Comments on: Pakistan after Baitullah; a new political hurdle http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/ Perspectives on Pakistan Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:31:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Bangash http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-21014 Thu, 13 Aug 2009 13:31:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-21014 @SinghPakistanis have a diversity of views and while a few fools called Mehsud a US agent, many correctly called Mehsud an Indian agent. Baitullah is the second major Indian agent in Pakistan to be eliminated following Nawab Akbar Bugti in 2006.

]]>
By: bulletfish http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-21003 Thu, 13 Aug 2009 07:46:25 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-21003 Fierce clashes broke out between supporters of Baitullah Mehsud and rival Turkistan Bhittani in the Frontier Region of Jandola on Wednesday and each side claimed inflicting heavy casualties on the other.(DAWN, 13/08/2009)I think we can forget about the political implications after Mehsud’s so-called death when factions of the Taliban are fighting with each other.One small thought has dawned upon me. The USSR forces left Afghanistan in 1989. So, the Mujahideen guys would have been on average aged 15 – 30 years. So, in 2001 they would have been 27 – 42, still with enough fight in them. It is now 2009, so they are now 35 – 50 years old. After the Soviets left Afghanistan, the Americans knew that their work was done. However, the Mujahideen could not seem to get themselves organised to rebuild their own country. They were all united to remove the USSR, but could not come together to fix things. The USA did not want to interfere otherwise IT would have been seen as an ‘imperialist capitalist’ interferring with a Muslim nation of holy warriors. If the Mujahideen had collected themselves together and appointed a leader and council and approached the USA to help rebuild Afghanistan, then the USA would have happily obliged. This only begs one question: Why did Saudi Arabia not step in with their oil money to rebuild Afghanistan?The USA got occupied with another situation in the Middle East: Kuwait. When Saddam decided to attack Kuwait and threatened Saudi Arabia; Osama Bin Laden offered to defend Saudi Arabia. Only Holy Warriors should defend the Holy Land. The Saudis thanked him, but no thank you. They turned to George Bush. OBL got angry that his offer was rejected, but more so that Americans will have bases on Holy Muslim Arab Soil. It was he who then formed Al Qaeda and not the Americans.Taliban originated, the early 1990s, from Pakistan and were given all the blessing of the state to conduct their recruitment from Zia ul Haq’s maddrassa education system in order to bring about their draconian, medieval laws in Afghanistan. Only 3 countries in the whole world legitimately recognised the Taliban as ruling government of Afghanistan: Pakistan, UAE and Saudi Arabia. It was this Taliban that hosted OBL and his Al Qaeda as honored guests in Afghanistan.

]]>
By: singh http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-21000 Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:24:42 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-21000 US-Pakistan partnership is beginning to get back on track with elimination of Mehsud using Pakistani intel and US drones.- Posted by BangashHow funny, if Baitulla Mehsud was CIA Agent as stated by Fellow Pakistanis commentators here, why will Pakistani Intel tell his hideout location to CIA, and why will CIA drone him.Other side of the story is, if he was enemy of Pakistan and Pakistan knows where he was hiding, why don’t Pakistani Army bombed that place themselves and take full credit. Instead you are trying to snatch credit from CIA, and top of that with a Drone attach which you are opposing already.Do you have some answers ??Umair, Bangash, Bagbag, mohammad Anjum, any Pakistani.

]]>
By: Mortal http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-20995 Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:20:41 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-20995 An excerpt from an article in Dawn by Mahir Ali:”Perhaps the most bizarre aspect of the Baitullah affair, however, is the insinuation that the Taliban have been receiving assistance from India.This allegation was deployed to sow disaffection against Baitullah among his followers by appealing to their instinctive hostility towards Pakistan’s eastern neighbour. But there are indications that it may not have been merely a cynical piece of disinformation: there is at least a chance that those who concocted this canard have persuaded themselves to take it seriously. It surfaced, for instance, in a briefing given by the suddenly PR-savvy Inter-Services Intelligence directorate to The Guardian’s correspondent Declan Walsh, who was also told that ‘Indian officials had orchestrated last November’s Mumbai attacks [in order to] cover up an investigation into Hindu extremism’.The absurdity of such claims – particularly when they are made by an organisation that must know better – may seem mind-boggling, but the mindset behind them ought to be familiar to all Pakistanis. They are, after all, the product of a nationhood that has for more than six decades defined itself negatively. Pakistan, from the outset, was the un-India. In the eyes of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, a Muslim-majority state did not necessarily entail a departure from essentially secular ideals, but the Objectives Resolution, passed just months after his demise in September 1948, effectively put paid to his vision”http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/conne ct/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspap er/columnists/separated-at-birth-289

]]>
By: Mortal http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-20994 Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:01:05 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-20994 “I think there’s a serious split coming in Pakistan-America relations. Nicholas Schmidle’s article alluded to it…..” – Posted by KeithThere’s a common saying in Pakistan since the 60’s: Pakistan exists because of three A’s – America, Allah & Army. Subservience to America runs deep in the psyche of every Pakistani leader & Pakistanis in general. I don’t think that the Pakistanis have the stomach to stand up to America & disobey their master. Yeah, they’ll always make some noise to extract that extra buck from their but eventually, they’ll come around to doing what America wants them to do (Case in point being the recent action taken against Taliban by the Pak army). Hence, I very much doubt that it’ll come down to any serious rift between the US & Pakistan because with it’s ‘stick & carrot’ approach, the US will get pretty much what it wants from Pakistan. Common Pakistanis can challenge America with nonsensical diatribes & do all the anti-American rah rah they want (on internet blogs) but the truth is that their establishment is pretty much owned by the US.

]]>
By: Bangash http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-20985 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:14:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-20985 @JacobPlease take discussions of India to some Indian blog.US-Pakistan partnership is beginning to get back on track with elimination of Mehsud using Pakistani intel and US drones.

]]>
By: babag55 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-20982 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 14:00:03 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-20982 Daily reader,Very good observation. Can’t agree more. Majority of the posts are the repetition of same old story.

]]>
By: singh http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-20978 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 11:33:11 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-20978 Bangash Wrote”Mehsud’s elimination is a very welcome development as he had the unique ability to unify factions. Without Mehsud, Pakistani militant groups will return to their old pattern of local commanders, local mischief and local agenda, which makes them easier to handle.”This statement reflects the mindset of an average Pakistani. Instead of eliminating rest of the the militant groups, pakistanis are talking about “OLD PATTERN” and how easier is to “HANDLE” now, Handling them in old pattern is making them attack India and Afghanistan in the name of Jihad. I don’t see any difference between a seasoned terrorist and an average pakistani if he thinks on similar lines.

]]>
By: bulletfish http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-20977 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:42:33 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-20977 Umair wrote:No Indian government is strong enough to make its decisions and solve disputes with Pakistan.-Why should any Indian govt talk with a Pak govt that supports terrorist groups and the Taliban to use as proxy wars against India?there are hindu fundamentalists and extremists in India too, the people like Col. Purohit of Indian Army who were involved in Samjhota express train bombing and killing of Pakistani citizens.-Again with the train bombing. What about the way you try your terrorists? A court hands down a sentence only for the Supreme Court to overturn it and everyone stuffs their faces with sweets in celebration. Should I even bother to mention the treatment of Mukhtar Mai (gang raped in a matter of honor) or Taslim Solangi, who was thrown to a pack of dogs and shot in the head infront of her father over a land dispute. Yes, Pakistan has a wonderful, smooth functioning judical system.As far as Indian democracy and development is concerned, it is still a distant wish.-M. Singh was voted in for a second term. What about your Pakistani democracy? Pakistan seems to have spent most of its 62 years under military dictators. As for development; India has moved on. In 1991, M. Singh removed the Licence Raj and made it easier for foreign companies to invest in India. We have call centres that seem to be the butt of peoples jokes, but at least its providing a service to the world. We have TaTa that have developed the world’s cheapest car. We have even the IPL that was formed by the millionaires of India who made their money from the economic reforms. Plus, the nuclear submarine.As for Pakistan development:Pakistan economic growth weak: IMF.Pakistan receives further $1.2bn from IMF.July trade deficit narrows 31%.Pakistan textile industry buckels under crisis.Banks reluctant to increase textile lending.Pakistan nuclear sites attacked thrice, claims reports.(all are recent DAWN article titles)You want to show the world that you are ‘defeating the Taliban’. However, you wish to retain the Taliban that you created and nurtured to use against India. Pakistan’s faults are greater than any other country. Otherwise it would not be so prominent on the international news radar.

]]>
By: rajeev http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/08/09/pakistan-after-baitullah-a-new-political-hurdle/comment-page-1/#comment-20976 Wed, 12 Aug 2009 08:33:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=3372#comment-20976 @No Indian government is strong enough to make its decisions and solve disputes with Pakistan.-posted by Umair-It takes 2 to TANGO. who has been ruling Pakistan–no one knows—while Pakistan is expert in doing TANGO with all stripes of terrorists on the floor, it is amusing that Pakistan does nort know how to deal with nations. who rules Pakistan is the first question..Indian politicians untill recently had no clue. so what solutions are you talking. Think cooly before shooting knee jerk return comment.There is NO dossier given by Pakistan..just a baseless allegation thus far and that includes balochistan issue and Lahore attack. Give factual statements…even commenters have some responsibility.

]]>