Debating Liberal Fascism

[S-2]

"...The latter are those 'liberal' Pakistanis who advocate and justify foreign military interventions on Pakistani territory, whether it be drone strikes or ground raids."

Drone strikes have been accepted by your state when converging with your interests. They remain the least intrusive means of self-defense that America possesses in light of Pakistan's selective abdication of sovereign authority over its lands. You surrendered your prerogative there when permitting the Afghan taliban access to FATAville and, in the process, permitting the enslavement of those FATA citizens under the thumb of these heinous beasts.

This is a critical point IMV and can't be emphasized enough. With the claim of sovereign authority comes the responsibility for sovereign control. In freely abdicating your sovereign authority to the Afghan taliban government escounced in FATAville and Balochistan you've opened the way to justifiable self-defense.

Many of your own citizens fully understand such.

Our raid on OBL was justified. I'm rather confident that specific possible target has long been discussed in detail between U.S. and Pakistani authorities. No doubt your government was fully aware of what we'd do should OBL be found. He was.

It's enough that we permitted his escape into Pakistan. No American would tolerate an American president permitting a second such escape. It's my opinion we'd have conducted that operation anywhere in the world-Great Britain, Russia-even the PRC were he located in any of those places.

He wasn't. It was Pakistan. We'd long said as much so this raid should come as no surprise.

Would we do so again? I'm unsure. Maybe Zawahiri. Maybe not. Precedent set? Unlikely. India undoubtedly understands a salient difference or two between themselves and America.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"...The latter are those 'liberal' Pakistanis who advocate and justify foreign military interventions on Pakistani territory, whether it be drone strikes or ground raids."

Drone strikes have been accepted by your state when converging with your interests. They remain the least intrusive means of self-defense that America possesses in light of Pakistan's selective abdication of sovereign authority over its lands. You surrendered your prerogative there when permitting the Afghan taliban access to FATAville and, in the process, permitting the enslavement of those FATA citizens under the thumb of these heinous beasts.

This is a critical point IMV and can't be emphasized enough. With the claim of sovereign authority comes the responsibility for sovereign control. In freely abdicating your sovereign authority to the Afghan taliban government escounced in FATAville and Balochistan you've opened the way to justifiable self-defense.

Many of your own citizens fully understand such.

Our raid on OBL was justified. I'm rather confident that specific possible target has long been discussed in detail between U.S. and Pakistani authorities. No doubt your government was fully aware of what we'd do should OBL be found. He was.

It's enough that we permitted his escape into Pakistan. No American would tolerate an American president permitting a second such escape. It's my opinion we'd have conducted that operation anywhere in the world-Great Britain, Russia-even the PRC were he located in any of those places.

He wasn't. It was Pakistan. We'd long said as much so this raid should come as no surprise.

Would we do so again? I'm unsure. Maybe Zawahiri. Maybe not. Precedent set? Unlikely. India undoubtedly understands a salient difference or two between themselves and America.

Neither drone attacks nor ground raids, including the one to get Osama, are officially supported by the GoP or the Military. They are both also strongly opposed by a significant majority of Pakistanis. As such, both drone attacks and ground troops operating in Pakistan without Pakistani authorization are acts of foreign aggression, and support/justification for them will not be tolerated on this forum, nor should it be tolerated in the Pakistani media or Pakistan.

They are acts of treason, as are those by terrorists.

 

[desioptimist]

In an atmosphere dominated by extremist views(which is decidedly rightwing) a liberal view would sound extreme.

But I would say it is better to allow people to debate and give their view and opinions here.

Act of treson is a favourite tool to silence the critics of govt.

But under indian law, a thought or vocalization of it does no amount to acts of treson, no matter how inflammatory and wrong it may be
Only direct involvement in anti state activity can be considered so.

Hence the charge does not stick with Mr Sen or Ms Roy no matter what majority thinks.

Dont know about pakistani law.

I would even suggest that you should allow supporter of terrorism to write their views here, it helps in understanding other's position.
If you cant speak your mind in an anonymous forum, where will you then?

 

[VCheng]

.........., both drone attacks and ground troops operating in Pakistan without Pakistani authorization are acts of foreign aggression, and support/justification for them will not be tolerated on this forum, nor should it be tolerated in the Pakistani media or Pakistan. ........

AM, can you please explain what your comment in bold means, so that I may censor, if needed, my expressions accordingly, BEFORE there is a problem. Thanks!

 

[RabzonKhan]

Before you “delete” this thread……..AgNoStIc MuSliM would you like to explain this?

On June 24, 2009, 80 terrorists were killed in two separate attacks by US DRONE, and this is what you wrote:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistans-war/28687-80-die-drones-hit-baitullah-s-hideouts.html
Well well, I am actually becoming cautiously optimistic that our relationship with the US and cooperation in this war against the Taliban might actually become productive and mutually beneficial….

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...ones-hit-baitullah-s-hideouts.html#post407238

“killing six militants, including senior Taliban commander Khwaz Ali. Khwaz Ali was said to be one of Baitullah Mehsud’s close and trusted commanders...

...Some reports said dreaded militant commander and master-trainer of suicide bombers Qari Hussain and prominent Afghan Taliban commander Maulvi Sangeen were also killed in the missile attack."

Oh hell yes - I hope the latter two are confirmed dead as well, though the account from a militant source in the article debunks the claim that Qari Hussain was killed.

Nonetheless, a significant strike.

THANK YOU USA!

 

[Jigs]

Neither drone attacks nor ground raids, including the one to get Osama, are officially supported by the GoP or the Military. They are both also strongly opposed by a significant majority of Pakistanis. As such, both drone attacks and ground troops operating in Pakistan without Pakistani authorization are acts of foreign aggression, and support/justification for them will not be tolerated on this forum, nor should it be tolerated in the Pakistani media or Pakistan.

They are acts of treason, as are those by terrorists.

Will not be tolerated. Well that is understandable. Of course i also take it the terrorist supporter that has been posting on a number of threads who has been reported by multiple members won't as well ? Double standards brings zero credibility if in turn no action is being taken.

 

[Elmo]

Let's have an entirely original debate on "liberal fascism"... have moved the relevant posts from the previous thread where it was started.

Let's all remain civil and not make this a slugfest.

 

[Developereo]

Pakistan's selective abdication of sovereign authority over its lands. You surrendered your prerogative there when permitting the Afghan taliban access to FATAville and, in the process, permitting the enslavement of those FATA citizens under the thumb of these heinous beasts.

I think most Pakistanis would agree with you that this abdication of sovereignty is a failure of the Pakistani government. We are even more angry than you are at the resulting cancer of extremism and gun culture that has spread throughout the country. However, the proper response is to hold the GOP accountable and pressure them to exercise sovereignty over all our lands. The proper response is NOT to cheer on as foreign planes bombs our lands, while callously ignoring the civilians killed in the crossfire.

America will do what America deems appropriate in its national interests, but there is no reason for Pakistanis to support it. The argument that drones also kill TTP and other terrorists targetting Pakistan is flawed because these same terrorists, including BLA, find sanctuary in Afghanistan. If America is not a true partner in anti-terrorism, how can it lecture Pakistan on it?

 

[Kashmiripandit2]

The term that is quoted in the title is pretty contradictory in terms of usage. How can a fascist be liberal or vice versa? I think you mean far-liberalism where all values are ignored and other concepts and cultures are allowed to tread all over your own.

But from my point, I don't think this is the problem Pakistan is facing. In fact, it is in the opposite direction of what this thread is debating. Just my input.

 

[VCheng]

Let's have an entirely original debate on "liberal fascism"... have moved the relevant posts from the previous thread where it was started.

Let's all remain civil and not make this a slugfest.

I am up for it, providing the chest thumpers from both sides are kept in check!

I think most Pakistanis would agree with you that this abdication of sovereignty is a failure of the Pakistani government. We are even more angry than you are at the resulting cancer of extremism and gun culture that has spread throughout the country. However, the proper response is to hold the GOP accountable and pressure them to exercise sovereignty over all our lands. The proper response is NOT to cheer on as foreign planes bombs our lands, while callously ignoring the civilians killed in the crossfire.

America will do what America deems appropriate in its national interests, but there is no reason for Pakistanis to support it. The argument that drones also kill TTP and other terrorists targetting Pakistan is flawed because these same terrorists, including BLA, find sanctuary in Afghanistan. If America is not a true partner in anti-terrorism, how can it lecture Pakistan on it?

I think it is important to realise that Pakistan and its people have the same right to pursue thier national interests just as much as any other state including the US.

The problem is far deeper than a failure of government leading to an abdication of sovereignty.

The whole society has been hijacked and being led down a path of extremism that is pulling in countires like the US and India by virtue of exporting its virulent ideologies. Failure to deal with these elements by Pakistani institutions is making the case for foreign interventions, direct and indirect.

It is simple: Either the Paksitanis clean up their own house, or others must do it. There is no third way.

 

[Developereo]

I think it is important to realise that Pakistan and its people have the same right to pursue thier national interests just as much as any other state including the US.

This is the problem: the US hasn't come to grips with this reality.

It's safe to assume that the Pakistani establishment is nurturing these jihadis for two fronts: Kashmir and Afghanistan. Leaving Kashmir aside, let's focus on Afghanistan. If the US had acknowledged the reality that Pakistan has a legitimate national interest in preventing Afghanistan from becoming an Indian poodle (yet again), they would have worked with Pakistan to address our legitimate concerns. If Pakistan felt confident about the future of Afghanistan, it would have worked more closely with the US, and there would have been no need for plan B with the Taliban. Instead, the US did the exact opposite: they practically gave India a blank check to come in do their dirty work in Balochistan and elsewhere. This was in line with their strategy to help India dominate the region.

Simply speaking, the Americans let their China obsession cross paths with their war on terror. In the process, they alienated Pakistan.

 

[Rig Vedic]

Instead, the US did the exact opposite: they practically gave India a blank check to come in do their dirty work in Balochistan and elsewhere.

That is a Pakistani allegation, not grounded in reality. What Pakistan wants is a pliant Afghanistan which can be used for "strategic depth" or whatever. When the Taliban were in power, the LeT used to run its camps on Afghan soil.

Once Pakistan accepts that Afghans have a right to full sovereignty, including friendly relations with any country, then progress can be made.

 

[T-Faz]

Lets define the words that have been oddly put together to create this term called 'Liberal Fascism'.

Liberal: open to new behavior or opinions and willing to discard : favorable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms.

Fascism: extreme right-wing, authoritarian, or intolerant views or practice.

How can an individual be open to new behavior, opinion and willing to accommodate change while also being intrinsically intolerant and authoritarian in their views?

Such verbiage is the product of confused radicalism and/or blind patriotism. The creation of such lies in the intolerance and authoritarian practices of its creators, the Islamists, who cannot stand to hear the other side. The imposition and use of this term is example of the fascist nature of Islamists who want to keep the populace wary and away from liberal practices.

While the people who have invented such terms are accusing liberals of inviting others to attack this nation, it is former group which has allowed such attacks to happen while they curse and slander the liberals who have always stood against any foreign attacks on this country.

 

[Developereo]

That is a Pakistani allegation, not grounded in reality. What Pakistan wants is a pliant Afghanistan which can be used for "strategic depth" or whatever. When the Taliban were in power, the LeT used to run its camps on Afghan soil.

Once Pakistan accepts that Afghans have a right to full sovereignty, including friendly relations with any country, then progress can be made.

This discussion is getting off-topic, so I have continued it in this other thread.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakist...tegy-afghanistan-pakistan-23.html#post1737859

 

[toxic_pus]

It's safe to assume that the Pakistani establishment is nurturing these jihadis for two fronts: Kashmir and Afghanistan. Leaving Kashmir aside, let's focus on Afghanistan. If the US had acknowledged the reality that Pakistan has a legitimate national interest in preventing Afghanistan from becoming an Indian poodle (yet again), they would have worked with Pakistan to address our legitimate concerns. If Pakistan felt confident about the future of Afghanistan, it would have worked more closely with the US, and there would have been no need for plan B with the Taliban. Instead, the US did the exact opposite: they practically gave India a blank check to come in do their dirty work in Balochistan and elsewhere. This was in line with their strategy to help India dominate the region.

This the famous Pakistani sense of entitlement in display. Other than that, this is a specious argument. What matters in Afghanistan is Afghanistan's interest. Nothing else.

As with India doing a dirty work in Balochistan, it is a convenient bogeyman that your leadership has set up as an apology for its own nefarious activities in Afghanistan.

PS: Sorry for the OT.