep them at bay?
Victory and defeat are first in the mind. What happens on the ground comes afterwards. The France of 1940 had lost it even before German divisions swept over the Maginot Line. The German advance into Russia a year later was spectacular, the Germans breaking through Russian defences and encircling entire Russian armies, taking hundreds of thousands of prisoners. But the Red Army, despite suffering catastrophic losses, kept on fighting. Russia’s spirit did not collapse.
We seem to have lost the will to fight. Our dithering and lack of resolve are an invitation to adventurism and anarchy. We probably need more gunship helicopters and night vision devices but more than that we need to steel our hearts, encase our hearts in iron. The will to fight must come before the ability to fight.
What was the Taliban commander, Latifullah Mehsud, doing in Afghanistan before the Americans nabbed him? He was hobnobbing with the Afghan intelligence service with a view to creating problems for the Pakistan Army. When states become weak that is what happens: even the meek start conspiring against you.
The old politics is dead. It has outlived its utility. A new politics is waiting to be born. But the old question: who steps into the breach?
Email: winlust@yahoo.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-211470-Mercifully-and-finally-the-death-of-illusion
Ayaz AmirFriday, November 01, 2013
People who find it hard to unlock YouTube, to give an absurd example, because they are afraid of their walking shadows and fear that by removing this ban they would be tempting the furies, how on earth does anyone expect them to sort out other problems? Calibre and capacity…that is the leading Pakistani problem: the deficit of ideas more alarming than the power deficit or our skewed balance of payments.
This inadequacy is not specific to the Sharifs or the other lumberjacks cluttering the political spaces. This cuts across the social and political spectrum. A nation of nearly 200 million souls – a tribute to the one thing in which we excel, our powers of procreation – a burden on the planet, but a mass which is directionless because of the leadership shortage.
Take any subject – school curriculums, the funny history we teach in our classrooms, and the history morons or illiterates we produce as a result, our starved social sectors, the attention we don’t pay our doctors (which is why, given the first opportunity, they run off to Saudi Arabia), our drains and water courses choked by that invention of the devil called the plastic shopper, or anything else, the medium of instruction, a common education policy, talking to the Taliban, recognising the extremist threat for what it is, etc, etc. To set any of them right you need decisions to be taken and the thought made flesh, crowned by action.
In other words, you need leadership. This can be leadership of any kind – political, military, bureaucratic, or even theocratic as in the case of Iran – but there has to be a driver running the train, a helmsman on deck to steer the ship over the waters, a conductor to lead his orchestra, a captain to lead his team. None of this is profound stuff…it’s very, very basic. But in Pakistan we just don’t seem to get it. From a pool of mediocre choices we select the worst examples of mediocrity expecting them to perform miracles. When that doesn’t happen we become cynical or frustrated.
Cynicism as an intellectual pose only the well-heeled can afford, scanning your morning newspaper as you sip your coffee and allowing yourself a cynical curl of the lips as you see the mug-shots on parade, and of course some kind of crystal glass and amber liquid to go with it as evening falls. For those without such advantages frustration is the next best option. And the way things are going, frustration is on the rise. Anyone can see it.
A growing youth population and not much to look forward to in life…it’s hard to beat this as a method of generating discontent. Happening to drive through Lahore Cantt some weeks ago I suddenly came across thousands of youngsters, some from as far away as Khushab and Sargodha, standing in line. To test their luck for 26 posts of upper division clerks in the Cantt’s garrison schools, and every second guy standing there was an MA or an MBA. Next time any police jobs are advertised just see the multitudes turning up for the 100 or so jobs on offer, again graduates and MAs desperate to make the grade.
But all said and done we have to be grateful to the present ruling lot who are proving to be the last nail in the coffin of Pakistani illusion-making. With president Zardari around, Punjab took mental refuge in the notion of a Sharif victory, convinced that everything would turn around and better days were at hand. Now that the Sharifs, in near record time, are proving the hollowness of their triumph, the space of illusion has shrunk, and if the gods are kind very soon it would have disappeared altogether.
Imagine the lifetime spent in disabusing ourselves of the competing attractions of the PPP and the PML-N. Tired of one set of jokers the voting public would plump for the other, and so the political see-saw would go up and down, the Bhuttos and the Sharifs deriving sustenance and oxygen from the mutual dictatorship of their mediocrity and ineptitude, to say nothing of their talent for mind-boggling corruption. With the swift defrocking of the present dispensation, the swinging of the pendulum should cease. This game has run its course. There are no more illusions it can yield.
We have seen the retreat of military rule. We have seen the arrival of democracy. For the first time in our history we have had a peaceful democratic transition. We have seen the rise and fall of the PPP and now we are seeing the dimming of that other beacon of hope, the PML-N. We have even tasted the fruits of that wonder, the independence of the judiciary. From one set of illusions we have travelled to another and we have arrived at the journey’s end of illusions…or at least of those illusions with which we have lived so long. The old cups lie shattered, all the old wine is either drunk or split. A new maikadah (tavern) is waiting to be raised.
But from where come the new tavern-keepers? Who steps into the breach, what fills this gaping void? The Taliban have taken the measure of us, they have tested what there is of the Pakistani state and their appetites are whetted, their ambitions aflame. Like the invading armies of old who came over the Hindukush mountains, through the Khyber Pass, drawn as if by a magnet to the riches of India, they sense their opportunity in the confusion we have made of our republic. So our problem becomes one of holding the line. What armies do we raise to stop their advance? What walls do we erect to keep them at bay?
Victory and defeat are first in the mind. What happens on the ground comes afterwards. The France of 1940 had lost it even before German divisions swept over the Maginot Line. The German advance into Russia a year later was spectacular, the Germans breaking through Russian defences and encircling entire Russian armies, taking hundreds of thousands of prisoners. But the Red Army, despite suffering catastrophic losses, kept on fighting. Russia’s spirit did not collapse.
We seem to have lost the will to fight. Our dithering and lack of resolve are an invitation to adventurism and anarchy. We probably need more gunship helicopters and night vision devices but more than that we need to steel our hearts, encase our hearts in iron. The will to fight must come before the ability to fight.
What was the Taliban commander, Latifullah Mehsud, doing in Afghanistan before the Americans nabbed him? He was hobnobbing with the Afghan intelligence service with a view to creating problems for the Pakistan Army. When states become weak that is what happens: even the meek start conspiring against you.
The old politics is dead. It has outlived its utility. A new politics is waiting to be born. But the old question: who steps into the breach?
Email: winlust@yahoo.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-211470-Mercifully-and-finally-the-death-of-illusion
PeaceGen
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2012
- Messages
- 3,889
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
additions:
You can keep the entire setup secure with help from US drones, even if your taliban-updating-project takes 100 years or more, coz I suspect all future US administrations, regardless of whatever (new) party wins the presidential and other relevant US elections, will be foolish enough to drop the drone-backup-support-level to any level that gets this "utmost-important fix to very-unreasonably-extremist flavors of Islam"-project derailed in any way, by getting too many of the moderate imams you enable to teach peaceful co-existinance with other (sub-)cultures than the taliban-area's own culture, killed for their work by extremists who stay violent (or getting too many of their bodyguards or pakistani military special-forces level quick response backups killed), during any timeperiod that this project must stay in force, which is ofcourse until that pakistani taliban extremist ideology is updated to FULLY respect the right to self-determination of other (sub-)cultures completely and of their own free will..
that recent move by the very top pakistani politician, asking the US publicly to end drone strikes, has me *severely* puzzled and definately willing to focus more of my daily attention on this pakistani-taliban problem until it's securedly contained again, with the Taliban clergy absolutely needing to become constantly-verified moderates to stay priest, and their military wing can have police jobs locally if they also agree to enforce only moderate muslim religous-social rules, instead of the kinda social rules they used to enfoce), WHILE pakistani taliban leaders will say in english language massmedia reports that I saw on defence.pk around a month ago or so, that they still desire strongly that 'all of pakistan be ruled by our taliban version of islam'....
Last edited by a moderator:
Bang Galore
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2010
- Messages
- 10,685
- Reaction score
- 12
- Country
- Location
That would be a reasonable assumption but one can't really be sure what Jinnah had in his mind. While you are right that Jinnah was unlikely to have been comfortable with a theocratic state, it was always going to be a difficult argument to make against. Once a state had been created on religious grounds, it was always going to go in the direction of a theocracy whether Jinnah wanted it or not. That idea was instilled in the very idea of that state. No amount of argument is likely to change that.
Whatever it was meant to be, religion is a very dangerous weapon in politics. As said by our former PM , PV Narasimha Rao, " We can fight the BJP but we cannot fight Lord Ram", a similar position exists in Pakistan. Once the state had been built on the religious affiliation, the risk always existed that it was going to be appropriated by the extremists. No matter how much you may want a moderate position, no one is about to challenge religion directly. Politicians can't, won't do that. In a secular set up, the constitution & constitutional bodies can challenge any religious assertion giving secular, liberal politicians their space. In Pakistan, religion overwhelms everyone. Pakistan's former part was able to break away somewhat from the religious position because it was created on the basis of ethnicity, Pakistan will find that very difficult. Pakistan had a chance in the early ears to change that position somewhat but too many people messed up things. Once religion was brought in, it is very difficult to push it out.
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
A very nice satire on the confused state of Pakistani public & politicians.
Adiah AfrazSunday, November 03, 2013
From Print Edition
27 20 2 1
That Hakeemullah is dead is no laughing matter, but that we are a nation of cluelessness personified most definitely is – yet in a very sad kind of a way. And when I say we, I include myself in the picture too.
“Hakeemullah who?” is one standard question that people ask, especially when the death interrupts a cricket match. “Hakeemullah, the Taliban leader”, you try to educate the masses. “Which Taliban? The good ones or the bad ones?”... “Well, the bad ones I guess”... “What's a bad Taliban?”, you are challenged.... “What's a good Taliban?”, you counterchallenge.
The truth is, nobody knows. Yet we all try any way.
“The bad Taliban are those who kill Pakistanis in bomb blasts and then take responsibility for it”, you try to explain... “The good Taliban are those who are victims of drone attacks and have been forced to become Taliban”, you get the other definition... “Very smart”, you say, “please complete the definition. The good Taliban are those who are victims of drone attacks and...? And they do what?”
A little reflective pause. “And they do bomb blasts to show their anger” Eureka!! Very smart! “They do bomb blasts where? Where do they do these bomb blasts to show their anger? On the moon?”
“No, in Pakistan”. This with a sheepish reluctance.
“So what happens in those bomb blasts?”, you build the momentum. “People die”, you get the answer. “Which people?”, you goad. “Pakistani people, I guess”. “Yes. Good. Pakistani people, people like us. People who are just living their lives, who have no enemies, who go to work and send their children to school. They just die. They go out on routine matters but they come back dead because your good Taliban bomb them”.
“But people die in drone attacks too?”, comes a triumphant response. “People, Pakistani people who are normal people like us, only poorer. They have children who are normal children, only poorer, and they go out to live their normal lives and they come back dead.
“And then only Malala gets to become famous and write a book about it and gets all the attention and nobody even thinks about the 13-year-olds who get killed in drone attacks every day around here. Is that because they don't survive to write a book? And Afia Siddiqui is languishing in a jail and Syrian Muslims are in trouble and even minorities in India are suffering and our pseudo-liberals talk about a rape victim in Pakistan just to counterbalance the bad press that Indian rape incidents create, and to malign Pakistan and…”
“Hey, hey hey, time out buddy!”, you interrupt. “Easy hero. One thing at a time please. Let's keep it down a notch for a second and let's go back to step one. We were talking about Taliban remember? Let's go back there.”
“Ha! Gotcha! It's because you are pro-Malala. You don't want to talk about her because it would expose her”. “No, it's not that. I am just trying to deconstruct this argument”, you clarify. “Maybe I will lose in the end, but I want to know what exactly the problem is. So wanna start again? Ok, thanks.”
“So let's go back to where I say that the so-called ‘good Taliban’ do kill people in Pakistan and you say...” “But most of the times they don't kill and somebody else does”, you are interrupted.
“And how do you know this?”, you ask. ”Because the Taliban say so themselves”, you are told. “And how do you know they are telling the truth?”, you ask. “Because when they do kill they are honest enough to admit it. When they don't kill they say they didn't do it”.
“Ok, fair enough”, you say. “I believe you. But still they do kill, right? They might not kill all of the people all of the times but they do kill some of the people some of the times? Huh?”. “Yea I guess”, comes the reluctant reply. “So does that make them good Taliban or bad Taliban?”
A moment of silence.
“That makes them neither. That makes them angry. They are angry because they are being droned. The innocent children and young ones and old ones are being droned.”
“Who drones them?”, you ask. “America!” “So why do they kill us?” Slight pause. “Well they have to take out their anger somewhere”, a reluctant admission. “What if they take out their anger on you and your family one day, God forbid. Will you still call them good?”
“What if they drone you and your family one day? Would you still call them good drones?” “But I never called them good drones. We haven't even come to drones yet. We were only defining the good and the bad Taliban.”
“See, that's the problem. Liberals in this country don't want to talk about drones. When you talk about drones, they say we haven't come to drones yet. That is why the Muslims are going down. We are hypocrites”.
“Ok, thank you for the compliment. But please answer my question. If the good Taliban are angry at drones why do they kill us?”
Pause.
“Because they live in Pakistan and we are closer to them so they...”
Pause.
“Ok, I am going to ignore this and let you re-phrase your answer”, you take the magnanimous route.
“Well, Ok. These Taliban are not educated. They consider us part of the American coalition and consider us to be the ones to be droning them so they bomb us”.
“So does that make them good Taliban?”
“I don't know. It's not as simple as that”.
Pause.
“You tell, does that make them good drones?”
“I don't know. It's not as simple as that”.
Pause.
“Wanna go for coffee?”
“Yea, you?”
“Yea”.
Pause.
“So tell me, is Hakeemullah really dead or is this also a big fat lie like Osama bin Laden's death?”
The writer is a graduate student at the University of Oxford, and faculty member at LUMS.
Email: adiahafraz@gmail.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-212021-The-good-the-bad-and-the-clueless
Adiah AfrazSunday, November 03, 2013
From Print Edition
27 20 2 1
“Hakeemullah who?” is one standard question that people ask, especially when the death interrupts a cricket match. “Hakeemullah, the Taliban leader”, you try to educate the masses. “Which Taliban? The good ones or the bad ones?”... “Well, the bad ones I guess”... “What's a bad Taliban?”, you are challenged.... “What's a good Taliban?”, you counterchallenge.
The truth is, nobody knows. Yet we all try any way.
“The bad Taliban are those who kill Pakistanis in bomb blasts and then take responsibility for it”, you try to explain... “The good Taliban are those who are victims of drone attacks and have been forced to become Taliban”, you get the other definition... “Very smart”, you say, “please complete the definition. The good Taliban are those who are victims of drone attacks and...? And they do what?”
A little reflective pause. “And they do bomb blasts to show their anger” Eureka!! Very smart! “They do bomb blasts where? Where do they do these bomb blasts to show their anger? On the moon?”
“No, in Pakistan”. This with a sheepish reluctance.
“So what happens in those bomb blasts?”, you build the momentum. “People die”, you get the answer. “Which people?”, you goad. “Pakistani people, I guess”. “Yes. Good. Pakistani people, people like us. People who are just living their lives, who have no enemies, who go to work and send their children to school. They just die. They go out on routine matters but they come back dead because your good Taliban bomb them”.
“But people die in drone attacks too?”, comes a triumphant response. “People, Pakistani people who are normal people like us, only poorer. They have children who are normal children, only poorer, and they go out to live their normal lives and they come back dead.
“And then only Malala gets to become famous and write a book about it and gets all the attention and nobody even thinks about the 13-year-olds who get killed in drone attacks every day around here. Is that because they don't survive to write a book? And Afia Siddiqui is languishing in a jail and Syrian Muslims are in trouble and even minorities in India are suffering and our pseudo-liberals talk about a rape victim in Pakistan just to counterbalance the bad press that Indian rape incidents create, and to malign Pakistan and…”
“Hey, hey hey, time out buddy!”, you interrupt. “Easy hero. One thing at a time please. Let's keep it down a notch for a second and let's go back to step one. We were talking about Taliban remember? Let's go back there.”
“Ha! Gotcha! It's because you are pro-Malala. You don't want to talk about her because it would expose her”. “No, it's not that. I am just trying to deconstruct this argument”, you clarify. “Maybe I will lose in the end, but I want to know what exactly the problem is. So wanna start again? Ok, thanks.”
“So let's go back to where I say that the so-called ‘good Taliban’ do kill people in Pakistan and you say...” “But most of the times they don't kill and somebody else does”, you are interrupted.
“And how do you know this?”, you ask. ”Because the Taliban say so themselves”, you are told. “And how do you know they are telling the truth?”, you ask. “Because when they do kill they are honest enough to admit it. When they don't kill they say they didn't do it”.
“Ok, fair enough”, you say. “I believe you. But still they do kill, right? They might not kill all of the people all of the times but they do kill some of the people some of the times? Huh?”. “Yea I guess”, comes the reluctant reply. “So does that make them good Taliban or bad Taliban?”
A moment of silence.
“That makes them neither. That makes them angry. They are angry because they are being droned. The innocent children and young ones and old ones are being droned.”
“Who drones them?”, you ask. “America!” “So why do they kill us?” Slight pause. “Well they have to take out their anger somewhere”, a reluctant admission. “What if they take out their anger on you and your family one day, God forbid. Will you still call them good?”
“What if they drone you and your family one day? Would you still call them good drones?” “But I never called them good drones. We haven't even come to drones yet. We were only defining the good and the bad Taliban.”
“See, that's the problem. Liberals in this country don't want to talk about drones. When you talk about drones, they say we haven't come to drones yet. That is why the Muslims are going down. We are hypocrites”.
“Ok, thank you for the compliment. But please answer my question. If the good Taliban are angry at drones why do they kill us?”
Pause.
“Because they live in Pakistan and we are closer to them so they...”
Pause.
“Ok, I am going to ignore this and let you re-phrase your answer”, you take the magnanimous route.
“Well, Ok. These Taliban are not educated. They consider us part of the American coalition and consider us to be the ones to be droning them so they bomb us”.
“So does that make them good Taliban?”
“I don't know. It's not as simple as that”.
Pause.
“You tell, does that make them good drones?”
“I don't know. It's not as simple as that”.
Pause.
“Wanna go for coffee?”
“Yea, you?”
“Yea”.
Pause.
“So tell me, is Hakeemullah really dead or is this also a big fat lie like Osama bin Laden's death?”
The writer is a graduate student at the University of Oxford, and faculty member at LUMS.
Email: adiahafraz@gmail.com
http://www.thenews.com.pk/Todays-News-9-212021-The-good-the-bad-and-the-clueless
Israel seems to stand as a counter example to that, in that it was created for a religious group, but is far from being a theocracy or in danger of sliding towards one - in fact, in practice it is the most secular entity in that religion crazy neighbourghood.
But that is the only counter example I can think of. In all other non-secular countries, people find it very difficult to challenge the grip of religions. Maybe it depends on the nature of the religion in question - judaism doesn't seek to convert, and in fact discourages outsiders from becoming jews. When a religion believes itself to be the only truth appropriate for everybody, and that dogma is accepted as the state religion, it follows almost logically that anybody who challenges that religion is an enemy of the state. Which is why nation states and any other government ought to be secular, it is the only morally justifiable position for governments.
@jaibi : The title of this thread, and the wording of the accompanying poll, are very misleading. If the question is phrased as "peace or war", any sensible fellow would want peace, except people who don't know the horrors of war. But you are assuming that "peace" is an option - as things stand, it is not. What you are calling "peace" is actually capitulation, or at least partial capitulation to avoid an agonising and prolonged conflict. (Now that is acceptable in some situations, but not in this case, as I explain below):
Two reasons:
1) I find it hard to believe that once some sort of a deal is reached in a conference room, there would be peace and prosperity from the next day, and talib fighters would all discard their rifles and pick up sickles instead.
2) What is the price the state will have to pay? An assurance of no furter drone strikes? That is not within the pakistani state's control, they cannot prevent the USA from operating drones. Unless pakistanis want to make peace with the talibs and war with the USAF instead... The only other 'compromise' that the state can offer (since they can't offer a guarantee of stopping drones) is to withdraw from those regions, and let talibs rule the place and impose sharia. In other words, have a parallel govt. Do you really want to lose sovereignity over parts of your country? And equally importantly, do you want people in those regions living under their barbaric laws, with girls getting flogged by bearded brutes for flimsy reasons? (That happened in Swat when they ruled.) With an entire generation of Malalas unable to go to school?
These are the only two things the state can offer them. The former (stopping drones) is impossible, the latter (letting them establish their rule) is unthinkable. Or so it seems to me.
Now why is the state of pakistan finding itself in such a situation? Well, because you allowed armed groups to operate in the country. As simple as that. Only the state (the govt) should have a legitimate right to use force, except people exerting force in self defence. Only the state should have armed forces or militias. Once you allow "non state actors" to form armies (lashkars or mujahideens or whatever you call them), it is only a matter of time before they would want to start governing. The existence of armies not belonging to the state, should be viewed as a violation of sovereignity of the state. The pakistani state, far from viewing lashkars as a violation of their sole right to form armies, in fact encouraged and patronized a few such groups. That is the mistake that led the nation to this situation.
Anyway, not to dwell on the past or cast blame at this point, but the choice you have presented in this thread is a false choice. Even acknowledging the TTP's right to exist, is an acknowledgement of loss of sovereignity. There can be no "peace", unless by "peace" you mean giving up some parts of the country to these groups. Letting them establish their writ and their medeival laws in your provinces doesn't sound like peace to me - it sounds like surrender. So the question you should be asking is whether you want this war to continue, or you want to surrender some parts of pakistan, although not the whole of it. Asked that way, many people who have commented here and talked about wanting peace, would answer differently.
Last edited:
jaibi
SENIOR MODERATOR
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2012
- Messages
- 3,459
- Reaction score
- 108
- Country
- Location
Thanks for reading janon!
My original title was 'A Divided Nation Against a United Enemy' the latter part and the poll was not not really my idea. The purpose of this piece was to address the conflict Pakistanis feel in seeing the Talibs as enemies and the deep divisions they face in deciding what truly to do with them.
My original title was 'A Divided Nation Against a United Enemy' the latter part and the poll was not not really my idea. The purpose of this piece was to address the conflict Pakistanis feel in seeing the Talibs as enemies and the deep divisions they face in deciding what truly to do with them.
afriend
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2008
- Messages
- 1,501
- Reaction score
- 0
Fools with guns..are most dangerous..!! They are an illiterate bunch of people..!! There is no point in having discussions with them..!!! Over Powering them.. and reverse brainwashing with education is the only solution..!!! Then things will change..!!!
Similar threads
- Article
