What's new

Why Pakistan Produces Jihadists

It's ironic that every time Pakistan is in lime light, the Indian members are in a race to stream line the issue and push their lack luster two cents, but when ever the tables turn, it suddenly becomes an Indian internal affair. Regret to spoil the party, but as our FM was quoted that every action is bound to invite some form of reaction, hence there is no chance of Pakistan being pushed into any corner.
 
.
Condemn India for this?

"Since March, when the Pakistani army staged a bloody crackdown in East Bengal, murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians and prompting 10 million Bengalis to flee across the Indian border, the U.S. has been ostentatiously mild in its public criticism of the atrocities and of Pakistan's military ruler, President Yahya Khan—a man whom President Nixon likes. Washington wanted to retain whatever leverage it had with the Pakistanis.
"
The World: The U.S.: A Policy in Shambles - TIME

no i believe AM was referring to certain foreign individuals who were armed and trained by our enemy to kill based on ethnicity. You hindstanys conveniently forget the violence waged on pro-Pakistanis (consisting of West and East Pakistanis at the time).

The propaganda blitz launched by Mujib that Bengalis were discrminated against, this in turn was given further impetus by external forces (hindustany) and who knows who else.

I guess Khalistan Zindabad Commandos, ULFA walas, Naxalites and the Kashmir Liberation Front (to name a few out of dozens) are perfectly legitimate forces as well.

:cheers:
 
.
It's ironic that every time Pakistan is in lime light, the Indian members are in a race to stream line the issue and push their lack luster two cents, but when ever the tables turn, it suddenly becomes an Indian internal affair. Regret to spoil the party, but as our FM was quoted that every action is bound to invite some form of reaction, hence there is no chance of Pakistan being pushed into any corner.

In this time Pakistan needs every ones 2 cents. IMO.
United we stand, divided we fall.
 
.
here is a new article from CNN. I think it nails perfectly from the outside world view.

Pakistan is 'epicenter of Islamic terrorism
Pakistan is 'epicenter of Islamic terrorism' - CNN.com

New York (CNN) -- The suspect in the Times Square bombing attempt was caught as he was seeking to flee to Pakistan, a nation that analyst Fareed Zakaria calls the "epicenter of Islamic terrorism."

"It's worth noting that even the terrorism that's often attributed to the war in Afghanistan tends to come out of Pakistan, to be planned by Pakistanis, to be funded from Pakistan or in some other way to be traced to Pakistan," said Zakaria. He added that Pakistan's connection with terrorist groups goes back decades and has often been encouraged by that nation's military for strategic reasons.

Faisal Shahzad, a 30-year-old naturalized citizen of Pakistani descent, had recently been trained in bomb making in Pakistan's Waziristan province, according to a federal complaint filed in court Tuesday. CNN reported Tuesday that Faisal Shahzad's father is a retired vice-marshal in the Pakistani Air Force.

Shahzad was arrested around 11:45 p.m. ET Monday at New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport just before he was to fly to Islamabad, Pakistan, by way of Dubai.

Zakaria, author and host of CNN's "Fareed Zakaria GPS," spoke to CNN on Tuesday. Here is an edited transcript:

CNN: Based on what we know so far, what lessons can be learned from this incident?

Fareed Zakaria: This does not seem to be part of a larger and more organized effort to penetrate the United States. That doesn't mean such efforts are not under way....it does make you realize just how open we are as a country and how open we are as a society. There is always a level of vulnerability that comes from being an open society and this guy, Mr. Shahzad obviously took advantage of that openness.

CNN: Apparently he traveled to Pakistan on a number of occasions. Does that signal that Pakistan isn't vigilant enough about terrorism?

Zakaria: Well it certainly signals something that we have known for a while, which is that Pakistan is the epicenter of Islamic terrorism. ... The British government has estimated that something like 80 percent of the terror threats that they receive have a Pakistani connection.

So there's no question that Pakistan has a terrorism problem. It has radical groups within the country that have the ability to recruit people and have access to resources that makes for a very combustible mixture.

It should remind us that even when looking at the war in Afghanistan, ultimately the most important place where jihadis are being trained and recruited is not in Afghanistan but in Pakistan. And there's no other part of the world where you have quite the same concentration of manpower, resources and ideology all feeding on each other.

CNN: What feeds the ideology that drives the terror effort?

Zakaria: Pakistan has been conducive to this kind of jihadis for a number of reasons. For the last three or four decades, the Pakistani government, the Pakistani military has supported, funded many of these groups in a bid to maintain influence in Afghanistan, in a bid to maintain an asymmetrical capacity against India -- in other words, to try to destabilize India rather cheaply through these militant groups rather than frontally through its army.

So it has found it useful to have these militant groups and to support them. It has always assumed that these groups will not attack Pakistanis and therefore was not a threat to Pakistan itself. And to a large extent that's true, these groups by and large have attacked people in Afghanistan, India, in the West but not in Pakistan. But that is changing, because these groups are so intermingled and often sufficiently ideological, and also because the Pakistani military is beginning to take them on.

But fundamentally the reason this has gone on is that there has been a policy of the Pakistani state and particularly the Pakistani military, to encourage these groups, to fund them, to ignore their most pernicious activities. And some of it goes back even further than four decades. In the 1965 war against India, the Pakistanis used Islamic jihadis...

And the great hope now is that finally the Pakistani government is getting serious about this. Frankly it remains a hope.

CNN: Why do you say that it's only a hope?

Zakaria: Over the last few years, it appears that the Pakistani government has begun to understand that these groups all meld together, that they are a threat to a stable and viable modern Pakistani state. But when I talk about the Pakistani government you have to realize that there are different elements in it.

The Pakistani civilian government really does understand the danger that Islamic terrorism poses to Pakistan, but the civilian government in Pakistan appears quite powerless. Most power lies with the military.

The military in Pakistan has a somewhat more complex attitude. It does believe that these militants have gone too far. It does believe that it has to take on the militants. And it has actually battled them quite bravely over the last few years.

CNN: So what's the reason for thinking the military supports militant groups?

Zakaria: It still holds within it the view that at the end of the day, the United States will leave the region and that they will have to live in a neighborhood which will have a very powerful India and an Afghanistan that is potentially a client state of India's -- and that in order to combat this Indian domination, they need to maintain their asymmetrical capabilities, their militant groups.

It is interesting to note that Ahmed Rashid, who may be the most respected Pakistani journalist, has reported on the way in which Pakistani government has thwarted and put obstacles in the way of any kind of talks between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

The message it has sent to the Afghan government is very clear. If you want to have any negotiations with the Taliban, you have to understand that since we are the critical intermediary -- since the Taliban leadership all lives in Pakistan -- the Pakistani military's terms to the Afghan government are, we want you to push back on Indian influence in Afghanistan, we want you to shut down Indian consulates in various Afghan cities.

In other words, the Pakistani government is still obsessed with the idea of an Indian domination of the region, and they're using their influence with the Taliban to try to counter Indian influence. This is the old game that the Pakistanis have played.

That's what makes me skeptical that there's been a true strategic revolution in Pakistan... There are still people who believe that there are good terrorists and bad terrorists, and some you can work with to further Pakistan's goals.

CNN: In the attempted car bombing in Times Square and the Christmas Day attempted bombing, you have two failed plots that don't appear to be highly sophisticated. Does that tell us anything about the terror groups?

Zakaria: At some level, that tells you about the weakness of the terror groups. You do not have highly organized terrorist groups with great resources and capacity that are able to plan spectacular acts of terrorism the way they were in the 1990s and on 9/11.

What you have now are more isolated, disorganized lone rangers and while they're obviously very worrying and one has to be extremely vigilant, it is also at some level a sign of the weakness of an organization like al Qaeda that it is not able to do the kind of terrorist attacks it used to.

To be sure, it's important to be very vigilant and make sure you have groups like al Qaeda on the run. But I don't know that in a free society, you will ever be able to prevent an individual with no background in terrorism who's broken no laws and is radicalized from attempting to make some kind of trouble.
 
.
^^^Never thought foreign media could hold Pakistan responsible so clearly. But it means, the tide is turning and its time Pak takes some serious steps, or in no time would it be labeled another failed state. The international community has started to take notice and soon they will be all over it. US will get another excuse to fight terrorism and safeguard Pak's nukes. I can clearly see, US would at least try to do to Pak what it did to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Things have gotten worse than Libya, and if not cured now, it might become another Somalia, but I pray to God, that day never comes.
 
. . .
Again self contradictory. First you write this:

This is the most recent poll. Previous polls on attacks on civilians and the use of 'terrorism' have similarly high percentages opposing them, so no, your argument does not negate my point.

When you suggest that some polls indicate support for the LeT, that ignores what the respondents to the poll believe the LeT to be. Do the respondents believe that the LeT is fighting Indian occupation forces in J&K and therefore support its struggle for Kashmiri freedom, or do they support the LeT because it attacks civilians?

So what is the genesis of LeT (there may be a hint in the name??) In whose name are the funds collected?? Following link can help.
Lashkar-e-Toiba

The LeT’s professed ideology goes beyond merely challenging India's sovereignty over the State of Jammu and Kashmir. The Lashkar's ‘agenda’, as outlined in a pamphlet titled Why are we waging jihad includes the restoration of Islamic rule over all parts of India. Further, the outfit seeks to bring about a union of all Muslim majority regions in countries that surround Pakistan. Towards that end, it is active in J&K, Chechnya and other parts of Central Asia.

Hafiz Saeed, a scholar of Islam, has said that the purpose of Jihad is to carry out a sustained struggle for the dominance of Islam in the entire world and to eliminate the evil forces and the ignorant. He considers India, Israel and US to be his prime enemies and has threatened to launch Fidayeen (suicide squad) attacks on American interests too.

The Lashkar-e-Toiba does not believe in democracy and nationalism. According to its ideology, it is the duty of every 'Momin' to protect and defend the interests of Muslims all over the world where Muslims are under the rule of non-Muslim in the democratic system. It has, thus chosen the path of Jihad as the suited means to achieve its goal. Cadres are drawn from the Wahabi school of thought.

Jihad, Hafiz Saeed said during the All Pakistan Ulema Convention held on July 17, 2003, at Lahore, is the only way Pakistan can move towards dignity and prosperity.

The LeT has consistently advocated the use of force and vowed that it would plant the 'flag of Islam' in Washington, Tel Aviv and New Delhi.



Or the following could also be worth a look:

Lashkar-e-Taiba - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Lashkar-e-Taiba group has repeatedly claimed through its journals and websites that its main aim is to destroy the Indian republic and to annihilate Hinduism and Judaism. LeT has declared Hindus and Jews to be the "enemies of Islam", as well as India and Israel to be the "enemies of Pakistan". In September and October 2009, Israeli and Indian intelligence agencies issued alerts warning that LeT is planning to attack Jewish religious places in Pune, India and other locations visited by Western and Israeli tourists in India. The gunmen who attacked the Mumbai headquarters of the Chabad Lubavitch movement during the November 2008 attacks were reportedly instructed that “Every person you kill where you are is worth 50 of the ones killed elsewhere.”


And then you follow up in the same post with the following:

Polls in Pakistan specifically on the question of terrorism and attacks on non-combatants over the past few years have come back showing strong opposition to the above, so my argument about 'Islamic Identity' not having anything to do with terrorism in Pakistan remains valid on that basis.

What is it if not propagating Islamic identity that your government tolerates and publicly and visibly encourages these Islamic terrorist organizations to wage the Islamic Jehad on all and sundry who believe that earth is round and not flat like the desert that they live in??

Propagating false Islamic identity has had eveything to do with Pakistan's genesis, its evolution in to a military state, the seeding and encouragement of extremism and finally to now the introspecting question "Why Pakistan Produces Jihadists".

Yet you continue to not accept the reality by making statements that Indians in Kashmir are fair game or in the post U.S Afganistan, the fascist Taliban government in Kabul will be the only thing that is strategically deep!

Time and again your terror factories are duly highlighted due to new and new students making their alma mater proud in our world and you still do not want to understand that the theology that your government and Army propagates and supports openly, and to which you refer as a "canard" when some one else brings it up, is the exact reason that even normal Pakistani citizens get conjured in the same image of Pakistan in the world that is created by your most famous export to us.

Only by understanding the problem can you find a solution. This will not go away by pushing it beneath a rug. They are here to stay because the terrorists are a product of an ideology. You have to eliminate and moderate this ideology.

Accepting things ast they are will be a good first step in solving this long, bloody, dangerous and existential threat to Pakistan.
 
.
For that matter it would be interesting to know the response of Indians on whether they support India's support for what we would call terrorists in East Pakistan and you would call 'freedom fighters'. On this forum at least a poll is not necessary, since we know that most Indians posting here support India's decision to train and send in 'terrorists' (by our account) into East Pakistan. So what does that say about Indians?
It says that the Indians came to the aide of a bunch of people who were being slaughtered in ‘death camps’ (western media term, not Indian) for being sympathizers of a certain political entity and/or being of certain religious community (ICJ called it genocide in no uncertain terms). We however condemn the whole act propping up of LTTE. India had no business in Sri Lanka.

However, unlike Pakistan, Indian aide to the victims of East Pakistan didn’t originate from a false sense of entitlement arising out of a misplaced idea of religious righteousness.

On a similar note, what about the fact that Americans support those who fought the British in their war of independence - attacks on non-combatants and other atrocities were committed by both sides in that war as well.
A revolution is not a dinner party, or writing an essay, or painting a picture, or doing embroidery; it cannot be so refined, so leisurely and gentle, so temperate, kind, courteous, restrained and magnanimous. A revolution is an insurrection, an act of violence by which one class overthrows another. – Mao Zedong
Or what about American support for the Mujahideen against the Soviets, or various other militias/rebels in Latin America and elsewhere against the communist threat? Are Americans supportive of terrorism?
The anti-communism in US was indeed a bizarre display of paranoia among the general populace and it arose from how their society was structured. It kinda proves the author’s assertion that roots of collective paranoia can be traced to a large extent to the social structure.

The question, as I pointed out to Fateh, is not just that people support XYZ group, but what they think that group does, and whether they support attacks on non-combatants. On the latter count the various polls in Pakistan over the years support my contention that Pakistanis overwhelmingly oppose terrorism, and therefore Pakistan's Islamic Identity has nothing to do with the current terrorism we see.
Does an average Joe have the sophistication to make a distinction between a ‘combatant’ and a ‘non-combatant’. For example, the anti-Indian diatribes of Hafiz Saeed continue to attract the Pakistani mass. Those who throng to listen to him, do they think that what he is saying will invariably result in death of ‘non-combatants’. The wonder kid Zaid Hamid also enjoyed overwhelming support of educated Pakistani youth from urban middle/upper class. How many of them pondered over the fact that his perverted vision of Pakistan’s supremacy would invariably result in death of ‘non-combatants’.

When someone supports the likes of LeT, he is actually supporting a certain brand of ideology which LeT represents and if enforcing that ideology results in death of ‘non-combatants’ it will be acceptable as collateral damage (or death of ‘kaffirs’). This person is not picking and choosing individual acts of LeT to support. For example, LeT doesn’t like the Hindu Pandits to come back and settle in their ancestral land. Is the understanding that it is the vitriolic ideology of LeT that is making the ‘non-combatants’ to suffer, stopping these supporters from lending their support to LeT? Or do they try to find a moral justification within their religion to rationalize this dichotomy?

Now if you strip a killing or any act of terrorism, off its ideology and attempt to see if it is supported by the same person he will invariably condemn it.

Then there is the definition of ‘non-combatant’. Does a person whose dress code doesn’t include a gun on hip but who would otherwise ‘combat’ tooth and nail against an ideology, qualify as a ‘non-combatant’ to the sympathizers of that ideology? Or will they consider him as an enemy of their ideology, ‘combating’ against what they think is right and justified?
So 'doodh ka doodh air pani ka pani to ho gya', the problem is that the Indians posting on this thread are neither drinking doodh nor pani, but poison laced with anti-Pakistan prejudice and hatred.
There is still plenty of pani in that dood.
 
.
let me put a straight question

why Pakistanis living abroad become extremists & terrorists despite of the fact that they grow up in a 'liberal' society

there are many examples on this very forum, something to ponder about, why do most of the Pakistanis living abroad have all tendencies of a 'proper extremist terrorist', WHY?
 
.
let me put a straight question

why Pakistanis living abroad become extremists & terrorists despite of the fact that they grow up in a 'liberal' society

there are many examples on this very forum, something to ponder about, why do most of the Pakistanis living abroad have all tendencies of a 'proper extremist terrorist', WHY?



Let me help.....

You live there...you work there....you make money....you pay taxes...and you still get treated as a second citizen.....

But you can not move back to your own country...because you cant leave all that Aisho arram...and Money .....on top of that ...daily news of you home country in turmoil....stops you from going back.....so you stay there....get frustrated....start meeting people in huddles..and religious gathering....and get brain washed....and then ....well you know what...Kaboom.....

You will see more people turning to extremists...in the long run...mostly because they live a dual life...
 
.
let me put a straight question

why Pakistanis living abroad become extremists & terrorists despite of the fact that they grow up in a 'liberal' society

there are many examples on this very forum, something to ponder about, why do most of the Pakistanis living abroad have all tendencies of a 'proper extremist terrorist', WHY?

i think the main reason for that is what the parents tell the children, Because the younger generation does not experience it themselves they get their information from the internet and from sources that encourage extremism. Youngsters listening to the likes of Zaid Hamid or Hamid Gul come under the pretext that extremism when used against the right foe is good. These youngsters are radicalized against other religions, nationalities and cultures by making them believe that these people are out to get them. A prime example would be a muslim living in Canada who is born here but still hates Jews without even knowing the real story. They see one sides images and stories on the internet and then come to believe that all jews are out to get them. The same reasoning applies to the India-Pakistan conflict. Without even knowing the real story, youngsters in Canada or US watch extreme videos by Zaid Hamid or read one sided articles, get radicalized and end up adopting the wrong path. Its a sad fact and it will continue to spread. Even in Canada, radicalized youth are spreading, specially in universities where such movement usually find lot of support. The recent foiling of terrorist attacks by the Canadian police is a prime example of that. These attacks were being planned by radicalized students at big universities like University of Toronto. Getting second hand info is more risky than getting no info at all.
 
. . .
Cheapest Journalism ever seen worst than Indian. I think this man is biggest enemy of Pakistan, worth smacking his face.
ambidex..why pissed off if he referred and compared it to indian star plus ****..great analysis i don't think he is enemy of Pakistan he has pointed out valid points..very interesting indeed.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom