Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
sources? I would be interested to know how are they operating something bulky like AAA
The Baloch issue taking a turn for the worst?
- Thread starter waz
- Start date
He could be referring to the quadruple 14.7mm AA type HMGs, of just HMGs in AA role.
lulldapull
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2006
- Messages
- 222
- Reaction score
- 0
Thats old news Asim. The Baloch are pretty well supplied now with IED's Remotely detonated mines, DshK 14.7mm/ ZPU-23 (truck mounted), 106mm RCL's (Recoiless Rifle) and other mobile Rocket launchers. Heck I have even seen a few Bm-21's driving around.
Most of these goodies are Indian and supplied via Afghanistan, or from the coast. Actually anything you need its pretty much available in the markets from Afghanistan.
The Baloch will get their independance sooner or later. We got the big boys involved now......Sooner or later Unkal Sam will move into the fray too, once this Punjabastani military bares its 'wahabbi' teeth to the Americans.....
Remember the re-drawn map of the ME, I was showing you guys, and everyone dismissed it?
Its already happening.
Awesome
RETIRED MOD
- Joined
- Mar 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,023
- Reaction score
- 5
Hmmm well their bases keep getting destroyed. What kind of a win is this for them?
BLA just doesn't have the numbers to take on the Pak Army. The Afghan border is troublesome, but with sufficient mining hopefully a few BLA would end up biting the dust there.
BLA just doesn't have the numbers to take on the Pak Army. The Afghan border is troublesome, but with sufficient mining hopefully a few BLA would end up biting the dust there.
How do they manage to hide these Grads?Heck I have even seen a few Bm-21's driving around.
lulldapull
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2006
- Messages
- 222
- Reaction score
- 0
They withdraw back to Afghan sanctuaries yaar.......
Last year at Dera Bugti the 15-25 x BM-21's rained down thousands of rockets on the punjabi army contonment there.
These guys are cowards Sword.....They come inside the Marri/ Bugti enclaves, they end up losing a few trucks and men everytime to the new IED's and RAM's everytime.
Any little town now these ministers or outsiders go in.....they need escorts of Punjab regiment to go with them, so the locals don't kill them.
The hatred is up to new extremes........Thats whats important for the freedom movement.
Check this out:
http://www.balochvoice.com/Video_clips/2006/05/Army truck Blown up by BLA.wmv
lulldapull
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2006
- Messages
- 222
- Reaction score
- 0
Pakistan's Costly 'Other War'
By Selig S. Harrison
Wednesday, February 15, 2006; Page A21
The usual explanation for Pakistan's failure to go all-out against al Qaeda and Taliban forces along the Afghan frontier is that Gen. Pervez Musharraf's armed forces and intelligence services are riddled with Islamic extremists. But there is also another, equally disturbing, reason. Musharraf has increasingly been forced to divert ground forces and U.S.-supplied air power from the Afghan front and from Kashmir earthquake relief efforts to combat a bitter, little-noticed insurgency in his strategic southern coastal province of Baluchistan.
Musharraf's "other war" against the Baluch, an ethnic minority of 4.5 million, has become increasingly bloody in recent weeks. According to U.S. intelligence sources, six Pakistani army brigades, plus paramilitary forces totaling some 25,000 men, are battling Baluch Liberation Army guerrillas in the Kohlu mountains and surrounding areas. The independent Pakistan Human Rights Commission has reported "indiscriminate bombing and strafing" by 20 U.S.-supplied Cobra helicopter gunships and four squadrons of fighter planes, including U.S.-supplied F-16 fighter jets, resulting in 215 civilian dead and hundreds more wounded, many of them women and children.
Visiting U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told human rights commission leaders recently that the Baluch conflict is an "internal matter" for Pakistan to resolve and that the United States has not raised the issue with Musharraf. This policy should be reversed, not only to stop the carnage but also because the United States has a major strategic stake in a peaceful accommodation between Islamabad and Baluch leaders. The administration should call on Musharraf to start negotiations immediately, and President Bush should keep up the pressure when he visits Islamabad in March.
Multiethnic Pakistan, dominated by the Punjabis, who control the army, is likely to become increasingly ungovernable in the absence of a political settlement with the Baluch. A continued military confrontation in Baluchistan could well intensify long-festering ethnic unrest in neighboring Sind and embolden various anti-Musharraf forces throughout Pakistan. Musharraf's ability to put adequate military resources into the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban, already limited, would be further reduced, undermining U.S. efforts to stabilize Afghanistan.
The strategic importance of Baluchistan has grown since China started building a port for Pakistan at the Baluch port of Gwadar, close to the Strait of Hormuz, with a projected 27 berths, enough for a major Pakistani naval base that could be used by Beijing. The Baluch ancestral homeland stretches west beyond Gwadar into adjacent Baluch-majority areas of eastern Iran, where there is a nascent Baluch rebellion against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Iran fears Baluch nationalism, but India is more ambivalent. New Delhi wants a stable Pakistan that will negotiate a peace settlement on Kashmir. At the same time, many Indian commentators appear happy to see Musharraf bogged down in Baluchistan and hope that the Baluch crisis will force him to ratchet down Pakistani support for Kashmiri Islamic extremist insurgents.
Musharraf has presented no evidence to back up his accusations that India is aiding the Baluch insurgents. But New Delhi did say on Dec. 27 that it is "watching with concern the spiraling military violence in Baluchistan" and called for political dialogue. Both Baluch and Sindhi leaders have often said that they would welcome Indian intervention to liberate them from Islamabad.
At present, most Baluch leaders do not call for independence. They are ready to settle for the provincial autonomy envisaged in the 1973 Pakistani constitution, which successive military regimes, including the present one, have nullified. What the Baluch, Sindhis and a third, more assimilated ethnic minority, the Pushtuns, want above all is an end to blatant economic discrimination by the dominant Punjabis. Most of Pakistan's natural resources are in Baluchistan, including natural gas, uranium, copper and potentially rich oil reserves, both onshore and offshore. Although 36 percent of the gas produced in Pakistan comes from the province, Baluchistan consumes only a fraction of its production because it is the most impoverished area of Pakistan. For decades, Punjabi-dominated central governments have denied Baluchistan a fair share of development funds and paid only 12 percent of the royalties due to the province for the gas produced there.
The Baluch were forcibly incorporated into Pakistan when it was created in 1947 and have subsequently staged two short-lived rebellions, in 1958 and 1962, as well as a protracted struggle from 1973 to 1977 that involved some 80,000 Pakistani troops and 55,000 Baluch tribesmen.
The big difference between earlier phases of the Baluch struggle and the present one is that Islamabad is no longer able to play off feuding tribes against each other and faces a unified nationalist movement. Another important difference is that the Baluch have a better-armed, more disciplined fighting force. Baluch leaders say that rich compatriots in the Persian Gulf are providing the money needed to buy weapons in the flourishing black market.
It is clear that a continuing Baluch insurgency would pose a major threat to the Musharraf regime and to U.S. interests in Pakistan. Future military and economic aid to Islamabad should clearly be withheld until Musharraf stops his military repression in Baluchistan and enters into serious negotiations with Baluch leaders. Once the present crisis is defused, the United States should launch a sustained effort to promote a process of democratization in Pakistan that gives long-overdue recognition to its multiethnic character.
The writer, former South Asia bureau chief of The Post, is the author of "In Afghanistan's Shadow," a study of Baluch nationalism. He is director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy.
By Selig S. Harrison
Wednesday, February 15, 2006; Page A21
The usual explanation for Pakistan's failure to go all-out against al Qaeda and Taliban forces along the Afghan frontier is that Gen. Pervez Musharraf's armed forces and intelligence services are riddled with Islamic extremists. But there is also another, equally disturbing, reason. Musharraf has increasingly been forced to divert ground forces and U.S.-supplied air power from the Afghan front and from Kashmir earthquake relief efforts to combat a bitter, little-noticed insurgency in his strategic southern coastal province of Baluchistan.
Musharraf's "other war" against the Baluch, an ethnic minority of 4.5 million, has become increasingly bloody in recent weeks. According to U.S. intelligence sources, six Pakistani army brigades, plus paramilitary forces totaling some 25,000 men, are battling Baluch Liberation Army guerrillas in the Kohlu mountains and surrounding areas. The independent Pakistan Human Rights Commission has reported "indiscriminate bombing and strafing" by 20 U.S.-supplied Cobra helicopter gunships and four squadrons of fighter planes, including U.S.-supplied F-16 fighter jets, resulting in 215 civilian dead and hundreds more wounded, many of them women and children.
Visiting U.S. Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns told human rights commission leaders recently that the Baluch conflict is an "internal matter" for Pakistan to resolve and that the United States has not raised the issue with Musharraf. This policy should be reversed, not only to stop the carnage but also because the United States has a major strategic stake in a peaceful accommodation between Islamabad and Baluch leaders. The administration should call on Musharraf to start negotiations immediately, and President Bush should keep up the pressure when he visits Islamabad in March.
Multiethnic Pakistan, dominated by the Punjabis, who control the army, is likely to become increasingly ungovernable in the absence of a political settlement with the Baluch. A continued military confrontation in Baluchistan could well intensify long-festering ethnic unrest in neighboring Sind and embolden various anti-Musharraf forces throughout Pakistan. Musharraf's ability to put adequate military resources into the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban, already limited, would be further reduced, undermining U.S. efforts to stabilize Afghanistan.
The strategic importance of Baluchistan has grown since China started building a port for Pakistan at the Baluch port of Gwadar, close to the Strait of Hormuz, with a projected 27 berths, enough for a major Pakistani naval base that could be used by Beijing. The Baluch ancestral homeland stretches west beyond Gwadar into adjacent Baluch-majority areas of eastern Iran, where there is a nascent Baluch rebellion against President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
Iran fears Baluch nationalism, but India is more ambivalent. New Delhi wants a stable Pakistan that will negotiate a peace settlement on Kashmir. At the same time, many Indian commentators appear happy to see Musharraf bogged down in Baluchistan and hope that the Baluch crisis will force him to ratchet down Pakistani support for Kashmiri Islamic extremist insurgents.
Musharraf has presented no evidence to back up his accusations that India is aiding the Baluch insurgents. But New Delhi did say on Dec. 27 that it is "watching with concern the spiraling military violence in Baluchistan" and called for political dialogue. Both Baluch and Sindhi leaders have often said that they would welcome Indian intervention to liberate them from Islamabad.
At present, most Baluch leaders do not call for independence. They are ready to settle for the provincial autonomy envisaged in the 1973 Pakistani constitution, which successive military regimes, including the present one, have nullified. What the Baluch, Sindhis and a third, more assimilated ethnic minority, the Pushtuns, want above all is an end to blatant economic discrimination by the dominant Punjabis. Most of Pakistan's natural resources are in Baluchistan, including natural gas, uranium, copper and potentially rich oil reserves, both onshore and offshore. Although 36 percent of the gas produced in Pakistan comes from the province, Baluchistan consumes only a fraction of its production because it is the most impoverished area of Pakistan. For decades, Punjabi-dominated central governments have denied Baluchistan a fair share of development funds and paid only 12 percent of the royalties due to the province for the gas produced there.
The Baluch were forcibly incorporated into Pakistan when it was created in 1947 and have subsequently staged two short-lived rebellions, in 1958 and 1962, as well as a protracted struggle from 1973 to 1977 that involved some 80,000 Pakistani troops and 55,000 Baluch tribesmen.
The big difference between earlier phases of the Baluch struggle and the present one is that Islamabad is no longer able to play off feuding tribes against each other and faces a unified nationalist movement. Another important difference is that the Baluch have a better-armed, more disciplined fighting force. Baluch leaders say that rich compatriots in the Persian Gulf are providing the money needed to buy weapons in the flourishing black market.
It is clear that a continuing Baluch insurgency would pose a major threat to the Musharraf regime and to U.S. interests in Pakistan. Future military and economic aid to Islamabad should clearly be withheld until Musharraf stops his military repression in Baluchistan and enters into serious negotiations with Baluch leaders. Once the present crisis is defused, the United States should launch a sustained effort to promote a process of democratization in Pakistan that gives long-overdue recognition to its multiethnic character.
The writer, former South Asia bureau chief of The Post, is the author of "In Afghanistan's Shadow," a study of Baluch nationalism. He is director of the Asia Program at the Center for International Policy.
Bull
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 6,850
- Reaction score
- 0
Nobody will go to ICJ unless they have a case to prove,why would anyone want international humiliation?
Money spent on them?
Which money?The money was spend on building hard assets in gwadar went to outsiders and not Baluchis.What sort of benefit did it provide to uneducated and illeterate baluchis.
China is not a fool to spend all those money.They would have got the contracts and now once it starts operation lets see what the income share is.
Lull,
India will never intervene to liberate Balochistan or any other part of Pakistan. It will escalate the war, thats why Pakistan has not supported the liberation of Kashmir as much as it could have.
India will never intervene to liberate Balochistan or any other part of Pakistan. It will escalate the war, thats why Pakistan has not supported the liberation of Kashmir as much as it could have.
Bull
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 6,850
- Reaction score
- 0
It did...now it just cannot even if wants to.
Your knowledge is limited to what Pakistan could have. You saw what happened when Pakistan tried a little more, you will say, in Kargil. The war was about to escalate, and Pakistan backed off, while you guys believed the victory.
Contrarian
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2006
- Messages
- 11,571
- Reaction score
- 4
The world believed it was a victory both miliary and diplomatic for India. Most of the people in Pakistan believe that it was a victory for India. Surprisingly some people actually believe the propaganda spewed by Musharraf,
BTW Kargil was a direct action by Pakistan. What is being talked here is indirect action, supporting proxy wars. India too could take direct action like Kargil inside Pakistan. But it will result in the same fate as what Pakistan suffered in Kargil, though not if it takes areas along the Indian border, but if it takes up positions in Balochistan. We would be condemned by the world like Pakistan was during Kargil.
So pakistan cannot do another kargil, try as it might. What it can do is support the insurgency in Kashmir, which it is doing at the top speed. What India can do is the same thing, support the liberation of the Baloch people through men, training, logistics, weapons, etc, etc.
Bull
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2006
- Messages
- 6,850
- Reaction score
- 0
Well you got screwed in kargil and you backed off.If Pakistan was in a winning position,why would it have backed off?
alamgir
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 380
- Reaction score
- 0
there is main diference between indian sepration movments and that of balochistan.all sepration movments in india operate in side civil population because they have strong support in population more of attacks on IA are happen in urban arias.how possible for IA to use heavy weaponary in city like sirinagar ,darjiling etc. that whay 90% victoms of IA are civils. in case of balochistan SPG[sardari protection gang]have no sympathy among civil population because they know very well these paid gangestors not fight for them but for thier mastores.so SPG operate in none populated zones like mountians. thier main actions are blowing up pipe lines electric polls or some single security vehicale.in this case why PA put in risk life of thier soldiers.
alamgir
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2006
- Messages
- 380
- Reaction score
- 0
Both Baluch and Sindhi leaders have often said that they would welcome Indian intervention to liberate them from Islamabad. qoute..
indian are master in liberating muslims, recent exemples gujrat,kashmir.i think you not have minimum idea about demography of pakistan. more baloch living in punjab then that of balochistan.in balochistan baloch are not more then 30%. 70% divided in pashtun, braui, hizara etc.i suggest you first read about pakistan then go to discuse
indian are master in liberating muslims, recent exemples gujrat,kashmir.i think you not have minimum idea about demography of pakistan. more baloch living in punjab then that of balochistan.in balochistan baloch are not more then 30%. 70% divided in pashtun, braui, hizara etc.i suggest you first read about pakistan then go to discuse
Similar threads
