Mullen & Kayani Attempt to Salvage US-Pak Relationship

[AAtish]

For the red part I believe Taliban and extremism has done far worse.

For the orange part, it's all collateral damage.

For the pink yes it is thanks to the U.S and also thanks to Zia and your leaders for supporting them. I've even seen pakistanis on this forum praising Zia as the victor of the Soviet breakup.

Don't get me wrong I'm an admirer of your posts. But I do feel that pakistan needs to own up to their responsibilities by getting rid of these goons. But it seems like isi has been playing a double game.

This is the reason we are asking Pakistan to PULL BACK from WoT.. cuz later on ppl who haven't done anything will be praised for SUCCESS and those who LOST EVERYTHING will be lost in history books.. they'll come just as "collateral damage"..

BTW, i understand you hatred against GENERAL ZIA-UL-HAQ Shaheed

 

[AAtish]

As long as they're taking out terrorist camps its fine. Something that GoP has failed to do.
Both U.S and pakistan have created the mess. It's about time they dismantle their "Frankenstein" they've created.

BAD NEWS FOR YOU.. people are starting to rise against Invaders.. and this nation is crazy.. so just keep an eye on how fast the US is gonna quite down and cease attacks now!

 

[|| |\| ||)) || /\\ |\|]

BAD NEWS FOR YOU.. people are starting to rise against Invaders.. and this nation is crazy.. so just keep an eye on how fast the US is gonna quite down and cease attacks now!

Ok I'll keep an eye

 

[SMC]

Reminds me of certain WMD claims the US made almost a decade ago.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

Azz.... since a decade u cant control kabul....... or find WMDs in iraq or stop insurgency n alqaeda in Iraq........... n finally ur govt is talking with taliban.............. n u blame ur failures on ur dad=Pakistan.......

 

[Majnun]

For the red part I believe Taliban and extremism has done far worse.

For the orange part, it's all collateral damage.

For the pink yes it is thanks to the U.S and also thanks to Zia and your leaders for supporting them. I've even seen pakistanis on this forum praising Zia as the victor of the Soviet breakup.

Don't get me wrong I'm an admirer of your posts. But I do feel that pakistan needs to own up to their responsibilities by getting rid of these goons. But it seems like isi has been playing a double game.

The Tehreek-e-Taliban and extremism were created by the US attacks. US attacks and murders turned people to that.
As far as Zia goes, whether he was responsible for the breakup of the Soviet Union or not, I do admire him, because, even if I don't agree with his ideology, I think he did some good for Pakistan, especially after Bhutto.
ISI has hedged its bets, nothing more, all secret services do, and now you can see why. As America prepares to turn Pakistan into another Cambodia, wouldn't you have hedged your bets, considering the history the US has?

 

[|| |\| ||)) || /\\ |\|]

The Tehreek-e-Taliban and extremism were created by the US attacks. US attacks and murders turned people to that.
As far as Zia goes, whether he was responsible for the breakup of the Soviet Union or not, I do admire him, because, even if I don't agree with his ideology, I think he did some good for Pakistan, especially after Bhutto.
ISI has hedged its bets, nothing more, all secret services do, and now you can see why. As America prepares to turn Pakistan into another Cambodia, wouldn't you have hedged your bets, considering the history the US has?

Absolutely. But let me ask you one thing, would you not mind having islamic extremism run through pakistan. For an example Sharia Law or say a government run by mullahs? It seems that is more of a threat.. and how do you suppose to get rid of such fanaticism?

 

[somebozo]

Did american suceed in dissolving talibans = NO
did they capture OBL or Mullah Omar = NO
They the suceed in war in Afghanistan = NO

so why make pakistan the scape goat when their own government admits defeat by calling taliban to talks?

 

[Majnun]

Absolutely. But let me ask you one thing, would you not mind having islamic extremism run through pakistan. For an example Sharia Law or say a government run by mullahs? It seems that is more of a threat.. and how do you suppose to get rid of such fanaticism?

I would definitely not like it. I am more in favour of a secular nationalist government in Pakistan. However, there are some points I would like to make.
Firstly, when any leader comes, when any party comes to power, you want to see the work they do, the ideology is least important. For example, I don't like the MQM or their ideology, but I have to admit they have done some good work recently in Karachi (and some bad).
Secondly, I don't blame Zia as much for Islamization in Pakistan as I do Bhutto. I believe that it was Bhutto who started the trend and, by the time Bhutto left, the trend would have been difficult to stop for any leader, whether a Zia-type or an Ayub Khan-type.
Thirdly, with regards to getting rid of such fanaticism, several steps. One, building more schools and improving the schools Pakistan already has and making sure they are functioning properly. In my view, Imran's college is a much greater contribution to Pakistan than his hopital, because schools nurture minds, they give the youth a base to think from, and that base is permanent. Secondly, US drone attacks must stop, that is radicalizing society faster than anything, and I cannot blame those who are turning to the militants. After that, an Ayub Khan-style government, I think, would do to reign in the mullahs by any method.
Lastly, I would not want the picture you painted to occur, but, something I would be even more against, is America constantly invading Pakistan and killing civilians with impunity.

 

[Pak_Sher]

US and NATO military failures and defeat cannot be blamed on Pakistan. All the Baloch terrorists are training under the US umbrella in Afghanistan, so US is the biggest terror trainer in this game.

 

[53fd]

I suggest he comes out with the proof (in public) implicating the ISI in its alleged relationship with the Haqqani network, just like the ISI exposed the covert activities of the CIA agent Raymond Davis inside Pakistan to the world. Something tells me he does not have anything to convict the ISI.

Seems like a lot of sour grapes from Mullen, to deflect the criticism the AfPak war & the CIA is getting.

 

[53fd]

The key word here is 'accused'

 

[Guest01]

The key word here is 'accused'

It is human nature to take positives out of everything. But in my view the key words are, "both walk away from this relationship at their owm peril". That is as plain a threat as could be and I am sure that this coming from Mullen, who is the mildest of all US foreign policy individuals involved with Pakistan, and that too on the pakistani soil, Kiyani will get the message that this rhetoric has run the course and there will not be more pennies on the table. It is now time to accept blood money like Davis situation and get back on programmed course. US has had enough jingoism for the day I guess.

 

[53fd]

It is human nature to take positives out of everything. But in my view the key words are, "both walk away from this relationship at their owm peril". That is as plain a threat as could be and I am sure that this coming from Mullen, who is the mildest of all US foreign policy individuals involved with Pakistan, and that too on the pakistani soil, Kiyani will get the message that this rhetoric has run the course and there will not be more pennies on the table. It is now time to accept blood money like Davis situation and get back on programmed course. US has had enough jingoism for the day I guess.

Not really, seems like sour grapes from Mullen to deflect the criticism the AfPak war, especially with how the war is faring & the covert activities of CIA agent Raymond Davis being exposed by the ISI.

 

[Guest01]

Not really, seems like sour grapes from Mullen to deflect the criticism the AfPak war, especially with how the war is faring & the covert activities of CIA agent Raymond Davis being exposed by the ISI.

I respect what your point of view is, however we need to understand that the only entity that is important in this equation is US and the messsage of what they think is clear from what Adm. Mullen has articulated. Regarding if CIA is the villain or is it ISI, then none of the agencies have their hands clean. Considering rana's and headly?s statement, let us not claim sainthood on this for any agency.