We feel this is a war against our whole tribe,elderly Mehsud tribesman

[S-2]

"These views, IMO, will likely change if the offensive proceeds successfully and the IDP's are taken care of."

Fully concur.

It is a difficult time to be a father of an adolescent boy in the tribal lands (maybe elsewhere too). They've seen with their own eyes who carries the real weight in their neighborhoods and are now deciding as they enter adulthood which way they'll swing.

Javed 3 does your citizens no service with his carping and mock supplication to Hillary, Holbrooke, Petraeus, et al.

 

[Solomon2]

No more than India was established by an elite rather than the people - Congress was after all basically the 'political elite' of India
Almost, but not quite. Jinnah could have used his influence to create looser influence from the center and more local self-rule, thus preserving India united. But that would have meant less socialism - less political control of the economic pie, that is. Wealth that he wanted to direct, not power shared his Hindu counterparts or the middle class. Thus his invention of "Islamic" socialism and rationale for a separate country.

how can you say for sure Congress was more representative of the people of India than the ML was of the people of Pakistan?
I don't! Hey, in American we have some states governed by Republicans as well as states governed by Democrats. All are "more representative" at the local level because they won office through local election.

the Taliban was not created by Pakistan or its politicians - it was the result of chaos, violence and the rape and pillage of Afghanistan by Afghan warlords and criminals post Soviet withdrawal.
Then why didn't Brazilians or aliens from the Andromeda Galaxy take over instead?

 

[qsaark]

Part of the problem behind the former set of opinions is the aura of the Taliban in SW, and the various peace deals and half hearted failed offensives by the PA - the Tribes are not certain that the PA will defeat the Taliban or that it will not again enter into 'peace deals' with them. Both of those scenarios would mean a lot of trouble for those who speak out openly in support of the Pakistani offensive.

These views, IMO, will likely change if the offensive proceeds successfully and the IDP's are taken care of.

Very correctly said Agno; that is the nature of these tribal folks. They will fight with you until they are sure that you can not win. But once you show that they can be defeated, than they become your ally.

Dera is also the stronghold of the JUI (F) and its clown leader Fazl ur Rahman. The leaders and the party workers will leave no stone unturned to win the sympathies of the affected people. What needs to be done is to let the media cover the situation in S-Waziristan and educate the Pakistanis about what is going on. So far the media is not playing any negative role (with few exceptions), but it has to play some more positive role.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No more than India was established by an elite rather than the people - Congress was after all basically the 'political elite' of India
Almost, but not quite. Jinnah could have used his influence to create looser influence from the center and more local self-rule, thus preserving India united. But that would have meant less socialism - less political control of the economic pie, that is. Wealth that he wanted to direct, not power shared his Hindu counterparts or the middle class. Thus his invention of "Islamic" socialism and rationale for a separate country.

Actually Jinnah was in favor or a secular Pakistan, and he in fact argued for a decentralized Indian Union initially, with a fair degree of autonomy for the States - that plan was shot down by the Congress, specifically Nehru, which led to Jinnah choosing to advocate for a separate state.

how can you say for sure Congress was more representative of the people of India than the ML was of the people of Pakistan?
I don't! Hey, in American we have some states governed by Republicans as well as states governed by Democrats. All are "more representative" at the local level because they won office through local election.

My point is that Jinnah and the Muslim league were no more 'elitist' and 'less representative' than the Congress and its leadership.

the Taliban was not created by Pakistan or its politicians - it was the result of chaos, violence and the rape and pillage of Afghanistan by Afghan warlords and criminals post Soviet withdrawal.
Then why didn't Brazilians or aliens from the Andromeda Galaxy take over instead?

Were Brazilians or aliens from the Andromeda Galaxy present in Afghanistan post Soviet withdrawal? Did they win over the Pashtun population and the Pashtun leadership, at least initially, with their ideology and disciplined rule?

Not sure what the point of your comment was, though I imagine you were shooting at some sort of sarcastic aside - a poor one though, since what I pointed out is fact.

 

[Solomon2]

Actually Jinnah was in favor or a secular Pakistan, and he in fact argued for a decentralized Indian Union initially, with a fair degree of autonomy for the States - that plan was shot down by the Congress

You know, when the U.S. broke from Britain, it did so with a proviso that if Canadians changed their minds they could become part of the U.S., too. Had Jinnah believed the issues were tactical and negotiable, he could have left an opening for unity, eventually. He did not do so.

Not sure what the point of your comment was -

That the Taliban, if not actually created by Pakistan, was so nurtured by it that it is essentially became its creature with the purpose of moving into Afghanistan to fill the vacuum there on Pakistani terms. Pakistan could have created a liberalizing liberation movement instead, but did not do so.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You know, when the U.S. broke from Britain, it did so with a proviso that if Canadians changed their minds they could become part of the U.S., too. Had Jinnah believed the issues were tactical and negotiable, he could have left an opening for unity, eventually. He did not do so.

The issues were not really negotiable - the attitude of the Congress leadership towards decentralized government indicated as much, and there was a lot of popular support for the idea of Pakistan within Pakistan.

There was no need to leave the issue of unity open, what the US does not become the 'only way'.

That the Taliban, if not actually created by Pakistan, was so nurtured by it that it is essentially became its creature with the purpose of moving into Afghanistan to fill the vacuum there on Pakistani terms. Pakistan could have created a liberalizing liberation movement instead, but did not do so.

We created no movement, liberalizing or otherwise. The Taliban had been expanding in Afghanistan, and we saw them as the only faction that was not influenced by corrupt warlords and criminals, and could therefore stabilize Afghanistan.

There was no liberal movement powerful enough to do so in Afghanistan.

Pakistan worked with the available choices.

 

[praveen]

No more than India was established by an elite rather than the people - Congress was after all basically the 'political elite' of India - how can you say for sure Congress was more representative of the people of India than the ML was of the people of Pakistan?

Except congress was lead by Gandhi and the people were ready to go to the gates of hell.If he instructed so.Not all of the members of the Indian constituent assembly were elite there were people from many shades of life.Ambedkar was one

A different kind of assault for sure - but that exists in many developing countries, even India today. In India it is however overshadowed by its economic growth, but until the economic reforms started to show results (nineties or so), the rape and pillage of Indian politicians was front and center.

It was never that high at the central level state level it was a different matter

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Except congress was lead by Gandhi and the people were ready to go to the gates of hell.If he instructed so.Not all of the members of the Indian constituent assembly were elite there were people from many shades of life.Ambedkar was one

I think the support the Jinnah had amongst Pakistanis also does not fit the definition of an elitist lacking popular support.

 

[Solomon2]

AM, we disagree on key facts. I strongly doubt that Pakistanis are taught anything more than a rosy account of Jinnah, at least compared to Hindus. Will you use the resources now available to you to learn more?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

AM, we disagree on key facts. I strongly doubt that Pakistanis are taught anything more than a rosy account of Jinnah, at least compared to Hindus. Will you use the resources now available to you to learn more?

Will you use the resources available to you to look beyond the Pakistan hating, Jinnah denigrating accounts you seem to have imbibed so far?

You have so far not backed up a single one of your points made in this thread, nor really responded to a single one of my questions - so before asking me to broaden my horizons, lets try and respond to the questions regarding the veracity of your claims on this thread.