CFR on Pakistan: hold course (for now)

November 14, 2010

damadola2The Council on Foreign Relations has just released a new report on U.S. policy on Afghanistan and Pakistan based on a study by a bipartisan group chaired by former Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage and former national security adviser Sandy Berger and directed by CFR senior fellow Daniel Markey.

As far as Pakistan is concerned, the report broadly endorses U.S. policy of trying to build a long-term partnership, while also aiming to persuade it to turn convincingly against all militant groups. It reiterates a U.S. complaint that while Pakistan is ready to act against militants that threaten the Pakistani state, like al Qaeda and the Pakistani Taliban, it continues to support or tolerate other groups it believes can be used as proxies against India, including the Afghan Taliban, the Haqqani network and the Lashkar-e-Taiba. Among a range of incentives to build a better relationship with Pakistan, the report argues for continued U.S. financial support for Pakistan, all the more needed after this summer’s devastating floods, along with more favourable trade terms to boost the textile industry, which it says provides 38 percent of the country’s industrial employment.

However, the report’s endorsement of U.S. support for Pakistan comes with a hard edge, warning that failure to achieve results, or an attack on the United States traced back to Pakistan-based militants, could lead to a much more aggressive U.S. policy:

“There are several strategic options available to the United States if the administration concludes that the current strategy is not working. In Pakistan, Washington could turn away from its present emphasis on rewarding and encouraging long-term bilateral cooperation. Instead, it could undertake increasingly aggressive, unilateral U.S. military strikes against Pakistan-based terrorists deeper into Pakistani territory, coercive diplomacy and sanctions, or a range of financial, diplomatic, and legal restrictions to control the flow of people, money, goods, and information to and from Pakistan. This strategy of containment and coercion could be coupled with a distinct diplomatic ’tilt’ toward India, with New Delhi serving as Washington’s main strategic and counterterror partner in the region.”

The report also highlights the potential threat from the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Punjab-based militant group blamed for the 2008 attack on Mumbai, which it says ”could eventually surpass al-Qaeda as the world’s most sophisticated and dangerous terrorist organization.”

“The growing ambitions and capabilities of LeT and its affiliates (and its ties to al-Qaeda) make it the ticking time bomb of South Asia. Washington should place greater pressure on Islamabad to degrade LeT’s capacity and restrain its sympathizers, bearing in mind that a number of these groups enjoy widespread popular support because of their humanitarian outreach efforts,” it says. 

“Discussion of LeT should receive priority alongside al-Qaeda and the Taliban in U.S.-Pakistan political, military, and intelligence dialogues. Tougher U.S. talk must be backed by strong evidence. The United States should therefore enhance its own intelligence and interdiction capabilities to shut down LeT’s operations outside Pakistan and its recruiting activities in the United States and Europe. By sharing intelligence with India and contributing to its defensive capabilities against terrorists based in Pakistan, the United States can undercut any in Pakistan who still see strategic value in supporting militancy.”

Some comments.

As far as I can make out from the list of South Asian experts who contributed to the report, none of them specifically speak for Pakistan’s point of view.  As a result, the subtleties and compromises that would be required in the kind of partnership it advocates go unaddressed. Its approach, rightly or wrongly,  is therefore one of adversary rather than ally. And the questions Pakistanis raise about their relationship with the United States and the future of the country go unanswered.

These include, but are not limited to:

1) Pakistan’s sense of itself as a “rentier state” which takes  money from the United States in return for allowing drone bombings and hiring out its soldiers to fight and die on America’s behalf.  This is a view exploited by militants who think they know best how to save Pakistan from what they see as a collaborationist government.  It is also a view likely to weigh heavily on soldiers and officers in the Pakistan Army, which although too disciplined to allow a rebellion from the ranks, is also intensely patriotic and connected to the feelings of society as a whole. 

2) The “won’t but can’t” (or, depending who you listen to, can’t but won’t) view of the Pakistani military in its approach to the Lashkar-e-Taiba. At one level, according to most analysts, it does not want to take on the Lashkar-e-Taiba, believing the group to be useful and reasonably obedient proxies which can be used against India.  (So far they are one of the few militant groups not believed to have been heavily involved in attacks within Pakistan). But Pakistan also can’t take on the Lashkar-e-Taiba without making the group even more dangerous, by driving it into the arms of an al Qaeda-inspired coalition. This could make it more of a threat to the west, to India and to Pakistan itself.

3) The fear of more bombings in Pakistan were its military to take a more aggressive approach; combined with a sense that the United States does not take  Pakistani deaths as seriously as it would American deaths, if for example as many were to die in U.S. cities as have been killed in a string of bombings from Peshawar to Lahore, Islamabad to Karachi

4)    The apparent (so far) inability of the United States to influence political discourse in Pakistan in a way which encourages people to see it as a friend rather than an enemy.  Running parallel to that is the government’s inability to convince people that Islamist militants pose a real threat.  And then pile on top the nature of politics in Pakistan — for an extreme version, see this link to a water-throwing incident between politicians, as picked up by Cafe Pyala.

5)  The “hedging your bets” scenario. If the United States is going to leave Afghanistan, sooner or later, why create more enemies by taking on the Afghan Taliban? Or maybe more to the point of this post. If the United States is going to turn on Pakistan because it runs out of patience, why create more enemies by having the Lashkar-e-Taiba against you? 

6) Then there is India, the country that is trying very hard not to be hyphenated with Pakistan,  and yet which still defines the Pakistani military’s view of what it sees as its existential threat.  President Barack Obama’s trip to India has left that debate in limbo, seen variously as a wake-up call  and a rebuff.

There is more, far more that ought to be said about a country of 180 million people. And to be fair to the CFR report, it also suggests how much more there might be if the United States changes course and switches from “frenemy” to enemy:

“Americans and Pakistanis must understand that these options carry heavy risks and costs. Both sides have a great deal to lose. Containing the terrorist threat from Pakistan would be challenging if the Pakistani and U.S. governments were at odds, intelligence sharing were reduced, and U.S. officials were forced to operate from neighboring countries. NATO’s presence in Afghanistan would be jeopardized without a secure logistics route through Pakistan. At the same time, Pakistan’s fragile political and economic stability would be undermined by greater tensions with the United States. Pakistan’s military would suffer from the loss of U.S. assistance and restricted access to training, technology, and spare parts for American-made weapons and vehicles. In general, U.S. coercion and containment of Pakistan could accelerate dangerous economic, political, and social trends inside Pakistan. Americans must recognize that as frustrating and difficult as Pakistan’s situation may be today, it has the potential to get even worse.”

The report, with admirable transparency, also quotes its many dissenting voices, including this one from Michael Krepon:

“I do not share this report’s analysis and recommendations in every respect. In particular, I believe that the report’s suggestion that Washington has a credible, coercive fall-back position to convince Pakistan’s security managers to change course is misplaced. In past crises, when the possibilities of leveraging unwelcome choices on Pakistan’s decision-makers were far better than at present, and when faced with far more concerted, top-down U.S. pressures, Pakistan’s leaders successfully parried Washington’s pressures to take actions that were perceived to be unacceptable on national security or domestic political grounds. This track record, as reflected in Pakistan’s pursuit of nuclear weapon capabilities, its protection of unconventional military options to influence Afghanistan’s future, and its policies to keep India off-balance, provides a cautionary tale of Washington’s ability to successfully manipulate carrots and sticks.

“To hold out the expectation that, this time around, with such a heavy U.S. military presence in Afghanistan dependent on Pakistani logistical support, Washington can coercively manipulate Pakistan’s orientation toward the Lashkar-e-Taiba, the Afghan Taliban, Kabul, and New Delhi, seems unwise. Pakistan’s security managers have to come to their own realization that their policies have resulted in profound damage to their country. If they do not, the natural result, with no U.S. manipulation necessary, will be the continued mortgaging of Pakistan’s future, its distancing from the West, and its economic decline.”

Again there is more, far more, to be said. But let me end on a somewhat flippant note. People (countries?) don’t do stuff they don’t want to do because other people tell them to.  Otherwise I would have given up smoking years ago. People do stuff because it is in their interests to do so, or because they choose to do so. I’m not convinced that the CFR report, with all the American bipartisan support behind it, gets there.  “Do this or else,” just does not cut it.

Comments

@KPSingh

” Not all Pashtuns are Taliban either. You are cleverly mixing them all up and projecting them as some heavy horned, three eyed gargantuans.”

***Rex pictures Afghanistan as a holy land where all pushtoons have undergone mandatory military training to serve under Taliban. It is hard to debate with him when he has firm belief that Taliban are powerful enough to take out Indian nukes and liberate Kashmir.

He has made Taliban and Pushtoon synonymous though his tireless efforts and he has succeeded at that.

Pushtoons have their own negatives and positives just like any other population can be imagined to have. There is nothing holy or not holy about that place.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

rehmat: “Pushtoons have their own negatives and positives just like any other population can be imagined to have. There is nothing holy or not holy about that place.”

There are lot of wonderful Pathans that have settled in India for generations. Many have done very well in the arts field. Shah Rukh Khan, Yusuf bhai (Dileep Kumar), Amjad Khan etc come to mind. Many Afghans (mostly Pathans) have settled in Deccan and places like Hyderabad. They are high culture people who came with the regal dynasties of the past. Saleem Durrani in the past played for Hyderabad and was famous for hitting sixers. None of them belong to the barbarians who live in the mountains of Waziristan. People become what they are due to their circumstances. The great Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan opposed the very idea of Pakistan and is always remembered as Frontier Gandhi. In Pakistan there are famous Pathans like Imran Khan. I am sure this Rex guy has no idea who these wonderful people are. He is focusing on the militants and bandits and romanticizing them. Pashtuns are normal people just like anyone else.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Interestingly, the word Pashtun has been grossly misunderstood by most people in the world. Pashtuns are basically an ethnic group which emerged in the eastern Iranain belt back in the 2nd BC & migrated to Afghanistn & North Western Pakistan in the ensuing millinias. Although, a majority of Pashtuns are muslim & speak Pashto, there are many hindu & sikh Pashtuns in India & Pakistan. The Indian film industry is full of Pashtuns, both muslims & hindus. The famous Kapoor family (Raj Kapoor etc) are also Pashtuns as are many others. Makes me wonder about my own ethnic makeup since my ancestors also hailed from Peshawar.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh
I am sure you do not want a response from me. The world is sadly witnessing the defeat of the americans and all the rest in the land of warriors and you and Rahmat are of the opinion that they are only few. The Americans have removed their names from the terrorist list and yet they are not prepared to negotiate with fgorteigners. You are one of the luckiest watching the history in making and yet you pretend that this is not real.

I recognise that there are still many who want to have a go at them and see if they can overpower them, making the same mistake in believing that only few hundred or thousands are involved against the quarter million foreign troops.

You are perfectly right if I were you I would not trust a Pashtoon either. The Americans know it but have no choice to go along with Mr Karzai the leader of a tribe, whose father was the casualty at the hands of the so called talibans. And yet the Pashtoons are one against the foreigners. This is their stregnth, their agility to act, lunch in Pashawar and combat in Qandhar! For them it is a 24 hr travel to kashmir, they have done it before and found no one to oppose them and they are capable of repeating it again, when the time comes. India can then show its stregnth.

Rex minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Rex

“For them it is a 24 hr travel to kashmir, they have done it before and found no one to oppose them and they are capable of repeating it again, when the time comes. India can then show its stregnth.”

***I am sure Mullah Omar is noticing you and would make you Afghanistan’s Ambassador to Germany once Taliban returns to power.

About that 24hr travel, let them deal with Pakistan Army first. You know the deal, right? Check with TTP.

“This is their stregnth, their agility to act, lunch in Pashawar and combat in Qandhar!”
***It is time to expect these Taliban to show their REAL JUICE and put their energy in building up Afghanistan. That was the purpose of the student organization (!!!!) post civil war situation after US/USSR left. Their achievement is zero. Even before 9/11 they were busy blowing up their own country.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Hey Rex,

You need to come out of high school soon. No one is interested in testing the fighting prowess of others today. Every society has run over others through history. Mongols ran all over Pashtun land once upon a time. Alexander the Great founded the city of Kandahar. His Selucid empire was headquartered in Afghanistan. In fact the first Mauryan emperor defeated Selucas Nicador who ruled over the region that you proudly claim as Pashtun land. Every tribe has been victor some time and has been at the receiving end some other time. It is time you came out of the past. Daisy cutters can wipe out all of Pashtunistan. No one is interested in those childish ventures. Everyone wants to move on with their lives, Americans included. It is unfortunate that some lunatics sitting in Afghanistan attacked Americans in New York. They are not here to play a boxing match to test the strength of Pashtuns. If Al Qaeda did not f*ck withe Americans, Pashtuns would have been left to fondle their own donkeys. No one really cares if they exist or not. So why don’t you sing your praises where it matters?

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh
Now you have made a full circle and once again telling us the story of the origin of the pashtoons, not dealing with the current situation.
My comments were to understand and explain the cultural background of the people the world armies are currently dealing with.
The german republic is currently on stand by and are expecting an attack from the so called talibans who we are told are travelling on the caravan route from waziristan to the German republic to carry out criminal acts in public places.
No body wants these uninvited guests in this country.

And you are once again playing the BIg Brother music and presenting it as a victim. Yes they were victim of the attack by the arabs not Pashtoons, who do not believe in suicides. The Pashtoons are the victims now, have sympathy for them. The vietnamese were the victims, do not always hang on with the wrong party.-
I have a very simple rule, I favour the victims and praise the winner who fights and then wins. I have no praise for the looser. i remember on this blog way back a Pakistani most probably ex military man even described to me the period of roughly six days for the Pakistan army to eliminte the waziristan uprising. I kept on advising him that waziris are the most fearless warriors in History experiernced by the Brits. You have a good read of history. It is the waziris now who are giving dance lessons to the most professionaly trained marines. There are a number of videos now on the internet taken by France 24 correspondents showing how good the marines re in protecting themselves from the snipers.
I would not bet on your favourites!

Rex Minor

PS Like the former German Chancellor said that Alex the great was the only sensible soldier who avoided any contact with the Pashtoons and travelled at night towards peaceful and friendly Taxela, India. There have been many tourists who have seen the route which is now used by the smugglers.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Right after 9/11, the US Deputy Secretary of State, Richard Armitage went to Islamabad & met with Musharraf, He told him “if your don’t cooperate with us, we’ll bomb you back to the stone age”. Musharraf thought for a minute & said “we’ll cooperate, sir. We don’t don’t want to go back to the stone age”. Then Mr. Armitage went to Kabul & met with the Pashtun Taliban leader. He told him the same thing “if your don’t cooperate with us, we’ll bomb you back to the stone age”. The Pashtun leader, without hesitating for a second, replied “You can bomb us all you want. We don’t care because we never got out of the stone age”.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

The only reason of Pashtun “invincibility” is that they have absolutely NOTHING to lose. Over the centuries, they have kept their standards of living SO low that they probably consider death as an upgrade.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

Motal1: “We don’t care because we never got out of the stone age”.

Actually Armitage did not speak in Pashto. So they thought he had come to buy heroine from them.

In the case of Musharraf, Armitage asked, “Are you with us or against us?”

Musharraf took it literally. So he worked with the Americans on one side and worked against them on the other. Can’t blame him for that. He is used to double meanings in everything. When Nawaz Sharif said “Peace with India,” Musharraf thought it was war and launched the Kargil offensive.

This whole place has been double dealing since historic times. Babur when he was planning to campaign into Hindustan to take on Ibrahim Lodi, sought the help of a Punjabi war lord named Daulat Khan. He did pretty much what Musharraf did. He did not know which way things were going to go. So he said whatever please Babur to him and whatever pleased Lodi when he met him. Babur realized this duplicity. So he had Daulat Khan brought to him with two swords hanging around his neck. One for betraying him and one for betraying Lodi.

These people have not changed over centuries. It has been their way of survival. They just pretend to be working with you while they pretend to be working with your enemy as well. Whoever gains, they will switch sides immediately. Such is the culture.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Mortal1: “The only reason of Pashtun “invincibility” is that they have absolutely NOTHING to lose. ”

Where? Down below? or in the heads?

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

@Mortal1
Had Dick armitage uttered these words to a Pashtoon leader, he would not have come back to report his experience. He knew that Musharaf was not the lad who could take pressure and therefore armitage approach towards him was relatively gentle, and in addition to the stone age scenario, he was also told about the torture chambers of the USA, as well as the maximum security prisons where most foreign dignatories are accomodated. I could never even dream to live the day to see Mullah Omar becoming the most powerful and feared personality of 2010. Both Times and Newsweek are competing to display his pictureon the cover next month.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Pakistan: “I could never even dream to live the day to see Mullah Omar becoming the most powerful and feared personality of 2010.”

Hey you are hurting Bin Laden’s gentle feelings! He claims to be the most feared dude. That might start a civil war in the caves about who is the most feared. Between the two, I think Bin Laden has the advantage – He has both eyes and is tall. His neck sticks out of the roof actually. Mullah Omar has only one eye. I think the Tajiks took the other eye for a soup dip. Bin Laden says he is better than Omar because he bombed the US and the US came and bombed Omar’s rear end off. All the Toyota trucks that the Taliban owned have been taken by the Americans. Poor Mullah Omar, he had to find a motor bike and escape to the safety in Pakistan. On his way his bike died and he ended up on top of a donkey. And further on the donkey itself died as Mullah was sexually harassing it in addition to riding it. Now he is sitting in Quetta under the watchful eyes of the ISI and Pak military. And he is hoping that the drones will kill off Bin Laden soon enough.

I know you can’t wait to see public beheadings, chopping off limbs, tongue pulling, eye ball plucking, flogging etc on stadiums built for soccer which was the game brought by impure infidels. And then there is further entertainment of blasting off pagan statues and temples. Power indeed. As soon as Afghanistan is “liberated” I can bet you will be there as the first Pashtun concubine to celebrate victory. Who needs women? There are plenty of Rex Minors from the old faithful school. Mullah Omar is going to have a tough time choosing between these virgins in the new paradise that is about to come.

Are you practicing new dance moves? Taliban might like it. The only sad part if you will not be writing here to entertain us because you will be busy there making the Pashtuns happy.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

@Rex Minor/Pakistan

Why don’t cut this nonsensical, annoying & utterly ridiculous chest thumping AND come out & admit that YOU ARE a Pashtun. C’mon, be a man!

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

Yes Pashtuns are good fighters, so what? You take a group of humans of any race, religion or ethnicity, put them in caves & mountains & train them in fighting, generation after generation AND that group of people will turn out to be damn good fighters. Practise makes a man perfect & the only thing Pashtuns have been practising for centuries, is fighting. The only education & livelihood they know of, is related to fighting. Their males are supposed to fight & their females are supposed to bear Pashtun sons, who can become fighters & that’s pretty much their purpose in life. They have no achievements besides that. They are nothing but a bunch of people who are bottled up in the stone age and for anyone, to project them as some sort of super-human beings, is beyond ridiculousness.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

My above comment is specifically with referrence to the militant Pashtuns, who have refused to progress & better their lives AND not the ones, who are progressive & productive citizens of Afghanistan & other countries.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@Mortal
It is a hell of a task to address a ccomplete community and express ‘unsinn’, ‘Quatsch’ and in english non sense. My simple reply would be a polite”mind your own business”. Try to compare one on one, and most of us would be interested your comments about the Indian Faqir who still receives aid from the tax payes around the world for being a inderdeveloped country and therefore unable to feed its citizens, and then wants to take a permanent seat in the UN security council and buying more lethal weaponry. Have fun. try not to think loud. We are all humans, your constituion must change to reflect that the diginity of a human is inviolable. We must the people as they are and not behave like a kenyan who went to the USA brought a son out, who the goes to India and tell them “what is in the interest of India”.
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rex Minor/Pakistan

You should know about nonsense, since you seem to have a doctorate in it. As for the rest of your garbage, I choose to ignore because, well as usual, it’s nonsense. So calm down & don’t forget to take your medication.

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@Rex

“I have a very simple rule, I favour the victims and praise the winner who fights and then wins. I have no praise for the looser.”

***OK let us find out what do you think of the following case.

Columbus discovered America, and immigrants from Europe fought with the Native Americans(read “victims” according to your “simple rule”). Native Americans were killed and the immigrants won. Now according to your rule, do you 1) favor Native Americans, 2) Praise Europeans who killed the Natives and 3) Do you have no praise for the lesser equipped Native Americans who fought the best they could.

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@Rehmat
Rewind the history and “srvival of the fittest” emerges. The rest of the stories like how the west was won are nothing more than children stories. besides the few natives could not live theie lives any more when their buffalos stock was eaten up by the european settlers.
You are always acting like the devil’s advocate. No offence is intended.
Have fun.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

The topic is about Pakistan’s course in the wake of new American strategic thinking.

Mr. Rex,

I’d suggest sticking to the topic line as much as possible. This is not the forum for discussing religious beliefs, non-believers, stomach etc. You have basically hijacked the discussion with responses from Indians. This discussion is turning non-sensical.

Posted by KPSingh01 | Report as abusive
 

Rex

“You are always acting like the devil’s advocate. No offence is intended.”

***Acting like Devil’s advocate is helpful since that challenges us to introspect.

Let me go further, what if USA nuke the hell out of Afghanistan and there is no living Pushtoon or any Taliban left, just their Kleshnikovs. There is nothing special about Pushtoons that it was not about Natives–both live simple lives, isn’t it?

I am trying to feel your survival of fittest theory. Then you should be OK with USA nuking Japan to its Knees. Survival of the fittest, right?

I am a person who asks questions to get better answers and a useful debate. Bit uncomfortable, but helpful. No offense, really!

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh

You are right sir. I did not mean to run away from the article. I shall revert to it as soon as I have answered Rehmat.

@rehmat
I have no problem with your non-cynical questions. But since you are raising hypothetical questions, may I suggest that you schould better spend some time in French and German universities to study Philosophy, or straight go to the devil’s den in Brooking Institute or chattahm House.

The problem you have is faced by most history students, the time and the place when history is experienced is often forgotten. I once aked a question, if you do not recognise that the Europeans are at least a century ahead of your civilisation, then there is no need to discuss further certain questions.

I am not taking you back to the neandertaler humans, but let us try to go back to the good old days, when there was starvation in Europe. People were looking for jobs that were not there and food which was not sufficient. There was also anarchy and criminality and the police were unable to handle them.
Most criminals from the UK were then being despatched to Austarlia. The poor and adventrous Irish and other europeans went over to the USA along with criminals,bandits and starving families to find a land where they could grow grain and prosper.

Well they found the land and some natives, apaches in the USA and the aborignies in Austaralia as well. So what, the natives assimilated or vaniished, and their place was slowly taken over by the slaves from africa. Not to forget the so called civil war in america, I do not what was civil in that war.
There were battles in america among the primitive agnostics and the south lost.

The Americans and the Austraians gradualy became so called civilised, with support from their countries of origin, though I must admit the Americans took a longer time but then very shorly took a decline slowly and slowly.

During the ww2 the europeansand the Americans were more or less civilised humans. This was the single most important reason to confront the Germans who under Hitler suddenly felt like conquering and controlling the terrotories and the people of the world.
The USA has not nuked Japan to its knees(do not distort the history).
No I am not o’k, we were not living in the stone age, the americans bombed the Japanese as a revenge and the brits bombarding the Dresden was also a revenge and what we are witnessing in your part of the world is also the revenge. So stop calling the people radicals, talibans, terrorists etc etc. The survival of the fittest is no longer valid. There are people in this world who have allocated all their wealth for the benefit of those who need it. We are civilised now, we have lost a lot but have learned. We do not want Indians and Pakistanis to follow the ways of Americans. The USA cannot keep on consuming a larger share of the earth resorces, they must allow others like India and China with large populations to improve the standard of living for their people.

Apparently you have never met Pashtoons, they live on proteins and fruits. How can you even imagine about them being defeated. They manufacture KK’s, and take their opium right across the oceans and land to reach their customers across the world. Let the Americans at least destroy their opium fields to demonstrate that they are capable of confronting them at least. KPSingh knows their history, what is it all about.´Are they invisible in battles; they picked up a man supposedly the Taliban leader and supposedly brought him in a helicopter from Quetta to Kabul and then discovered that the guy was an imposter? France 24 cable network newsitem.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Rex

“may I suggest that you schould better spend some time in French and German universities to study Philosophy, or straight go to the devil’s den in Brooking Institute or chattahm House.”

*** How do you know I did not spend sometime allover? It is stupid any way. Keep your German and Taliban love, and American hatred to yourself.

You are getting absurd by the day.
Rehmat

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

@Rehmat
Sorry, in my view you a very poor knowledge or perhaps deliberately posting motherhood. I have no feelings for foreigners, neither love nor hate. I simply admirte the winners and ignore or pity the loosers. You have definitely not been exposed to philosophy that is why I mentioned these countries. Not to belittle you.
Have fun to use your words.

Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Mortal
Doctrate yes, but not in nonsense. Do you also address your Professors in such a unfriendly way? Be careful, the break is over. Let us concentrate on the topic; CFR on Pakistan!
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@KPSingh
You are a hilarious personality. You would even outmatch the commedians of CNN and CNBC. There were minor errors though in your narration, BL is or was the son in law of the powerful Omar. Mr BL has died several years ago and Mr Omar is now permanently in meditation in the arabian world, perhaps a guest at the BL’s family saudi residence. Saudi Arabia as you know is the God father of the USA and keeping their economy going.

Rex Minor

PS Omar lost his one eye battling Russians the friends of the communist gang in Afghanistan, not at the hands of his cousins.

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

@Rex
“Sorry, in my view you a very poor knowledge or perhaps deliberately posting motherhood.”
***Was it you who said you do not have patience with anyone who does not follow your thinking. Use wide angle lens to understand what I say.

“deliberately posting motherhood.”
***???

“You have definitely not been exposed to philosophy that is why I mentioned these countries. Not to belittle you.”

***Yes Dr. Minor, the father of crapilosophy, you are right, I have not been exposed to this particular area of philosophy. Trust me I am learning fast and prove to be a good student.

What a nut case!

Posted by rehmat | Report as abusive
 

Minor,

I have no intention of wasting my time, indulging in a sparring contest with you. Bottomline is, I don’t have much of an appetite for your factless, delusional & pshycic, “stomach based” line of thinking. I don’t think you’re a bad guy, just that most of your comments don’t make much sense to me. take care!

Posted by Mortal1 | Report as abusive
 

@Mortal
Grow up and grow out of rudeness. At least try it.
Rex Minor

Posted by pakistan | Report as abusive
 

Post Your Comment

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
  •