I really like how he says ''we'', as if the Americans actually consider him a part of themselves. As usual, trying to be more loyal than the king.
Pakistan’s failure to tackle its jihadist challenge
Failure pictured below:
-mod edit-
(Just a regular day of Zarb-e-Azb.)
It took the US and a coalition of fifty other countries fourteen years to tackle a Jihadist challenge. Pakistan is working on it, and so far terrorism has been reduced significantly. It will be eventually eliminated and there is nothing to suggest that Pakistan has failed - it's the exact opposite.
Pakistan also continues to depend on Islamist ideology—through its school curricula, propaganda and Islamic legislation—to maintain internal nationalist cohesion, which inevitably encourages extremism and religious intolerance.
''Islamist'' , a word so ambiguous, misused and ultimately meaningless that it turns already confusing situations into an undecipherable bunch of nonsense. But I'll get to the point as he's clearly implying that Pakistan should abandon Islam as a state ideology.
Abandoning Islam to fight extremism is like demolishing a wall to remove mold - just like the mold wins and gets to live in the rubble, the extremists end up winning the entire religion over and gaining more recruits and political strength.
Incorporating the countless good aspects of Islam is an infinitely more effective counter to extremism, and is more practical than trying to secularize a country where over 90% of the population is religious.
the destruction, demobilization, disarmament or dismantling of Afghan Taliban and other radical groups is clearly not on the Pakistani state’s agenda
Maybe that's because the Afghan Taliban were invaded and destroyed by fifty countries and the Afghan Government is supposed to be handling what's left of them. Perhaps Haqqani sahab would've been happy if the Afghan Government didn't co-operate and the PA went along with its hot pursuit threats into Afghanistan.
Or, being the hypocritical parrot that he is, he wouldn't have been happy and would have instead continued with his defamation of Pakistan regardless of what anyone did.
Pakistan did not contribute a single soldier for the wars in Korea or Vietnam but went to war with India over the disputed border state of Kashmir instead in 1965.
That is an utterly retarded statement. Why should have Pakistan contributed soldiers to Korea or Vietnam? Pakistani support in Afghanistan was more than enough ''anti-communist'' contribution. If the US expected more, too bad but too late.
it is likely that the 15 AH-1Z Viper helicopters and 1,000 Hellfire missiles—as well as communications and training equipment being offered to it—will be used against secular insurgents in southwest Baluchistan province
Okay, putting the hilarity of this idiocy aside,
earlier he was moaning about 'good terrorist and bad terrorist'. And now he's making a similar distinction, as if these wonderful ''secular insurgents'' are any better. These ''secular insurgents'' murdered twenty people just a while ago, and have been doing it on a regular basis for a while.
I can not even begin to criticize the idiotic reasoning behind this idiotic statement and its equally idiotic implication that secular insurgents are somehow not a problem or less of a problem and should not be dealt with using helicopters.
At most, the reasoning would be that a religious ideology is more dangerous than a nationalist one, but the families of the twenty murdered laborers would strongly disagree. And using helicopters to fight them wouldn't effect this aspect in any way.
