Comments on: Pakistan’s Waziristan fight tougher than Kashmir ? http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/ Perspectives on Pakistan Thu, 01 Oct 2015 19:31:05 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: LOVE SMS http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-26064 Thu, 19 Nov 2009 10:18:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-26064 Really great blog and here lot of information about our country, thanks for information.

]]>
By: Keith http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-26001 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:47:12 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-26001 In fact I already see you as a straight forward guy who because of his background appears to be very jumpy in reaching a conclusion.
– Posted by rex minor

I am generally a nice guy. But I don’t suffer racists very easily.

I see no need to bring my background into this. That you say it is relevant is worrisome. How would you evaluate my comment is I was white? And what you think of my comments if I was black? Would your opinion be different if I was Hindu or if I was Muslim?

If you want to understand me, read my comments. They are straightforward enough. Where I am from, the colour of my skin or which god I pray to is not relevant on an internet forum. I am not out to date your sister. We are merely discussing politics here.

]]>
By: Victor http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25994 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 03:22:47 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25994 (1) The numbers thrown around by Pakistanis of 500,000 Indian troops in Kashmir are very misleading. Kashmir borders both Pakistan and China with borders disputed. Most of the Army is deployed to defend the borders, not fight the Jehadis. As the Kargil War in 1999 illustrated, even these 500K soldiers are not enough to prevent a war.

(2) The modus operandi of the Indian Army in Kashmir is very different from the Pakistani Army. The Indian Army goes out of the way to minimize civilian casualties. Gunbattles with the Jehadis often last multiple days, as the Army tries to wear them out. Often these leads to officer casualties. The Indian Army does not use armor, artillery or air-power in Kashmir. OTOH, the Pakistani Forces have used F-16s, artillery, and helicopter gunships to fight their own people. There are numerous stories of massive civilian casualties in these attacks. Often the relatives of suspected Taleban sympathizers are murdered and their houses blown up to send a message. As a result there have been hundreds of thousands of civilians who fled the battle-zone (known as Internally Displaced People).
See this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0GErBdwhj Z4

Unfortunately these gross human rights violations by the Pakistani Army are not talked about by the Pakistani or the Western Press because it is supposedly for a good cause. The same group would not spare any opportunity to malign the Indian Armed Forces while not shedding any tears for the Kashmiri Pundits who have been ethnically cleansed from their own homes.

]]>
By: rex minor http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25989 Wed, 18 Nov 2009 01:16:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25989 keith,
It is important for me to know the background of the people,if at all it is possible, simply to understand them. This is in no way intended to evaluate their statements. For me chromosols do give a certain indication but this will not prejudice my opinion of the person. Every one of us has a different upbringing, culture, family traditions etc. etc.And I am sure if you were to know my background you would not look at the hints to label me. In fact I already see you as a straight forward guy who because of his background appears to be very jumpy in reaching a conclusion. I wish that we exchange views on the subject and learn during the process but not throw labels at each other. Thank you.

]]>
By: Keith http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25971 Tue, 17 Nov 2009 22:23:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25971 Rex Minor,

It’s not Dubya language to call a spade a spade. If someone wants to use language that hints at their racial superiority or suggests that the value of my opinion should be based on my race, religion, nationality, I will call them out for the racism they are exhibiting. Do you think I should value what you say based on where you are from, your skin colour or which religious building you pray in?

Anyway, do feel free to defend them if that’s your thing.

]]>
By: rex minor http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25950 Tue, 17 Nov 2009 10:50:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25950 @keith,
let us try to obtain the list of people who are on cia payroll? If you cannot wait the time when the info will no longer be classified ,it can be obtained at any time from the retired cia agents. There are quite a few to give you this info. Or perhaps just listen carefully to the presenters and the personalities they interview and you would be able to rwealise the people who are willingly or unwillingly on the payroll of CIA. Instead of calling people racists that you do not know or talaban the terrorists (even hillary clinton says that there are good talabans and there are bad talabans) why do’nt you stop the use of obscene language which George W introduced in the world and get a clearer and more civilised view of the world which is far away from your cold and very much isolated land. You do not always have to think loudly and write without any deliberation. Your sentence “we spell his name the way he spells it” explains everything. Have a nice day.

]]>
By: bulletfish http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25913 Mon, 16 Nov 2009 09:58:49 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25913 We are in a difficult time. We know that. But we will emerge victors. We will clear all the RAW/Mossad/CIA agents from our region. We will hold our ground until the Americans tire and leave. Then we will recover. That must send shivers down the spines of some people.
-Posted by Mohammad Anjum

You are in difficult times and you will remain in difficult times. China is not going to come running to your rescue.

Where is your proof of RAW/Mossad/CIA agents in your region?

You are holding no ground because every week ther are fresh attacks from the Taliban you created (AND THAT IS A FACT).

How are you going to recover? Is Uncle Saudi going to open his wallet to give you aid?

Pakistan is already on a lifeline of IMF and US aid.

Everything you type is baseless and a pathetic attempt to appear tough in the face of your own problems.

]]>
By: GW http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25880 Sun, 15 Nov 2009 20:09:58 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25880 @Anjum,

CIA/RAW/Mosaid were not involved in the suicide attack on your building at 0640.

That early in the morning, there is almost no one there. If CIA or some other agency was going to do it, they would have gone for maximum body count and waiting until the building was full.

All this suggests that the ISI may have did this to themselves, just to play the victims or throw a smokescreen and divert scrutiny unto themselves.

Does my conspiracy sound ludicrous to any Pak bloggers here? Well, during Mumbai, many bloggers like Ali, Umair and some others strongly suggested that India did Mumbai to themselves.

It seems victimhood is a one way street. When the States or India suffers a 911 or a Mumbai, it is always the CIA, MOSSAID or RAW that supposedly commits these acts to “malign Pakistan or muslims”, but when Pakistan gets a terror attack, why can’t we, as Indians or westerners say that the ISI did it to Pakistani’s? Perhaps even rogue elements of the ISI? That seems much more plausible than the CIA doing it. The CIA/USA is giving billions USD to Pakistan to stablize it and on the other end trying to hurt the ISI?

Give me a break dear Pak friends and quit being dismissive about the Taliban Militant cancer tearing through your country, while you sit impotently, idle with fear and stew in static complacency to maintain the status quo.

]]>
By: Keith http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25848 Sun, 15 Nov 2009 06:41:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25848 Ganesh. What recks Anjum’s thesis is the inconvenient truth that those undertaking the attacks are Pakistanis. While I don’t accept his argument, let’s say it was true and outsiders were running this mess, does that give the Pakistanis an excuse not to fight the militants (guys like Anjum want peace deals with the Talibs)? What does it say about Pakistan that its citizens are so easily bought off? And what does it say about the ISI which so easily lost control of these groups? If its true that outsiders can meddle so easily, what does it say about the state of Pakistan’s unity and cohesion? I’d be seriously worried about imminent collapse, if Anjum’s thesis is correct. Thankfully, I don’t think he’s right.

]]>
By: Ganesh Prasad http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/2009/11/10/pakistans-waziristan-fight-tougher-than-kashmir/comment-page-2/#comment-25837 Sun, 15 Nov 2009 01:12:37 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/pakistan/?p=4168#comment-25837 Mohammad Anjum said (numbering mine):
“[…]
(1) If you believe in the idea that the ISI blew its own offices up in order to win sympathy, then you must be able to believe the idea that the Mossad and the CIA staged the 9/11 attacks through their Arab agents staying at Germany. That might have helped the US return to this region. War on terrorism is actually a war for Central Asian Oil pipe line.
(2) Someone asked why the US is still sympathetic to Pakistan. That is because Pakistan is sitting directly in the path of that oil pipe line. That is why it confined its attacks to Afghanistan.
(3) Israel is definitely concerned about our nukes. That is another reason why the US is sitting in Afghanistan, creating the chaos inside Pakistan. At some point they will use the excuse of extremism to take our nukes out. ISI building attack was staged to show that our nuclear installations are not safe either.
(4) They are trying to weaken our military by engaging it in wars with our own brethren.
[…]
(5) If they wanted Bin Laden, they would have taken him out long ago. But they are beating around the bush for some reason for the past 8 years.
[…]”

Arguing from a position of pure logic, the man has some points. None of us really knows what machinations governments and secret service agencies are up to, so one person’s conspiracy theory is as good as another’s.

While I cannot really comment on how true these are, I must say Mohammad Anjum has taken the time to articulate them quite well. It beats some of the incoherent rants I’ve read here on occasion.

If anyone has read George Friedman’s “The Next Hundred Years (A Forecast for the 21st Century)”, it is an extremely unsentimental analysis of what countries will likely do over the coming century. Many statements that would normally be dismissed as conspiracy theories have been backed up by detailed reasoning.

I guess all I can say is, I certainly hope all this is not true. Even if they are, Pakistanis can make things easier for themselves by being cooperative with other countries instead of adopting a war mindset. More powerful countries may then be incentivised to trade with Pakistan rather than manipulate them into giving up their resources, don’t you think?

Regards,
Ganesh

]]>