Pakistan Army - All is not well

[srsrsr]

.yeah righh you're gonna fight your wars from call center.Hi, This is Peter I am fighting Against Pakistan Army and Pakistan.

inspite of hurting my Indian pride, this comment made me laugh. Good humourous one

 

[Javed3]

The US has to leave Afghanistan some day; even the mightiest power on earth cannot afford the financial drain for ever.

Karzai will simply pick his bags and catch the next flight to the US to develop his restaurant business more.

Northern Alliance and Taliban will have to slug it out to gain Takht-e-Kabul. Whoever wins will spell big time trouble for Pakistan.

 

[Solomon2]

All-Green, your wise words have cooled my heart, a little. Thank you.

You assess the situation and tell me what kind of a stupid agency you think ISI to be, if it plans such an outrageous attack at a time when Pakistan is in a critical battle with the terrorist horde?

At the time the newly-installed civilian government was trying to take firmer control of the ISI. That would have involved dismissing or at least reorganizing personnel. The Mumbai attacks created a situation where war with India was portrayed as imminent. I'm sure that had the effect of halting ISI reform in its tracks, at least for a while. That, I think, was the purpose of the Mumbai attacks.

(An alternate story that started making the rounds of the D.C. rumor mill last year was that it did indeed start out as an ISI operation but degenerated into a terror attack on civilians once the reigns were given to the LeT leadership. I don't put much faith in it, but it does have the advantage of providing sufficient "cover" so Pakistani officials can still be invited to diplomatic receptions.)

If you don't think that Pakistani bureaucrats would stoop to murdering innocent Indians just to keep their jobs, then I think you don't know the history of Pakistan very well. How many times was there a coup, or nullified election, or extended war because somebody didn't want to step down from power? A lot. This act may have been carried out in the same spirit.

Perhaps the most amazing thing about America has been the willingness of its leaders to leave power - and the refusal of the populace to contemplate anything other than the law of the land for the succession of power. It is a test of both country and character.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

Solomon2,

Any innocent life lost is something tragic and most regrettable.
There is genuine sympathy for the innocents but human mind always comes up with many thoughts and arguments.

The us versus them argument usually prompts one into thinking that their innocent is not the same as our innocent.
To some extent this is true since an Israeli citizen killed as opposed to a Palestinian citizen killed will not at all invoke the same sentiments from across the globe, leaving the two main parties aside.
It is because once you are detached from some party, the chances are that you shall not feel much sympathy for their loss, especially if an established prejudice already exists against the victims in your heart.
This is why we see so much hate in this world.

However i have seen that once you know a person regardless of a difference in religion, nationality, creed etc. their untimely death will be a tragedy in your mind.

The reality is that any innocent life lost in any part of the world is the same loss really.
Just a different name, ethnicity and religion but a human being nonetheless sent into this world by Allah.

I am sure H2O3C4Nitrogen did not mean any offense to Jews, i think he can better explain himself to you via PM.

His main argument is that India will do unto Pakistanis what it can never do unto its own and vice versa...so to demonize ISI and RAW has been the norm of this region.

You assess the situation and tell me what kind of a stupid agency you think ISI to be, if it plans such an outrageous attack at a time when Pakistan is in a critical battle with the terrorist horde?
We already are the much smaller army, however after the FATA and Swat operations the disparity on eastern front is even more evident.
The attack gained naught for Pakistan in any way possible, it made us further insecure and at risk.

Makes no sense for ISI to plan such an operation using people from Pakistan, it was downright stupid and bizarre to say the least, this was not the work of a covert agency but a deliberate effort to fuel the fires of war.
When there are so many rebel and militant groups in India, why would ISI not act through them even if we consider that there was anything to gain by such terrorist attacks (which i consider rubbish)?
I see no logic to implicate ISI in this attack, except the traditional mistrust and enmity playing its part.

What I see is a clever ploy by Al Qaeda and its allies to ensure that Pakistan Army is diverted and even a war is started which shall be heaven sent to these extremists as an Indo Pak war will give them much more space and chances of infiltrating the entire subcontinent.

I dont have any hatered against jews, but due to the fact that our respected fellow PDF member Solomon2 do not even hesitates to defend Israeli raid which killed alot of innocent Palestinian Women and Childeren and then yet again even knowing the fact that there are alot of twists in the Mumbai Incident, he openly and always tend to exploit things which could some how land the ultimate Picture of Pakistan being the culprit.
I have tracked Solmon2 for quite a while on PDF during many discussions and i had came to a conclusion that guys like him come here with predefined mindset and totally anti-Pakistan POV being burned permanently in their memory and they dont want to let it go for some reason i dont know why, and thus find futile to argue with them..
Again i dont have any grudge against Jews,And i am Personally More than Apologetic to anyone and especially Solmon2 and dont shy away for accepting the bad from my Part which might have offended anybody. And i am more than thankful to you AllGreen for clearing things up.
The Apologies are all mine...!!!

 

[Solomon2]

due to the fact that our respected fellow PDF member Solomon2 do not even hesitates to defend Israeli raid which killed alot of innocent Palestinian Women and Childeren -

Because many such raids are, indeed, entirely defensible. Especially the 2008-9 operation to clear out Hamas' rocket-launchers. If you insist upon applying the "Lord Jim" standard - that not one innocent must die due to a mistake in judgment or as a result of actions to defend a community, upon pain of death - then (1) you should apply it universally, not just to Jews, and (2) you automatically empower terrorists of every stripe that they are in the right as long as they can employ civilians as human shields.

No army on Earth accepts such a standard, though Israel takes great care in its operations to avoid human casualties. The operation was long delayed for that reason; yet the Israelis couldn't let the list of their own casualties continue to grow longer, nor permit Hamas to bombard areas to halt people's activities.

You knew a great deal about some of what happened in Gaza because of the presence of reporters Israel permitted to enter but were restrained by the Arabs from reporting accurately. I learned in science lab that one can view and measure things with great precision, but that was no guarantee of accuracy. You need calibration to be accurate - knowledge of context. And that context is what is missing.

even knowing the fact that there are alot of twists in the Mumbai Incident, he openly and always tend to exploit things which could some how land the ultimate Picture of Pakistan being the culprit -

Is that true?

...anti-Pakistan POV being burned permanently in their memory and they dont want to let it go for some reason i dont know why-

There are some parts of some Pakistanis' psyche that I don't like. Not only is Pakistan diverse, but - and this seems unique to me - many of its groups take up arms to pursue their own ends, both inside and outside the country, either with the blessing of the state or without. Some Pakistanis are trying to control that. So what Pakistan is is part of Pakistan's struggle right now. All is not well, and not just in the Army; your souls are at stake.

and thus find [it] futile to argue with them..

if your argument can't be sustained, why not agree with the person you are arguing with instead?

 

[mehru]

The problem is trhat there are a few elements within the army who support these militants.For instance the attack on the military headquaters was planned by a army doctor.

There is a possibility of taliban sympathizers in army but the question is are they still serving army or not? In my opinion, not anymore. In the past, they were in majority.
Dr. Usman was an ex-army doctor who later on joined terrorists groups and was not a serving employee by the time he attacked GHQ. So the example you gave to support your argument is wrong. Currently we don't know any serving army person who is supporting taliban.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

At the time the newly-installed civilian government was trying to take firmer control of the ISI. That would have involved dismissing or at least reorganizing personnel. The Mumbai attacks created a situation where war with India was portrayed as imminent. I'm sure that had the effect of halting ISI reform in its tracks, at least for a while. That, I think, was the purpose of the Mumbai attacks.

(An alternate story that started making the rounds of the D.C. rumor mill last year was that it did indeed start out as an ISI operation but degenerated into a terror attack on civilians once the reigns were given to the LeT leadership. I don't put much faith in it, but it does have the advantage of providing sufficient "cover" so Pakistani officials can still be invited to diplomatic receptions.)

If you don't think that Pakistani bureaucrats would stoop to murdering innocent Indians just to keep their jobs, then I think you don't know the history (if you do then please please share with us, We all will be Enlightened) of Pakistan very well. How many times was there a coup, or nullified election, or extended war because somebody didn't want to step down from power? A lot. This act may have been carried out in the same spirit.

Perhaps the most amazing thing about America has been the willingness of its leaders to leave power -(Yup i have great respect for Elgore, He realy steped down ) and the refusal of the populace to contemplate anything other than the law of the land for the succession of power. It is a test of both country and character.

I really want to thank you for giving ISI such high respect, It appears that ISI consumes much of the time which you devote for BrainStorming .
I have brained stormed some great ideas regarding the American Engagements of Both Iraq & Afghanistan and Pakistan & India, but reluctant to share em, becouse that wont make me any different than you.
I will again thankyou for devoting much of your thoughts for ISI .

Epic isnt it.

 

[Solomon2]

Brainstorming isn't just about generating ideas, but evaluating and filtering them. If facts are sought for yet not found that would nullify a hypothetical, than I see no problem with taking that line of thought seriously.

Yet your point is valid: that doesn't mean the line of reasoning is true. At best, it merely means that given lack of contradictory information and based on prejudices from education and experience I've come up with what I consider the most sensible explanation.

At worst, people who brainstorm may simply conclude that invisible pink flamingoes are to blame for the world's ills.

 

[T-Faz]

Brainstorming isn't just about generating ideas, but evaluating and filtering them. If facts are sought for yet not found that would nullify a hypothetical, than I see no problem with taking that line of thought seriously.

Yet your point is valid: that doesn't mean the line of reasoning is true. At best, it merely means that given lack of contradictory information and based on prejudices from education and experience I've come up with what I consider the most sensible explanation.

At worst, people who brainstorm may simply conclude that invisible pink flamingoes are to blame for the world's ills.

Solomon I provided you with proof of US support for the Taliban and you have not replied to it, why is that. You held a completely different view and I provided you with conclusive proof that US had a role in getting Taliban to power.

I want to hear your comments on this matter.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

At the time the newly-installed civilian government was trying to take firmer control of the ISI. That would have involved dismissing or at least reorganizing personnel. The Mumbai attacks created a situation where war with India was portrayed as imminent. I'm sure that had the effect of halting ISI reform in its tracks, at least for a while. That, I think, was the purpose of the Mumbai attacks.

(An alternate story that started making the rounds of the D.C. rumor mill last year was that it did indeed start out as an ISI operation but degenerated into a terror attack on civilians once the reigns were given to the LeT leadership. I don't put much faith in it, but it does have the advantage of providing sufficient "cover" so Pakistani officials can still be invited to diplomatic receptions.)

All of this is, as you yourself pointed out, rumor mongering, not unlike the 'CIA and/or Mossad did 911' rumors out there.

If you don't think that Pakistani bureaucrats would stoop to murdering innocent Indians just to keep their jobs, then I think you don't know the history of Pakistan very well. How many times was there a coup, or nullified election, or extended war because somebody didn't want to step down from power? A lot. This act may have been carried out in the same spirit.

The only 'murderer of innocents' that I can think off is Zia-ul-Haq, who hung Bhutto.

Aside from that the wars that have taken place were not initiated by a particular individual/entity/institution because he/she/it/they wanted to retain power or capture it.

1947, a tribal invasion launched because of the Maharajah's persecution of Kashmiris fighting against dictatorship not sparked by an intra-Pakistan power struggle.

1965, a war after a Pakistani covert bid to instigate a rebellion against Indian occupation failed, not sparked by an intra-Pakistan power struggle.

1971, a war after successful covert Indian support for rebels/terrorists in East Pakistan, and mismanagement of East Pakistan affairs by the GoP.

1984, Siachen conflict initiated by Indian occupation of glacier.

1999, Kargil conflict initiated by Pakistani occupation of Kargil heights - power struggle arose because of the Kargil conflict, the conflict was not the result of a power struggle.

So I think it is pretty clear that your arguments calling Pakistani leaders bloodthirsty and capable of terrorism and starting wars for the sake of war have absolutely no basis, and your entire analysis is delusional.

Perhaps the most amazing thing about America has been the willingness of its leaders to leave power - and the refusal of the populace to contemplate anything other than the law of the land for the succession of power. It is a test of both country and character.

Agreed to a degree there.

 

[Solomon2]

Solomon I provided you with proof of US support for the Taliban and you have not replied to it, why is that. You held a completely different view and I provided you with conclusive proof that US had a role in getting Taliban to power.

I want to hear your comments on this matter.

It's OT, but with AM's indulgence I'll tackle it...

Hmm. Not #40 or #41. #59 alleges U.S. support but actually describes support by Pakistan and interest - not control or direction - by Unocal. Was this in some other thread and I missed it?

 

[Solomon2]

AM, the euphemism, "mismanagement of East Pakistan affairs" hides an awful lot. And in 1965, no matter how you think it started, the war was unnecessarily extended by Pakistan, which Bhutto at the time claimed would keep fighting (even though it was losing on the ground) as long as it kept receiving armaments. (Good thing the U.S. cut Pakistan off.)

Far from my "arguments calling Pakistani leaders bloodthirsty and capable of terrorism and starting wars for the sake of war" having "absolutely no basis" these matters are confirmed in the declassified diplomatic cables of the U.S. State Dept of 1965, and even more by the records of 1971. (This time I'll leave it for you to Google the links.)

 

[toxic_pus]

The only 'murderer of innocents' that I can think off is Zia-ul-Haq, who hung Bhutto.

Aside from that the wars that have taken place were not initiated by a particular individual/entity/institution because he/she/it/they wanted to retain power or capture it.

1947, a tribal invasion launched because of the Maharajah's persecution of Kashmiris fighting against dictatorship not sparked by an intra-Pakistan power struggle.

1965, a war after a Pakistani covert bid to instigate a rebellion against Indian occupation failed, not sparked by an intra-Pakistan power struggle.

1971, a war after successful covert Indian support for rebels/terrorists in East Pakistan, and mismanagement of East Pakistan affairs by the GoP.

1984, Siachen conflict initiated by Indian occupation of glacier.

1999, Kargil conflict initiated by Pakistani occupation of Kargil heights - power struggle arose because of the Kargil conflict, the conflict was not the result of a power struggle.

So I think it is pretty clear that your arguments calling Pakistani leaders bloodthirsty and capable of terrorism and starting wars for the sake of war have absolutely no basis, and your entire analysis is delusional.

1947; tribal invasion was a result of internal power struggle within Pakistan’s polity. Akbar Khan’s Raiders in Kashmir says as much. Maharaja’s ‘persecution’ was an excuse, a perfect one at that.

1965; resulted because Ayub Khan, already intoxicated by his sense of Pakistani supremacy over the ‘Hindu’ Indians, wanted to steal a march on Bhutto, who constantly accused Ayub of letting go of an opportunity to militarily settle Kashmir, in the wake of India’s defeat in the hands of China.

1971; less said, the better. As Solomon correctly pointed out, ‘mismanagement of East Pakistan affairs by the GoP’ is a gross understatement.

1984, Siachen; Musharraf in his biography, In The Line of Fire (pg 68 – 69), makes it appear that it was a case of faulty planning on the part of PA that India won the race.

‘At general headquarters (GHQ) we began planning to occupy the passes on the watershed of the Saltoro Range that dominated the Siachen Glacier. [……] The key decision was when to occupy the passes. Time was critical because we assumed that the Indians would try to occupy the same passes, now that they already knew that our SSG team had crossed into the glacier from the Saltoro Range. We suggested early March, to ensure that our forces got to the passes first, just as the worst of winter had passed. We were opposed by the general officer commanding the Northern Areas, who had jurisdiction over this area. He felt that the harshness of the terrain, and the low temperatures, would not allow our troops to reach there in March. He proposed May 1 instead. His opinion prevailed, because he was the commander on the spot. This proved to be a mistake: when we went there we found the Indians already in occupation of most of the dominating features on the Saltro Range, beyond the Siachen Glacier.’

Hardly a case of ‘conflict initiated by Indian occupation of the glacier’. I would however agree that it was not due to any power struggle within Pakistan.

Here is something interesting from Tarek Fatah [Chasing A Mirage: A Tragic Illusion Of An Islamic State; pg 31-32].

‘In the summer of 1947, one week after swearing in his new prime minister and cabinet, and as Pakistanis were celebrating their first Eid-ul-Fitr holiday after Ramadan, Jinnah broke another sacred principle of democracy. He dismissed the duly elected provincial government in the North West Frontier Province (NWFP), which borders Afghanistan. Dr. Khan Sahib, the chief minister of the province, had a comfortable majority. Jinnah installed his own party as the government, but when it failed to get a vote of confidence, he arranged to have all the dismissed members arrested, creating an artificial majority. [……] Nine months after dismissing the NWFP government, Jinnah demonstrated his arbitrary power again. This time he dismissed the government in the province of Sind, which belonged to his own party, the Muslim League. And as if this were not enough, the ailing leader of Pakistan then tried to stage a palace coup inside the provincial government of Punjab. In less than a year of the nation’s existence, the man who had created Pakistan as a democratic state for the Muslims of India had gone against the grain of democracy, invoked Islam to bring discipline among those who protested, and mere weeks before he passed away, declared to the country’s majority Bengali population that their language was not worthy of being the nation’s national language as it was not a “Muslim” language.

[……]

If the Father of the Nation had set the precedent of arbitrary rule, who would dare stand in the way?’

 

[asq]

A version of Pakistani wars by an Israeli and by an Indian, both adversries of Pakistan, what would one expect from them.

toxic_pus U talk about Tarek fateh. who is he, he lives in Toronto and is vhiamently against anything Islam/pakistani, him being Anti Pakistan is the key about his writings about Jinnah, I wll not give a zilch about his deductions as he is anti pakistan.

Notation out of his book about war operation proceedure at Kargil by Gen. Myshy, u.r. diverting the facts about what was the cause of war, it was occupation of siachan by Indian Army.

1965 war came after Run of kuch fight when Pakistan wisely took this case to Interantional arbitrations and won. But India attacked Lahore without any justifications and that is how 1965 war started.

there was no Internal power strugla in pakistan in 1947/48 u r spaculating, a usual India spin.

1971 there was no Mismanagement by any Pakistani leader, there was interferance in Internal affiars of pakistan by India, India was training mukti for saveral years prior to the 1971 war and deduction by an Israeli is a deduction of an adversary who is by virtue of his many posts shows his true colors and is an anti Islam and anti Pakistan.

so i will sugest to u to stop this concocted spaculative anti pakistan rhetric and try to post something based on facts acceptable for their rationality and truthfull values.

 

[asq]

AM, the euphemism, "mismanagement of East Pakistan affairs" hides an awful lot. And in 1965, no matter how you think it started, the war was unnecessarily extended by Pakistan, which Bhutto at the time claimed would keep fighting (even though it was losing on the ground) as long as it kept receiving armaments. (Good thing the U.S. cut Pakistan off.)

Far from my "arguments calling Pakistani leaders bloodthirsty and capable of terrorism and starting wars for the sake of war" having "absolutely no basis" these matters are confirmed in the declassified diplomatic cables of the U.S. State Dept of 1965, and even more by the records of 1971. (This time I'll leave it for you to Google the links.)

The deduction by other than Pakistanis is that, just a deduction, real meckoy is from the one who went through it.

American deduction are based on their concept of Islam, pakistan and India.

Pakistan was in it, so noone knows better than Pakistan as to what realy happened.