Is this going to be another Vietnam?

.
.
.
.


. . . . I don't know is this really a good idea? Is Pakistan's fundamental national/failed state problems solvable through military avenues.................more American military advisers, more military aid......I never thought so, and I thought that was the implicit understanding of the current Washington regime with the emphasis on economic aid rather than security aid; the latter which the Bush junta emphasized to a great degree, with the ensuing mess in Pakistan.

No Pakistan most definitely does not need the Vietnam solution.

Pakistan does not need more American military trainers training them inside or outside Pakistan; this only increases the negative perception of the Pakistan military within Pakistan, as a tool of Washington.

What Pakistan needs, and the original and only mistake of America in South Vietnam, is in Pakistan's case honestly back competent uncorrupted populist civilian regimes in Islamabad. That is the winning ticket for success in Pakistan, and for America around the world in all Third World nations. The Papa Doc Duvalier, the General Noriega's and the Ferdinand Marcos SOB of America have got to be relegated, and age old racist foreign policy perceptions and modes ditched for American foreign policy to survive in the 21st century.

Also it is not a lack of numbers (800,000 Pakistan military unofficially, with 300,000 paramilitary), or a lack of equipment (2,000 artillery pieces, 2500 tanks, 450 jet fighters) or a lack of training (see the performance of some of the operations of the Pakistan military trained LeT, JeM against the Indian army) that results in the "failure" of the Pakistan military against the 3,000 Swat Taliban armed with AK-47, it is a simple lack of will.

On a more sinister level, but probably accurate given Pakistan's military history with their MO, is that the Swat Taliban are proxies of the Pakistan military, out to threaten and destabilize the civilian government and thus allow the military to get back into power.

In that light what Obama said last Friday (1/5/2009) was highly destabilizing for Pakistan, and shameful, as President of America in a major platform for him. Now I know its all the rage to show Jew sympathy whilst putting the boot in (This is being Jew clever), but ALL Pakistanis whether in the military or as civilians should be aware of such double dealing. The Democrat Party of America is the Jew party of America par excellence...80% of American Jews traditionally vote for the Party, and for this reason alone, and in relations to the Israeli 30 year goal of neutralizing Pakistan's nuclear bomb capabilities, Pakistanis must be wary of the intentions of the Obama regime towards the country, especially now.

They must not draw false naive assumptions of American intentions from the huge aid that Pakistan is being given right now........$7.5 billion annual economic aid, $7.6 billion IMF loan, $5.28 billion International assistance, and $ 3 billion military assistance----$23 billion........all this is NOTHING, NOTHING if the American's call you the most dangerous nation on earth, destabilize the country, and then use the pretext of Islamist are taking over Pakistan's nuke assets to invade the country, and eventual occupation..........which causes $300 billion worth of damage to Pakistan; the death of 8 million Pakistani civilians like Iraq; and 20 million Pakistani refugees in India like Iraqis in Syria and Jordan selling themselves for one Dinar to survive.

No more military assistance for the Pakistan military. Lets focus on the content of the Pakistan military.

Why are there so many beards in the Pakistan military?

Why are there so many beards in senior positions in the Pakistan military?



Why are there so many beards in senior positions in the Pakistan military, which are then sent for training in America?

From what type of background are the mullahs of the Pakistan military recruited from? Who are these mullahs?

Why did the Pakistan military surrender to the Swat Taliban, and then advise the Islamabad civilian government to negotiate with the Swat Taliban terrorists, which gave them legitimacy?



Why does Mullen keep visiting Pakistan so often?

When will the Americans end their illegal occupation of Afghanistan, and ease the problems on Pakistan by doing this?

For how long do the Americans intend to support failed regimes, and non-governance in Afghanistan, before they lecture Pakistan about the same?

How much drugs money profits do the Jew want to make through Afghanistan, before the Jew decides to call it a day?

Was the Vietnam war (1965-75) about controlling drugs trade for the Jew (successful), or about fighting Jewish Communism (unsuccessful)?

What fucking bright new ideas will the Jew come up with, and how do we discern what is a Jew policy, and "American foreign policy" ?


______________________________________________

Obama: ‘We Want to Respect Pakistan’s Sovereignty, But…’

US Eyes Expanded Intervention in Pakistan

by Jason Ditz of Antiwar.com

President Barack Obama had nothing but good things to say about Pakistan’s military, cheering them for recognizing the “misguided” concern with a prospective Indian invasion and recognizing, in his words, “that their biggest threat right now comes internally.”

But with regards to the nation’s civilian government, Obama was anything but supportive. While criticizing it as “very fragile” and incapable of delivering basic services, the US president declared “We want to respect their sovereignty, but we also recognize that we have huge strategic interests, huge national security interests in making sure that Pakistan is stable and that you don’t end up having a nuclear-armed militant state.”

While pressuring Congress to support “urgent” aid to Pakistan, the Obama Administration intends to significantly expand the nascent US military training program in the nation. Reportedly the president will discuss the matter with Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari during his visit next week, but senior officials say that Pakistan has already agreed in principle to the idea.

The United States started a small training program for Pakistan’s paramilitary Frontier Corps in October, though officials in February also confirmed a “secret task force” of over 70 military advisers were also dispatched to provide direct training and advisory functions.

Historically, growing US training commitments have been a prelude to more direct US military intervention. The US military was involved in training the South Vietnamese army in 1954, an escalating commitment in which the United States ultimately committed more than 500,000 ground troops to a bloody and ultimately failed war.

What the president’s somewhat ominous comments about wanting to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty will ultimately come to remains to be seen, but recent history certainly is not on the side of the United States in creating a “stable” nation where none exists.

Related Stories

• May 1, 2009 -- Hedging, US Woos Pakistani President’s Rival

Ex-Raw chips in with his angle on the Swat scene.

.
.
.
Pak Taliban: From A Bunch Of Suicide Bombers To A Conventional Army

By B. Raman at SAAG.

1.Like the Neo Taliban of Afghanistan, the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) has evolved in less than a year from a bunch of suicide bombers to a conventional army capable of set-piece, stand and fight battles with the Pakistani Army and para-military forces. This conversion has been facilitated by the recruitment of a large number of retired Pashtun ex-servicemen living in the Pashtun tribal belt in the Federally-Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and in the Malakand Division of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP). The Swat Valley and the Buner District, less than a hundred kms from Islamabad, which was occupied by the TTP earlier this week without any resistance from the local security forces, form part of the Malakand Division.

(Much of the Taliban in Afghanistan Pakistan is controlled by the Pakistan army, as proxies. If the TTP can fight set piece battles its because of the logistical and personnel support of the Pakistan military using it as a "Controlled Opposition" proxy for the Pakistan military's agenda.......to destabilize the Civilian government in Islamabad, and get back into power as national saviors of the day )

2. The agreement signed earlier this year by the coalition Government in the NWFP headed by the Awami National Party (ANP) with Sufi Mohammad of the Tehrik-e-Nifaz-a-Shariat-e-Mohammadi (TNSM), which is a constituent unit of the TTP, for the introduction of Sharia courts covers the entire Division, consisting of seven districts and not just Swat. Now that the agreement, despite strong criticism from abroad, has been got approved by Prime Minister Yousef Raza Gilani by the National Assembly and signed by President Asif Ali Zardari, the TNSM has lost no time in expanding its control to areas of the Malakand Division outside Swat. The occupation of the Buner district is the beginning. The occupation of the other districts will follow.

(Very foolish of the civilian government to negotiate and sign agreements with these types of people. It makes them look ineffective afterwards)

3. What should be of great concern to both India and the US is that the TTP, which was seen till recently as merely a collection of young suicide bombers with limited capability for territorial control and dominance through conventional forces, has started demonstrating that it has evolved into a conventional army, which can fight, occupy and administer territory. Thus, the TTP has evolved into a mirror image of the Neo Taliban. It shares with the Neo Taliban its objective of fighting for the defeat of the US-led NATO forces in Afghanistan. At the same time, it has its own independent agenda of expanding its territorial and ideological dominance to other areas of the Pashtun belt in the NWFP initially and then to non-Pashtun areas. The Neo Taliban does not approve of this independent agenda, but does not oppose it actively.

(I would hesitate to call a bunch of irregular insurgents numbering 3,000 with AK-47 an "army", that is on the thresh hold of taking over Pakistan, hardly!!!.........the Swat Taliban are "Controlled Opposition" proxies of the Pakistan military, and unless the Pakistan military have a serious need to reinvent themselves as bearded fundies who only fight as irregular soldiers against their own country and people, all of it from Lahore to Karachi, and abandon the entire basis of their present organization and professional ethos, then its very unlikely that the Swat Taliban will morph into occuppying the whole of Pakistan....which is hardly the case....what we are seeing with the Swat Taliban is a tactical move by the Pakistan military to destabilize the civilian government.........Thus the Swat Taliban can be activated or dismantled as and when the Pakistani military wish it to be the case.....From a rational civilian perspective this type of behavior is dangerous brinkmanship, but from the Pakistan's military perspectives it is business as usual........the Swat TTP is doing what it is doing because of orders from the Pakistan military)

4. The Pakistan Army headed by Gen. Ashfaq Pervez Kayani, its Chief of the Army Staff (COAS), has shown neither the will nor the inclination to counter the advance of the TTP and then roll it back. It is not Kayani’s worries about what could happen on the Indian border, which have come in the way of a vigorous response to the TTP’s military advance. It is his worries over the continuing loyalty of the Pashtun soldiers, who constitute about 20 per cent of the Army, and of the Frontier Corps and the Frontier Constabulary, which are responsible for his anxiety and keenness to make peace with the TTP. The Frontier Corps and the Frontier Constabulary consist predominantly of Pashtun soldiers recruited in the FATA and the NWFP, officered by deputationists from the Army. These units have been showing less and less inclination to fight the TTP. They have been either avoiding a confrontation with the TNSM and the TTP or in some cases just deserting and surrendering to the TTP units.

(So 80% of the Pakistani military is not Pashtun.........enough available personnel from the outside of the Frontier Province to quell the Swat Taliban, but why should they any way, if these groups are created controlled proxies by the Pakistan military and manned and often guided by Pakistani military personnel? It is true Pakistan has lost some men fighting the Taliban in FATA at the behest of American urgings and military assistance, but we do not know what are the true losses of the Pakistani military there? It is also very true that many of the Pashtun personnel of the Pakistan military are obviously not happy fighting their own kith and kin, whilst at the same time observing the Americans attack the same with drone attacks...........they can't be too happy with that, as wouldn't any self respecting people.

It is not fear which led to Kiyani seeking peace with the Swat Taliban, but because the Swat Taliban as Pakistani military proxies had achieved for the Pakistan army exactly what Kiyani wanted. The Pakistani military has never shown any disinclination to side with America and fight the Pashtuns with their ethnic sensibilities-------The Pakistan military is not as sophisticated, sensitive and nuanced as that....1971 East Pakistan, Baluchistan 1973--1977, and now NWFP FATA since 2004. The Pakistan military has never been shy of fighting its own people......this "great tradition" has not changed, even under Kiyani....It has killed more of its own people than any other military in the world.)

5. According to reliable sources in the Pakistan People’s Party (PPP), it is pressure from an alarmed Kayani to reach an accommodation with the TNSM and the TTP, which set in motion the negotiations with Sufi Mohammad and the developments that have followed. The Army and the para-military forces have already conceded territorial control to the TTP in the FATA and in the Malakand Division of the NWFP. By re-locating his forces and by reducing the Army’s presence in these areas already under the domination of the TNSM and the TTP, Kayani is reportedly hoping to prevent an ingress of the Pakistani Taliban into other parts of the NWFP and beyond.

(So here is the indication that the Swat Taliban is "Controlled Opposition" proxies of the Pakistan military......it never made sense why the 800,000 Pakistan military, "The best in the world" backed by 300,000 paramilitary would surrender to 3,000 poorly armed irregular insurgents, unless.....)

6. The objectives of the TTP are presently limited to ideological unity of all Muslims in Pakistan based on the Sharia and the ethnic unity of all the Pashtuns in the Af-Pak region to wage a relentless jihad against the US-led NATO forces till they vacate Afghanistan. It has the motivation and intention to extend its ideological influence to non-Pashtun areas too, but is not yet in a position to establish territorial dominance in those areas. The Muttahida Qaumi Movement (MQM) of Altaf Hussain apprehends that the TTP wants to set up a strong presence in Karachi, which has the largest Pashtun community in Pakistan after Peshawar.

(To quell Pashtun nationalism, and reinforce the state from the Pakistan military perspectives)

7. Confronted with the worsening ground situation in the NWFP and with the danger of a possible collapse of the strategy of President Barack Obama even before it was taken up for implementation, the US is acting like a cat on a hot tin roof. There have been understandable cries of alarm not only from Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, and Robert Gates, the Defence Secretary, but also from White House spokesmen. Cries of alarm and the preparation of yet another national intelligence estimate on Pakistan alone will not help. What is urgently required is a national intelligence estimate on US policy-making towards Pakistan, which has been leading it from one critical situation to another.

8. A study of the course of US policy-making would show how those Pakistani leaders who are toasted one day as frontline allies against extremism and terrorism turn out to be either accomplices of terrorism or capitulators to terrorists and extremists the next day. Pervez Musharraf belonged to the first category. Zardari belongs to the second. Despite nearly 60 years of close US interactions with the political and military leaderships in Pakistan, the US has not been able to acquire any enduring influence over policy-making circles in Islamabad.(!!!!!!!!!!!.......this is just basic shoddy analysis for a former senior intelligence officer, it misses the fundamental power play in Pakistan, but at least he is retired and no longer advising the Indian government..........The two most important players in Pakistani political life are the 2 A's... the Army and America. The USA is not some kind of innocent Pollyanna figure who is completely clueless about Pakistan,hardly) The US has very little to show in terms of changed policies in Islamabad in return for its unending pampering of successive regimes in Islamabad with the injection of more and more money and military equipment. The time has come to stop pampering, but there is a reluctance in the Obama Administration---as there was in the preceding Bush Administration--- to do so due to fears that a stoppage of US assistance and pampering may result in a failed state with the control of its nuclear arsenal falling into the hands of the jihadis.

(American interference in Pakistan as with its interference in many other Third World countries has been negative, since the 1950's:

The Americans weren't pampering Pakistan when they destabilized the Ayub Khan regime 1965-69. The Americans weren't pampering Pakistan when they toppled the Bhutto regime in 1977 using the military. The Americans weren't pampering Pakistan when they wiped out the entire top brass of the Pakistan military for pursuing the nuclear program against America's and Israel's wishes. The American's weren't pampering Pakistan when in 1990 they basically abandoned Pakistan with the Pressler Amendment.......and so on, the sheer amount of political interference, where prospective political figures have to have private one to one meetings with the American ambassador in Islamabad.)

9. Unfortunately, the situation in Pakistan has reached a stage where the outcome---ultimate jihadi control of the State and its nuclear arsenal--- may be the same whatever the US does----whether it continues pampering or stops doing so. It is a thankless dilemma. It is easy to criticize the US strategy or the lack of it, but difficult to suggest a viable alternative. The starting point of an alternative strategy has to be a cordon sanitaire around the areas already under the control of the TTP and a crash programme for the economic development of the Pashtun areas not yet controlled by the Taliban. Obama’s plans to spend billions of dollars in the areas of the FATA already under the control of Al Qaeda and the Taliban would produce no enduring results except to waste the US taxpayers’ money. This money should be better spent on immunizing those areas where the influence of the Taliban has not yet spread.

(Better still instead of giving money to the Pakistan central government, why not give a greater % of the money to state governments in all of Pakistan for development and to fight terrorism...that might be more effective)

10. An equally important point of the strategy should be to step up the US Predator strikes in the FATA and to extend them to Swat in order to keep the Al Qaeda and Taliban elements running for cover all the time and make it difficult for them to plan new strikes and get them executed.

( That would do great wonders for the fragile civilian government in Islamabad......The Obama administration did talk about attacking Baluchistan with drones but the idea was shelved, because of the implications on the weak civilian government.

If the Swat Taliban are proxies of the military, staffed by ex-Pakistan military and regulars, and directed by the Pakistan military against Pakistan, to regain power, operating inside Pakistan against Pakistan as a pose to American soldiers in Afghanistan, than an attack on such an entity would be severely received by the regular Pakistan military, America's main buddy in Pakistan. Drone attacks in FATA are carried out with the aid of the Pakistani army in FATA, and the facilitation of Pakistani military bases in Baluchistan for such a purpose)

11. The third point of the strategy should be to restore to the Intelligence Bureau of Pakistan its original role of primacy as the internal intelligence and internal security agency of Pakistan. Over the years, the IB has been reduced to the position of a powerless appendage of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and its top ranks militarized through the induction of serving and retired military officers. This has to be reversed.

(This sounds like a good idea. Have a domestic intelligence agency that is run by the Ministry of the Interior which is wholly civilian, non-military, and in addition have the ISI attached to the FM, and again shorn of its military component. The Core problem for Pakistan is the ISI, and its numerous misadventures to secure Pakistan's interests........usually ends up the other way. The ISI was created by the British in 1948, and operates as an annex of British and American intelligence, it certainly is not some free wheeling Third World agency with its own set of "great ideas". By doing such things, Pakistan's civilian governments can be strengthened against the schemes of the ISI and their foreign masters)

12. These are medium and long-term measures, which would take time to produce results. The questions requiring an immediate response is how to protect Pakistan from itself. How to stop the advance of the Taliban? How to confront it ideologically? For this purpose, the US needs objective allies in Pakistan. It has none so far. It has been working through opportunistic allies in the army and the political parties. They will accept all the money from the US, but will not produce results.

(To deal with the Taliban problem involves first and foremost dealing with the Pakistan military and its fundamental culture of political interference inside Pakistan since the creation of Pakistan, and its various misadventures abroad which have negative blow back effects there after without fail)

13. The objective allies have to be found in the Pashtun community. All the talk in Washington DC about their being good Taliban and bad Taliban is ridiculous. But there are good Pashtuns and bad Pashtuns. The US should urgently identify the good Pashtuns and encourage and help them to take up the fight against the Taliban ideologically. After the elections in Pakistan in March last year, I had pointed out that the ANP, which came to power in Peshawar, was a party of good Pashtuns and that the US should work through it, forgetting its past links with the Communists in Afghanistan and the erstwhile USSR. I was given to understand that a couple of ANP leaders did visit Washingtin DC, but beyond that nothing further was done. Now the ANP-led Government in Peshawar has conceded ideological victory to the TNSM in Swat. Despite this, the US should persist with cultivating it and other good Pashtun elements in parties such as the Pakhtoonkwa Milli Awami Party (PMAP) of Mehmood Khan Achakzai. They constitute the progressive component of the Pashtun community and they need to be strengthened and encouraged to counter the Taliban. The present US policy of depending on repeatedly failed elements in the Army and in the mainstream political parties is not working. The regional Pashtun forces have to be encouraged to take up the fight against the Taliban.

(I would certainly welcome greater USA emphasis on local state civilian politicians who are effective, rather than corrupt Pakistani politicians in the Central government, with the generals. However I would question whether American officials inherently prefer dealing with clean effective leaders in Pakistan, or the greasy corrupt ones with the military.........This is the main issue here between Pakistan and America, and fundamental American foreign policy in the region.

Since the Munro doctrine, and into the 1980's in the Reagan era America has always preferred their South American client state leaders as some what "Colorful"...........this is related to issues of racism, and domination......the "greasy diego" is corrupt and of a lower order, and as such deserves leaders of that caliber. In addition it was deemed that some how corrupt leaders are therefore due to their character more easily "managed' for American interests. All that changed in the 1990's, when increased South American emigration to the USA illegally, and South American narcotics flooding into the country necessitated a policy change. Since that time the USA has backed, or recognised ''cleaner" and more effective South American leaders who deliver for the common people, without feeling insecure or developing neurosis about them (Hugo Chavez not withstanding). The USA finally understood, after 170 years of the Munro Doctrine that what was good for South America could also be good for America. Since that time in the 1990's there has been a marked decline in negative American intervention in America's back yard.

However this change of policy by America should not be defined purely by American terms.............aggressive clean local nationalists leaders who were not corrupt, within South America, conscious of negative American involvement have also contributed to this change in relationship between the USA and the rest of Central and South America.

This is where we need a real change with Pakistan/America relations. Zardari backed into power by the USA/UK is proving to be an embarassment purely because of Zardari himself a small time crook who married big, and a few other lucky breaks, never the less a small time gangster when all is said and done................First and foremost America needs to ditch him immediately, and than coopt, better local Pakistani leaders from Pakistan.....its a nation of 180 million, with 20% from the population being Middle class, if they can bypass the traditional colonial era elite that most certainly will be helpful for Pakistan as a nation. Its a win win situation if America has the will to grasp it.)

14. The survival of Al Qaeda in the FATA and the rise and spread of the TTP are due to support from large sections of the Pashtun community. The resistance to them has to come from the Pashtun community. It cannot come from the likes of Zardari, Gilani and Kayani.

(Wrong again B Raman!!!!!!!! "al-Qaeda" does not exist, and the Taliban exist ONLY because of the good grace of the Pakistani military who think they can use it for certain objectives of theirs in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Some what romantic and naive to think that Third World insurgency movements are created purely through class oppression and peoples will to struggle. Somewhere along that romantic narrative state intervention and support, covert or overt turns such movements into a reality......the backing of the Pakistan military, in the case of the Taliban, without their backing they simply could not exist)

A significant strategic shift to meet new challeneges.

Time to change our strategic posture
By Brigadier (ret.d) Jahanzeb Raja.

Pakistan has traditionally followed an offensive-defensive doctrine vis-a-vis India while adhering to a defensive doctrine on the western front with Afghanistan in its land doctrine.


(Its mainly been an offensive policy with India, 1948, 1965, 1971, 1990 almost and 1999. Unless I am mistaken Brigadier Sahib in all these instances Pakistan was the initiator of hostile actions. Let us speak the plain truth. The Pakistan military is a British colonial fiction with no real fundamental connections to the Pakistani people, which has in addition been primed to attack India..........like a dog, and like a dog nearing 60 years, without question and without serious reflection it has done so......acha sahib!.....good show sahib! ........brilliant idea sahib!.....only now when the chips are down, and Pakistan's "ally" America is posturing in an hostile manner are questions being asked about Pakistan's strategy. Better late than never.)



The implications of such a policy dictate placing of defensive forces within striking distance of the borders while keeping large uncommitted reserves at strategic locations for counter strikes into enemy territory.

(Yes that would be the sensible course, as I have argued repeatedly. But the IMF are calling the shots soon, and if they have their way the Pakistan military budget will be 30% less to 2.1% of the GDP. That means cuts to the military. I would have 100,000 troops in Baluchistan, 100,000 troops on the NWFP border in strong Battalion formations, 100,000 troops in the NWFP as reserve, backed by 500,000 in Punjab and Sindh as general reserve. With minimal numbers on the Indian border........maybe just lightly armed paramilitary. Of course Brigadier you need to understand that this in itself is not enough. There is a whole mass of other security policies which also need to be followed to compliment this ONE policy..........reorientation of troops is important but not enough, this needs to be applied in conjunction with many other policies internal national security, quasi-security related policies............but you are on the right lines)


This not only ties down a majority of our forces on the Indian fronts which are inactive or are unlikely to change in the short term, but restricts movement of vitally needed forces elsewhere. The escalation of threats from both external and internal forces on the western front is increasingly restricting our military options and creating grounds for anarchy and social unrest.

( Well Brigadier shahib I thought the American strategy was pretty clear in Afghanistan/Pakistan, and your job as a military man is to call it as it is.........you destabilize a target and then you attack. That is what the Americans are doing in the NWFP and Pakistan in general.

WHY?

It has been an Israeli policy since the 1970's to manage the Pakistani nuclear weapons program which were percieved as a threat to Israel's security. You can see the paranioa of Israel over Iran's peaceful nuclear program. First act of theirs against Pakistan was to topple the Bhutto regime in 1977, through America..........President Carter made direct threats against PM Bhutto on his visit to Pakistan, as did Kissinger before him in 1975/6 for Israel. When these threats failed to move Bhutto, the Americans initiated a coup and brought in the military. Bhutto was executed on false charges.

The Israelis did not do their homework and were sloppy; the main supporters of the nuke bomb program in Pakistan was the military, not the civilian politicians, and when the military came into power with American backing the program only accelerated with billions of $ pouring from Libya and Saudi Arabia. Then the whole military leadership is killed by the Israelis as it dawned on the Israelis who were the actual initiators of the program.

During the 1980's the Israelis also approached India for joint attacks against Pakistan which India correctly turned down......an attack on Pakistan would have indeterminate open ended consequences for India, and would turn Pakistan into a 'hero' in the Muslim world; the program would go under ground; the program would accelerate as a 'national cause' mobilising the whole nation.

The "clever" Israelis also tried other policies in controlling Pakistan's nuclear program......through Turkey (Israeli client state with close security linkages) they actually began supplying the Pakistanis with what they required .........from America with some American approval...Sibel Edmonds........"you supply, you control". The fake blue prints for nuclear reactors supplied to Mullah Iran by the Americans, which accidently turned out to be near perfect blue prints!!!!!!!In reality there is the issue of being clever, and being clever.

After the top military leadership were wiped out in Pakistan the nuclear program went out of control in the late eighties, totally opposite to what the Americans and Israelis wanted at least officially.

It is also my belief that the funding of mad bad Islamic fundamentalists under "Operation Cyclone" and "Greenbelt" was partly to embroil the Pakistan military with the "wrong crowd", and therefore wrong foot them, put them into an awkward defensive position/situation, where by pressure could be exerted to influence and manage Pakistan's nuclear bomb program there after...............The Mujaheddin, with extremely unsavory characters like Hekmatyar...and later ofcourse the Taliban, backed by America, haling from the 8th century, with no Music, no dancing, no pictures, no cinema, no education for girls,...........and no fun.......Now the fact that America backed such people through Pakistan should have been a pause for thought for the Pakistani military..........But Brigadier Sahib, its always "acha sahib"......"no questions asked sahib" "Tell us what to do sahib".

So it is my analysis that the whole Islamic fundamentalist show (1979---2008) in Pakistan/Afghanistan by the American/Israelis was to ensnare Pakistan in an Islamic fundamentalist trap, and use the Islamic fundamentalists as a future Fifth column to attack Pakistan. And so the call by the Americans that Pakistan is the "most dangerous nation on earth" label! WHAT IRONY! WHAT A SURPRISE! And presumably the Americans must deal with it? And presumably they must secure the nuke bombs of Pakistan for the free world?

So Brigadier Sahib we see a whole lot of Israeli activity against Pakistan and the nuke bomb program since the 1970's. The current situation is a continuation of that long policy.

Philosophical musing: Whose fault is all this? The Pakistani military. To be sure they have been victims, but as guardians of the nation they have jeopardized the very existence of the state, as things stand, by following a whole line of false policies over 30 years, without reflecting where it was all going for Pakistan. They lacked strategic depth and foresight, which is their job, in between checking their huge estates in the Punjab and Sindh, and the profits from the narcotics trade and GOD knows what other business these 'MILITARY' people do.

Now the Pakistan armed forces are helping the Americans attack sovereign Pakistani territory, and killing Pakistanis......even though they are fully aware that al-Qaeda is an American/Israeli fiction; The Taliban are an American/Israeli fiction.............Osama died in 2001 as Benazir no less stated on TV......The destabilization in Pakistan is America's work. What an utterly sorry lot, and they call themselves the Pakistan armed forces. Motto...."Faith, Piety, to strive in the path of Allah".) Where is the honesty, piety, decency, service to the nation and faith in all this.


Two Chamars who look like they are meeting their girlfriends for the first time. "You do it this way" "Acha sahib, acha sahib"


Should not therefore a review be carried out of our strategic posture? The dynamics of the western front have changed dramatically.

(Yes there should have been a fundamental review a couple of years ago, but the Western trained top military brass trained in the USA, and UK aren't going to be asking such questions any time soon. Instead the head of the ISI goes to the USA secretly and tells the Americans they can attack Pakistan, no problem as long as the gangsters such as Zardari can complain about it for the hundreth time for Public consumption, "Oh please sahib do not attack my country, because it is not helpful" Yes I can imagine the Americans are really paying attention............Brigadier Sahib you have Mir Jafars in the top brass of the military, and even worse politicians who have served time in prison for corruption.......out of such a bunch of Nachniwali Mujra Chauds how are you going to get a comprehensive security policy for Pakistan?............never)



Punjabi Mujra girl.


Nato and US forces are aggressively pursuing the Taliban and al-Qaeda elements within Pakistan’s borders, striking both from land and by air.

(With the consent of the Nachniwali Mujra Chauds in Pakistan....which one of them work for America? After the invasion which one of them will retire to London and America)


The internecine warfare within Fata is being supported by both state actors and non-state surrogates with the intention of creating anarchy and despair.

( You know who they are, I know who they are)


While the army and paramilitary forces are increasingly being drawn into a long-term insurgency mode, the people are confused between tribal and national unity. Should they support the government now and be punished by the tribe later or support the tribe in the short term with long-term repercussions? They are lost between the devil and the deep blue sea.

(Exactly, precisely....and the arming of the Frontier Corps by the Americans through the Pakistan army, adds fuel to the civil war fire.....remember East Pakistan? The Razakars and al-Badr units. The number of American backed insurgents in FATA means the armed forces reorientated away from India have suffient numbers to deal with the small number of foreign backed insurgents in the NWFP in general. Yes)


The situation in Balochistan is no different, with the writ of the government being challenged at will by insurgents who choose the time and place of attack, resulting in the collapse of the social order.

(Baluchistan has always been run as a Punjab colony, with Punjabi armed forces stationed there near civilian areas, with Punjabi police operating like colonial era Raj police forces. This needs to stop, with Baluchis being given real power over their own province. Finally greater autonomy for Baluchistan, and greater financial resources............the Balchis need a little bit more love from the Punjab.)


Relations with our erstwhile foe, India on the eastern border, continue to improve both on the Line of Control in Kashmir and Siachen, where a ceasefire continues to hold since 2004, with no significant threat.The present insurgency in Kashmir only hints at its past glory, where the Indian forces were actively engaged on numerous fronts with cross-border aspersions being cast on Pakistani infiltrators. This calls for a radical shift in orientation of not only our ground forces, but their relocation to new cantonments further west into Balochistan and NWFP where the threat is the greatest.This will have the effect of not only projecting a military presence in the area but also demonstrate the logistic stamina to undertake long-term military operations when needed.The presence of military forces in previously inaccessible areas of Fata and Balochistan will not only give active support to tribes loyal to the government, but provide the much needed security to foreign and local firms active in exploitation of minerals and oil. It will also free the paramilitary forces from protection duties along the numerous lines of communications where they are being frittered away.

( Now you are talking like a real Pakistani military person......................you provide good solutions, that are practical. But Brigadier shahib this is only a small part of the solution, as stated before. You simply cannot reorientated troops from East to West just like that..........there has got to be something more. For Pakistan to draw a line on the sand with India in such a way, as a gesture to India, Pakistan MUST sign an FTA with India, and later negotiate seriously about legalising the LOC. This compliments the troop reorientation to the West, and reinforces Pakistan's Eastern border. This is the logical thing to do, and is strategically good for Pakistan.

There is no guarantee that after considerable cajoling since the eighties by Israel (remember the joint attacks discussed with India against Pakistan) and closer relations with the USA recently, the Indian government might in the future join in any possible Paki bashing that may be entertained by the Obama administration. So Pakistan fights a war on two fronts.......Too negate that possiblity of fighting a two front war and losing, and being occupied, and being Iraqified, resulting in mass deaths and mass refugees, Pakistan MUST sign an FTA with India asap, and legalise the LOC.

The Americans historically, and the racists Jews in particular aren't great lovers of brown people (Jews like Occidental countries to play and settle in), so if they are being very nice to India now, its for a specific objective.

Now is that going to happen under Nachiwali Mujra Chauds Kiyani/Zardari and the rest? No. these fuckers have visted Greece, Turkey, UAE, Saudi, China, Britain, USA, and many other countries usually begging for money (IZZAT), but not India. Because Britain and USA will veto such action.

I'm not talking about love for India, just doing whats right for Pakistan. For Pakistan to become more mature and adult and deal with India accordingly. Turning away from India, holding meaningless round of talks with India as empty gesture politics is futile for Pakistan.

The only solution then in that situation is to remove these people from their positions, and get people with the best interests of Pakistan within Pakistani society to such positions. There has got to be a few men like you, and others in the civilian sector. You can't afford to have a felon and gangster from Sindh running the show in Pakistan for America.



The presence of US troops and bases in Balochistan is the cause of the anger of local tribes and the Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan against the government and the army. There needs to be a reappraisal of the deployment of these troops in these areas where they are purportedly supporting the radical elements in the insurgency.The Pakistan Army needs to take over these bases and garrison them for purposes of internal stability so that outside interference is minimised. If we accept the fact that state actors are actively supporting the insurgency and yet allow the presence of foreign forces inside our territory who then are we fooling? Only ourselves I am afraid.

( You dear Brigadier like a true gentlemen use such soft words to describe this incredible situation. It is unbelievable! The Pakistan "politicians" and top brass know exactly who is backing these anti state insurgents...............and yet 1) The Americans are allowed their bases on Pakistan. 2) Allowed to bring in yet more military advisors to train the Frontier Corps 3) Allowed to attack sovereign Pakistan territory, with the OK of Zardari and Kiyani.!!!!!!!!!!!4) Will be allowed to manage the Pakistan economy through the IMF. Words cannot describe this situation. Brigadier Sahib you know where this situation is leading.....you know....you know.....and so must the Pakistani armed forces which aren't Nachiwali Mujra Chaud to America. So must the real politicians of Pakistan.)


Lastly, the China question. We have repeatedly parroted the very close ties with China and the active strategic support we are getting from them without giving major concessions in return. China is constructing strategic dams, ports and power plants in the country with construction periods ranging from eight to 10 years. In the long term, the Chinese presence needs to be bolstered by giving them their own security arrangements in the form of troops and even bases at strategic locations, especially when a concerted campaign to eliminate Chinese workers is unfolding. Pakistan’s vision of being the gateway for energy and trade corridors from China and Central Asia can never materialise until we can provide the much-needed investment climate and security to foreign investors. Billions of rupees have gone into preparing the infrastructure for these very corridors, but their utilisation can never be economically maximised unless peace prevails in our region. If we can have US troops on our soil then why not Chinese troops? This paradigm shift in policy has to be taken if we realise that the allies across the Durand Line are not sincere towards the cause of Pakistan and are actively supporting insurgents to destabilise the region.This will no doubt have a profound effect upon future US-Pakistan relations but will also test our allies’ true intentions in the region. If they are sincere towards our security and development goals then dramatic changes will take place at the government level both in Afghanistan and in India. The presence of Chinese troops will not only dissipate tribal anger but will have trans-border implications across the region.

(This is an interesting idea. But really ultimately it falls on the old failed premise of relying on foreign powers to protect Pakistan when fundamentally that is the prime and duty of Pakistan only. The Pakistan armed forces. How many different types of foreign troops do you want on Pakistani soil? Isn't that creeping Iraqification by default? The Chinese have been stalwart allies of Pakistan providing arms, and getting involved in heavy strategic projects with reasonable credit terms. How many strategic projects have America and Britain been involved in Pakistan? None.........................The Chinese workers need to be protected, so they should be given firearms training, and allowed to carry firearms. This should be bolstered with greater Pakistani military security protection; we are only talking about a few thousand Chinese workers. Generous compensation provided by the Pakistani government to families of Chinese workers who are killed by foreign backed insurgents.

As I understand it with Kiyani's visit to China recently , this will mean more Chinese military personnel in Pakistan, but this seems like an adhoc policy. In 1971 the Chinese remained seriously neutral as Pakistan was being divided, and in 1999 during Kargil they were again silent.

Is Communist China going to save the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, and come to her aid if USAREAL with India attack? I think not. Pakistan is strategically important to China with access to the Gulf and hence their participation over Gwadar, but past performance suggests they won't intervene. Some Pakistanis foolishly over estimate their value to China into falsely believing that China will protect them when it comes to war.

Having said this who knows, the Chinese might in the future flex their muscle, and decide as the greatest industrial power in the world, and defacto banker to the world to confront the USA if Pakistan is attacked. As a Pakistani leader I would get signed security guarantees from the Chinese that in the event of an attack by America, China immediately and significantly would intervene on behalf of Pakistan in order to demonstrate to America that Pakistan is China's 100% sphere of influence, and China has important strategic interests to protect in Pakistan.

For the Chinese to make such commitments to Pakistan, Pakistan would first have to ditch America 100%. Close all American military bases on Pakistani soil, and stop taking American military aid. Why should the Chinese commit to and protect a defacto, unrealiable "American ally" which is "bitch slapped" by America publicly? Then allow Chinese military personnel into Pakistan, and Chinese warships at Gwadar permanently. Very public training and military manouvers with China involving a couple of Chinese divisions in Pakistan.


The US is posturing to place India as a major regional power both against Pakistan, China and Iran. It will have to rethink its regional game plan.

(Like I said before, the USA(Jew) has never been a great fan of brown India. However it is a country that simply can't be ignored, whether by Pakistan as neighbor which must forge a new more realistic alliance with India, or the USA. India's economy is now $4.5 trillion PPP, the thrd largest in the world. They have 2 million men under arms unofficially, the second largest military in the world, and the fourth most powerful military after the USA, China, Russia.

The Americans have paid lip service in talking about making India into a "great power": 1) India is a significant power already, regardless of America. 2) India will be a great power if so she chooses without American help, whether in 10 years time, 20 years time or 30, India will be great power. 3) It is not in India's interests to become embroiled negatively with Asian neighbors for Uncle Sam's strategic objectives, acting as an appendage bit player. 4) The statements of the Americans about making India a "Great Power" is lip service, with no connections with reality and only a fawning idiot in the ICS would believe such statements. Which nation in the world wants to create/help a great power which might one day eclipse it? There is none.

I think Brigadier Shahib you don't give enough credit to the Indians. Whilst Pakistani leaders have been easily persuaded to betray their own country by America, that has not been the case with the civilian leadership of India. Otherwise Brigadier Sahib you would have seen a joint Israeli/Indian attack against Pakistani nuclear facilities in the 1980's. I understand that the Israelis in their usual Jew mode were quite persistent, and it is now 2008.



The threat to Iran from potential US-Israeli strikes is likely to recede dramatically bringing about a rapprochement between the two estranged friends, whose relations are badly eroded due to the power play in Afghanistan engineered by the US-led Karzai regime.

(Ha? Karzai is a weak ineffectual puppet, who cries often...........no more........not a political svengali who has clout in Washington. Washingtons policies towards Iran are dictated significantly by Israel, and other groups within America)


Afghanistan will have to very seriously rethink its foreign interests in Pakistan and the attendant cost with the presence of a major power next door.

(Not clear.............who is a major power, Pakistan, Iran? Both are not major powers. They are powerful compared to Afghanistan, but not major powers. Second the Afghans are not masters of their own destiny; they are occupied by foreign powers who run their country. The weak ineffectual 'MAYOR' of Kabul has no power, installed by the Americans working for the American company UNICOL before his current job, so the statement "Afghanistan will have to decide" is misleading.......meaningless)

The Indian presence in Afghanistan is likely to reduce, especially with the likely withdrawal of allied troops in the not too distant future. With the change of leadership in Afghanistan the upside obviously would be elimination of support to the insurgents who will not survive indefinitely.The opportunity is there for our policymakers, provided we have the will and courage to bring about the change in our strategic posture.

( The idea that the coalition is going to leave Afghanistan any time soon is being a little optimistic. Obama wants to increase the American troops there, as does the British............so we are here for the long haul. This is what Pakistan needs to face up to. The profits from Heroin/opium in Afghanistan is huge for the criminal elements of America. In addition to the Pakistan nuke bomb dimension. Thus huge amounts of this is being shipped through the facilities of the American Airforce to narco state Kosovo/Albania, and then into Europe and North America. A certain percentage is also going through Pakistan with the approval of the criminalised elements of the Pakistan military. Billions, and billions, and billions $ of profits, of other peoples work (Afghans given a pittance); whilst the Americans get to posture to the world as noble righteous warriors, safe guarding the world from Islamic fundamentalism; torturing and harrassing Afghans as an added side pleasure of psychopathic criminals. It simply cannot be run as an honest fair business......for the Americans, like WalMart. It must be done in the way of Jew gangsters.

As to will and courage from the present set of military brass and Zardari bhai's gangs, forget it. You need a change of leadership in both areas first, and then the right policies. Zardari bhai mean while will be selling what ever of Pakistan he can in order to stay in power.......until it becomse utter chaos, AND that is why he was brought into power by America/UK in the first place)