Should ISI be helping India?

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Allow me to compliment you in vainly trying to defend a poor situation ( reinforcing a failure..in military parlance).

A head of state does not use such language unless he has something to hide. Just coz Pak army is incapable of handling probs within the state, it hands over / allows outsiders to knock its own citizens !!.. and then outwardly shows resentment at it & even makes threatening noises !!!

This is getting curiouser & curiouser !!

Move in a slow fashion ? The last image I saw was the use of attack helicopters & field artillery inside the W borders of Pak by the pak army. How much faster can it get unless nuking them is what the Pak army considers as fast.

I notice you too have begun to use " possibly".

Dont know what time it is in ur part of the world but its late here.. so we'll live to fight another day ?

My goodness - we are just reaching for heights of absurdity now.

Explain to me why a head of state cannot use the word 'possibly' when referring to an event he may not be certain of. And show me the head os state handbook that prohibits its usage.

I am not defending anything 'indefensible', Pakistan's position is perfectly rational and logical. You on the other hand have come up with this absurd conspiracy theory of 'Zardari used the word possibility'.

AHA! Pakistan is guilty, their President used the word 'possible'.

This is utter rubbish. India hasn't shared any evidence with Pakistan, so how can Zardari be sure of where the attackers are from and who they are and who their supporters are? So of course he would use 'possibility'.

You obviously also have no clue as to how the PA is operating in FATA. Currently they are engaged in Bajaur and Swat. The areas that the US is attacking are primarily North and South Waziristan. They are two of the largest and most hostile agencies in FATA.

For the PA to simultaneously engage militants in all of these agencies woudl require far more troops and resources, hence the focus on one agency at a time, and the tacit approval for US strikes in the other agencies against cross border attacks.

 

[third eye]

My goodness - we are just reaching for heights of absurdity now.

Explain to me why a head of state cannot use the word 'possibly' when referring to an event he may not be certain of. And show me the head os state handbook that prohibits its usage.

I am not defending anything 'indefensible', Pakistan's position is perfectly rational and logical. You on the other hand have come up with this absurd conspiracy theory of 'Zardari used the word possibility'.

AHA! Pakistan is guilty, their President used the word 'possible'.

This is utter rubbish. India hasn't shared any evidence with Pakistan, so how can Zardari be sure of where the attackers are from and who they are and who their supporters are? So of course he would use 'possibility'.

You obviously also have no clue as to how the PA is operating in FATA. Currently they are engaged in Bajaur and Swat. The areas that the US is attacking are primarily North and South Waziristan. They are two of the largest and most hostile agencies in FATA.

For the PA to simultaneously engage militants in all of these agencies woudl require far more troops and resources, hence the focus on one agency at a time, and the tacit approval for US strikes in the other agencies against cross border attacks.

The former head of ISI admitted in the Pak assembly in 2004 that the Lashkar was responsible for the attack on Parliament & on Mush among other attacks in Pak.In any case it doesn't matter anymore.

Pk has always been in denial.. ' tacitly" approves US to hit targets in its own territory !! You are the 1st pakistani who has at least admitted it !

The only thing rational & logical in the Pak stance is the complete inability to control itself. No one is in control. How ironical is it that US pays Pak for the services rendered & uses Pak soil & ppl for target practice a while GOP makes noises. Going by your remarks Kiyani must also know the intent of GOP, why did he give instructions to retailate against US strikes ? Is he diff from GOP or is this yet another example of double speak by a govt to its own ppl or running with hare & hunting with hound to save its own skin ?

What could have been a sound nation is so mixed up today that its own citizens don't know whats to do or whats happening.

Are the reserves in Pak army so low in terms of troops that the US is tacitly invited to operate in Pak soil against Pak citizens ?

Yes, a head of state is not expected to waffle, he / she must know what to say. In the case of pak, retracting statements is nothing new, the PM had to eat his words on ISI uttered thoughtlessly abroad etc etc, as regards the Pres, he simply is the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time.

India actually need not give proof anymore..since US,Israeli, Aus & UK agencies have seen the evidence in terms of satellite phones, checked links & calls made / recieved, things are already in the open.

Not that it matters, Codi Rice too coroborated all this in her remarks last night.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The former head of ISI admitted in the Pak assembly in 2004 that the Lashkar was responsible for the attack on Parliament & on Mush among other attacks in Pak.In any case it doesn't matter anymore.

Pk has always been in denial.. ' tacitly" approves US to hit targets in its own territory !! You are the 1st pakistani who has at least admitted it !

The only thing rational & logical in the Pak stance is the complete inability to control itself. No one is in control. How ironical is it that US pays Pak for the services rendered & uses Pak soil & ppl for target practice a while GOP makes noises. Going by your remarks Kiyani must also know the intent of GOP, why did he give instructions to retailate against US strikes ? Is he diff from GOP or is this yet another example of double speak by a govt to its own ppl or running with hare & hunting with hound to save its own skin ?

What could have been a sound nation is so mixed up today that its own citizens don't know whats to do or whats happening.

Are the reserves in Pak army so low in terms of troops that the US is tacitly invited to operate in Pak soil against Pak citizens ?

Yes, a head of state is not expected to waffle, he / she must know what to say. In the case of pak, retracting statements is nothing new, the PM had to eat his words on ISI uttered thoughtlessly abroad etc etc, as regards the Pres, he simply is the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong time.

India actually need not give proof anymore..since US,Israeli, Aus & UK agencies have seen the evidence in terms of satellite phones, checked links & calls made / recieved, things are already in the open.

Not that it matters, Codi Rice too coroborated all this in her remarks last night.

What does the former head admitting anything have to do with tracking down the Mumbai perpetrators? The whole point here is that the GoP's position is India should provide evidence implicating whoever in the Mumbai attack, and Pakistan will arrest them and try them in Pakistan.

What is 'Pakistan' you keep referring to? Are you referring to the GoP, the military, the people, what? If you are referring to the GoP and/or the military, then I woudl disagree with you completely that they are in 'denial' over the air strikes. I have tried to explain to you (watered down albeit) why the understanding between the GoP and US on air strikes, but perhaps you need to read through the FATA threads to get a better understanding of why the GoP allows airstirkes, and why it publicly complains about them.

ISPR's statement to shoot down any US choppers wasn't a contradiction - the US crossed a line with its ground raids, and that was unacceptable, and the US was made to realize that. The GoP completely supported that view, since it carried strong repercussions politically. I think the belligerence and sabre rattling from India after the Mumbai attack is enough justification of why Pakistan has been hesitant to move more resources away from the East, especially with Op. Parakaram.

There are a lot of issues that have to be catered to, and keeping the whole place in relative equilibrium requires delicate tinkering with the dynamics on the ground, both in FATA and Pakistan proper. Please don't turn this into a Pakistan bashing thread which is all your 'mixed up nation' rant is about and stick with the subject.

On the head of the state 'waffling' you really need to brush up on understanding what 'possibility' means - he wasn't waffling, he stated the position as any diplomat would. Unless you can prove to me that it is illegal for a head of state to utter the phrase 'its possible', drop this absurd argument.

It doesn't matter what the US, Israelis and Uk see in terms of evidence, the GoP's position is that if you want us to arrest someone and try them, you need to give the evidence to us - we aren't going to merely act on your say so. in this particular case India has steadfastly refused to do so far, and even seems to have spurned the joint investigation offer.

 

[Flintlock]

What does the former head admitting anything have to do with tracking down the Mumbai perpetrators? The whole point here is that the GoP's position is India should provide evidence implicating whoever in the Mumbai attack, and Pakistan will arrest them and try them in Pakistan.

It indicates that such ISI-sponsored attacks have happened in the past, and Pakistan has steadfastly refused to act but instead accuses India of fabricating the whole story.

This is just a new chapter in the same story.

Would you hand over evidence to the thief?

The only people who are getting evidence are the Americans, Brits and Israelis. They will take care of things.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

It indicates that such ISI-sponsored attacks have happened in the past, and Pakistan has steadfastly refused to act but instead accuses India of fabricating the whole story.

This is just a new chapter in the same story.

Would you hand over evidence to the thief?

The only people who are getting evidence are the Americans, Brits and Israelis. They will take care of things.

Not really - it indicates that one individual believes that a particular group carried out an attack.

The decision to not provide evidence is illogical, since eventually it will have to be shared to get Pakistan to act eventually.

Well, figures the Indians would be begging the Yanks, Brits etc. to do something. Ya'll can't do much on your own.

But we shall see, Pakistan has indicated it will act provided it is given evidence - whether it comes from the Yanks or you doesn't matter, so long as it is provided.

 

[Vinod2070]

^^ Surely he is not any individual.

It is one who knows what he is saying and has a first hand knowledge, more than most members here.

 

[Flintlock]

Not really - it indicates that one individual believes that a particular group carried out an attack.

Ah, well that depends on who that individual is. For goodness sake - the ex head of the ISI.
Are you quite sure you want to take that line of reasoning?

Well, figures the Indians would be begging the Yanks, Brits etc. to do something. Ya'll can't do much on your own.

Oh no, we're not begging. They're coming to us and trying to find ways to make themselves useful.

But its true, the Israelis and Americans are far better equipped to clean up the terror camps in Pakistan than the Indians.

But we shall see, Pakistan has indicated it will act provided it is given evidence - whether it comes from the Yanks or you doesn't matter, so long as it is provided.

Oh yeah...you'll "try them in your own courts". Is that a frickin joke?

I have a better idea - send them to the yanks and let them spend a term in Guantanamo Bay.

 

[Vinod2070]

But its true, the Israelis and Americans are far better equipped to clean up the terror camps in Pakistan than the Indians.

Well if that is more palatable to our Pakistani brothers, so be it.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

^^ Surely he is not any individual.

It is one who knows what he is saying and has a first hand knowledge, more than most members here.

I am disagreeing with Flint's extrapolation from that alleged comment, of institutional Pakistani complicity. If the head of police says that a particular gang from his city was involved in a crime, that does not automatically make his city or his department complicit in that crime.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Ah, well that depends on who that individual is. For goodness sake - the ex head of the ISI.
Are you quite sure you want to take that line of reasoning?

See my response to Vinod above.

Oh no, we're not begging. They're coming to us and trying to find ways to make themselves useful.

But its true, the Israelis and Americans are far better equipped to clean up the terror camps in Pakistan than the Indians.

If India does not intend to take any action herself, then the hoopla and noise raised by it recently only indicates that it is trying to get the others to act.

Oh yeah...you'll "try them in your own courts". Is that a frickin joke?

I have a better idea - send them to the yanks and let them spend a term in Guantanamo Bay.

No its not a joke, that is the GoP's official position for now. That came straight from the President and Prime Minister I believe. It is the correct position as well - Pakistan will try any Pakistani suspects under her laws and in her courts, as was the case with Omar Shaikh.

Guantanamo is being shut down, and good riddance, and the US under Obama will likely move to either try the individuals detained there in proper courts, or set them free in countries that accept them.

That is the way to proceed, Pakistani courts must try Pakistani suspects - we have no extradition agreement with India.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well if that is more palatable to our Pakistani brothers, so be it.

Not really, and won't happen either, unless they happen to be hiding in Waziristan ala Rashid Rauf and get knocked out by a drone.

 

[Silverfalcon]

ISI should help India in regaining their lost senses !

Its like a cricket match between India and Australia, India lost and now are blaming Pakistan for their Loss.

Dosnt make any sense does it. ?

 

[third eye]

What does the former head admitting anything have to do with tracking down the Mumbai perpetrators? The whole point here is that the GoP's position is India should provide evidence implicating whoever in the Mumbai attack, and Pakistan will arrest them and try them in Pakistan.

Isn't is obvious.. since u choose to ignore, it means that Pak was definitely involved in the attack on the Parliament. Like all thieves do , the beans were inadvertently spilled later.

What is 'Pakistan' you keep referring to? Are you referring to the GoP, the military, the people, what? If you are referring to the GoP and/or the military, then I woudl disagree with you completely that they are in 'denial' over the air strikes. I have tried to explain to you (watered down albeit) why the understanding between the GoP and US on air strikes, but perhaps you need to read through the FATA threads to get a better understanding of why the GoP allows airstirkes, and why it publicly complains about them.

Is there any difference betweenthe GOP, Mil & Ppl of Pak ? the whole world felt they all lived in the same country & were collectively responsible for what goes on in that country.

As regards FATA..any amount of threads will not change the bottom line that GOP is (a ) Not in control. (b) Allowing others to shoot at its own citizens coz it cannot control them itself (c) making threatening noises about US drones & msls..while ' tacitly' - to use ur word ,allowing the US knock Pak citizenry. Can u imagine how the yanks must be laughing .. !! Here is govt that compromises its citizens & growls for effect !! ( d) is beholden to the US for its existence.

ISPR's statement to shoot down any US choppers wasn't a contradiction - the US crossed a line with its ground raids, and that was unacceptable, and the US was made to realize that. The GoP completely supported that view, since it carried strong repercussions politically. I think the belligerence and sabre rattling from India after the Mumbai attack is enough justification of why Pakistan has been hesitant to move more resources away from the East, especially with Op. Parakaram.

Why ? How much is ok for US msls to be fired into PaK and how much is not ok ? When someone gets 'paid ' for services.... & Op Parakram is not being discussed here.

There are a lot of issues that have to be catered to, and keeping the whole place in relative equilibrium requires delicate tinkering with the dynamics on the ground, both in FATA and Pakistan proper. Please don't turn this into a Pakistan bashing thread which is all your 'mixed up nation' rant is about and stick with the subject.

This is not a Pak bashing situation..but a neighbourhood reality check.

On the head of the state 'waffling' you really need to brush up on understanding what 'possibility' means - he wasn't waffling, he stated the position as any diplomat would. Unless you can prove to me that it is illegal for a head of state to utter the phrase 'its possible', drop this absurd argument.

Zardari, Your Head of State actually is the "Tail of the state". He is at the end of the chain of command, control, information & acceptance. He wags at the drop of a hat .. less said the better


It doesn't matter what the US, Israelis and Uk see in terms of evidence, the GoP's position is that if you want us to arrest someone and try them, you need to give the evidence to us - we aren't going to merely act on your say so. in this particular case India has steadfastly refused to do so far, and even seems to have spurned the joint investigation offer.

Even if a guy is caught red handed .. Pak will not accept. The ISI head admits things after two yrs in 2004, the next chief in 2010 will spill the beans on the mumbai episode.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Isn't is obvious.. since u choose to ignore, it means that Pak was definitely involved in the attack on the Parliament. Like all thieves do , the beans were inadvertently spilled later.

Even if a guy is caught red handed .. Pak will not accept. The ISI head admits things after two yrs in 2004, the next chief in 2010 will spill the beans on the mumbai episode.

No, ignoring something does not equate complicity. In case you forgot, India started Operation Parakaram after the attack - no one in Pakistan was in a a mood to cooperate after that display of hostility and belligerence.

And once again, the question here is of India providing evidence to take action against the people involved. Ambassador Haqqani apparently stated that the US may be doing that now, since the Indians are not cooperating.

The current chief may or may not know who carried out the Mumbai attack, but what we do know is that India is refusing to provide evidence and cooperate, and now the US is stepping in to do that.

Is there any difference betweenthe GOP, Mil & Ppl of Pak ? the whole world felt they all lived in the same country & were collectively responsible for what goes on in that country.

As regards FATA..any amount of threads will not change the bottom line that GOP is (a ) Not in control. (b) Allowing others to shoot at its own citizens coz it cannot control them itself (c) making threatening noises about US drones & msls..while ' tacitly' - to use ur word ,allowing the US knock Pak citizenry. Can u imagine how the yanks must be laughing .. !! Here is govt that compromises its citizens & growls for effect !! ( d) is beholden to the US for its existence.

Actually your comment was about 'Pakistan in denial' not about 'responsibility', and it was in that context that I refuted your argument. No one is in denial but the Indians and they are the ones refusing to cooperate and share evidence.

Since it is impossible to control every single thing that happens in a large and diverse country like Pakistan, the GoP, Military and the people of Pakistan are not 'responsible' for events like Mumbai. What we are responsible for is ensuring that we take action on the basis of evidence provided to us, and use the resources at our disposal to attempt to prevent such acts in the future.

Is there any guarantee that we will be a hundred percent successful in preventing such acts? No. But our responsibility is to try.

I don't really consider militants killing innocent people 'citizens'. And it appears that since we started cooperating innocent casualties in drone strikes have dropped dramatically, while the number of high profile targets killed has shot up. And you do need to read through the FATA threads, since you have no understanding of what is driving events in that region.

Why ? How much is ok for US msls to be fired into PaK and how much is not ok ? When someone gets 'paid ' for services.... & Op Parakram is not being discussed here.

Boots on the ground carry the connotation of invasion or occupation, in addition, when under attack, there is a far larger likelihood of the SF's shooting their way out of an ambush or attack, and therefore killing a lot of innocent people, as seems to have happened in the last SF raid.

With drone attacks, provided there is cooperation between the ISI and CIA, good HUMINT assets on the ground allow for a lot greater accuracy and far lower risk then ground assaults.

Allowing US drone strikes isn't the preferred option - as I said, we would rather do this ourselves, but the fact is that the groups the US is targeting are the ones we made deals with to hold back the TTP in Pakistan. For Pakistan to attack them would mean that we have reneged on our 'deal' with them and they would be free to join forces with the TTP and present a united front in FATA.

I mentioned Operation Parakaram in this context because the above situation, of a United Taliban Front, could be handled solely by Pakistani troops if we were able to move resources from the East into FATA. However given our experience with the Indians (OP. Parakaram), most resources are not being moved, and given the belligerence on display in India right now, they probably won't any time soon either.

This is not a Pak bashing situation..but a neighbourhood reality check.

"What could have been a sound nation is so mixed up today that its own citizens don't know whats to do or whats happening."

You are engaging in pakistan bashing when making ill informed generalizations about Pakistan and its people. Please refrain from that.

Zardari, Your Head of State actually is the "Tail of the state". He is at the end of the chain of command, control, information & acceptance. He wags at the drop of a hat .. less said the better

And again, unless you can prove that a head of state is not supposed to use the phrase 'there is a possibility', your argument is really pointless.

 

[SamJarwar]

No Isi is not helping India