Article

2006-02-28 India-Pakistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by john 2006-02-28 09:43|| || Front Page|| [11140 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 So why is Bush giving billions of dollars to those who want to kill Americans? It was the Pakistani government who set up the Taliban, hosted Al Qaeda and the ISI head honcho who wired $100,000 to Mohammed Atta to fund the WTC and Pentagon/White House mass murders. Why isn't the American government explaining the depth of Pakistani involvement in the 9/11 atrocities, the depths of hatred Islam engenders and then systematically reducing Pakistan. Instead Bush gives them $40 billion and the first positive economic growth rate in years. In return, Americans get death threats and AQ and the Taliban get shelter. To those in charge in D.C., I say good job!

Posted by ed 2006-02-28 10:43|| 2006-02-28 10:43|| Front Page Top

#2 "to protest the publication of ~~blasphemous caricatures of their Holy Prophet Mohammed~~ a few silly political cartoons by a newspaper in Denmark"

Hope everyone is shopping Danish products.

Posted by ex-lib 2006-02-28 10:57|| 2006-02-28 10:57|| Front Page Top

#3 There is a group within the state department that believes that if Pakistan feels secure, it will assist more in the WoT.
Look carefully at the US military assitance.

26 Jetranger helicopters
40 Cobra helicopters
6 C-130E Refurbished Hercules
5 Aerostat radars
6 AN/TPS-77 radars plus Command & Control software
8 P-3C Refurbished & Upgraded Orions
6 Phalanx CIWS,
2,000 TOW missiles,
60 Harpoon missiles,
300 Sidewinder missiles,
Tactical Radios
100 155mm Howitzers
75 F-16s
etc

Each item is meant to address a weakness in the Pak defence and give it near parity with India.
They are meant to neutralize any overt Indian military advantage.

Tow missiles to destroy the Indian T-72 tank force, Harpoons to destroy Indian navy ships, 155mm artilery and weapon locating radar to respond to Indian gunners. Helicopters and transport aircraft to airlift commandos in case of war in Kashmir.

Does this strategy actually make sense?
Probably not, since whenever Pak has felt secure, it has attacked India. The Pak military doesn't expect to conquer India. They have a war fighting strategy where the fight lasts two weeks and they seize some Indian territory. Then the international community forces both countries to a ceasefire and Pak gets what it wants in negotiations because it holds parts of the Indian Punjab.

Sound weird? That is Pak military logic.

What this aid does is piss off India.

Today the Indian Finance Minister Chindabaram (a leftist dove) unveiled the Indian budget.
He raised the defence budget by 7 percent to twenty billion dollars, 42 percent of which is earmarked for new weapon purchases.

Posted by john 2006-02-28 11:03|| 2006-02-28 11:03|| Front Page Top

#4 So much for goodwill from helping a nation with a major earthquake that would have killed thousands if we didn't help out.

Posted by Penguin 2006-02-28 11:17|| 2006-02-28 11:17|| Front Page Top

#5 I think this calls for a big foam rubber #1 finger graphic.

Posted by Xbalanke 2006-02-28 11:39|| 2006-02-28 11:39|| Front Page Top

#6 "On one side he is giving an impression that the 'citizens of Kashmir' are not citizens of India. On the other hand he told Doordarshan in an interview 'on my trip to Pakistan, I will, of course, talk about the terrorist activities, the need to dismantle terrorist training camps and to protect innocent life.'

Is he trying to blackmail both India and Pakistan? What could be his objective behind using the Kashmir card?"This is a way to beat these idiot's. Say things that confuse them, they will think themselves to death.

Posted by plainslow 2006-02-28 11:44|| 2006-02-28 11:44|| Front Page Top

#7 Pakistan under Musharraf is much, much, preferable to the alternative.

Posted by gromky 2006-02-28 12:31|| 2006-02-28 12:31|| Front Page Top

#8 You're falling for the "Apres moi, le deluge" extortion strategy that Pakistan has used for decades.

The very first Pak PM, Liqiat Khan used this to pressure India into concessions.. after him was supposed to be the flood of bearded islamists.

This was fifty years ago!

And the Paks still use it, to great effect.

Debunking the Myth of Pakistans Islamist Threat

The fact is that religious political parties and militant organizations are manipulated by the Pakistani Army to achieve its own objectives, domestically and abroad. The army, not the Islamists, is the real source of insecurity on the subcontinent

Posted by john 2006-02-28 12:47|| 2006-02-28 12:47|| Front Page Top

#9 After Perv is another General, after him is another.

There may be the facade of a civilian PM but the real power will be the army.

It takes most of the Pak budget, is above criticism, its veterer foundations control a sizeable chuk of the Pak economy and the Pak property market.

Pak is essentially a praetorian state.
The Pak army will slaughter everyone who presents a real challenge to their power.
They are ruthless.

To quote a former Pak Military dictator - Yahya Khan - "Kill three million of them and the rest will fall into line"

Posted by john 2006-02-28 12:52|| 2006-02-28 12:52|| Front Page Top

#10 So, a MODERATE Pakistani is like Siegfrid and Roy having a FRIENDLY CUTE WHITE TIGER?

Posted by 3dc 2006-02-28 12:54|| 2006-02-28 12:54|| Front Page Top

#11 The moderate Pakistani is like Yahya Khan or like Mohhamed Ali Jinnah.

Jinnah loved his bacon and his whisky but thratened the British with jihad.. the first time since 1857 mutiny that muslims had challenged the Raj.

Yahya loved his mistresses, and really loved his whiskey.

Whiskey driking, clean shaven officers are a dime a dozen in the Pak army.
They represent the Pak elite.

You need to understand which muslims backed the creation of Pakistan.

The Deobandi Ulema, the Jammaat-Islami-Hind etc did not back Pakistan. They called it the work of the devil.

The poor muslim Bengalis did. Many hoped to be free of Hindi landlords.
The Punjabi feudal class did. They were afraid of the land reform promised by Ghandi, Nehru and the Congress party. They didn't want to lose their serfs.
The muslim civil service did. They had special quotas under the British with various priviledges and did not want to lose them in an independent India.
The Pak feudal elite that man the civil service and officer corps of the army use islam to maintain their power over their co-religionists.

Posted by john 2006-02-28 13:11|| 2006-02-28 13:11|| Front Page Top

#12 Which is not to say that they are not religious..

Many are. Islam is the defining part of the Pak identity.

What, then, was partition all about?
But to recap the usual factors held responsible for the founding of Pakistan, Islam was not in danger in pre-1947 India. Indeed, considering the sectarian violence and religious bigotry we face today, it was in better health then. Nor was democracy the issue because even if partition had not happened, India was getting democracy once the British left. The Indian Independence Act promised that.

So what was the compelling reason for the Muslims to insist on a separate homeland especially when there was no going around the uncomfortable fact that, no matter how generously the frontiers of the new state were drawn, an uncomfortably large number of Muslims would remain in India?

The purpose of Pakistan, transcending anything to do with safeguarding Islam or promoting democracy, was to create conditions for the Muslims of India, or those who found themselves in the new state, to recreate the days of their lost glory.

Posted by john 2006-02-28 13:16|| 2006-02-28 13:16|| Front Page Top

#13 john, have you started on your book yet? Or is it already written? I'd gladly buy a dozen copies.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2006-02-28 13:26|| 2006-02-28 13:26|| Front Page Top

#14 I think I spend far too much time reading Pak newspaper columns...

Posted by john 2006-02-28 13:35|| 2006-02-28 13:35|| Front Page Top

#15 More evidence that there is no M³.
Looking for them is futile. They don't exist.

Posted by SPoD 2006-02-28 14:30|| 2006-02-28 14:30|| Front Page Top

#16 Great, informative posts, John! This is why I love Rantburg: well-informed opinions that cut through diplomatic sugar-coating and confusing media-spin. Thank you for your contributions.

Posted by ryuge 2006-02-28 17:37|| 2006-02-28 17:37|| Front Page Top

#17 Didn't Mushy launch the Kargill War (another humiliating Pak defeat) 6 months after the "Peace Summit" with India? He can be trusted as far as Bush could spit against a hurricane.

Posted by Listen To Dogs 2006-02-28 22:27|| 2006-02-28 22:27|| Front Page Top

23:55 2b
23:46 Pappy
23:43 2b
23:35 2b
23:28 2b
23:25 2b
23:04 DMFD
23:04 Anonymoose
23:03 Alaska Paul
23:00 DMFD
22:56 DMFD
22:41 N guard
22:34 Listen To Dogs
22:27 Listen To Dogs
22:23 .com
22:23 mom
22:20 phil_b
22:12 JosephMendiola
22:11 Old Patriot
22:08 JosephMendiola
22:08 Hupomoger Clans9827
22:07 C-Low
22:05 .com
22:04 JosephMendiola