1
   

N.Korea or Pakistan?

 
 
K VEE SHANKER
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2003 10:32 am
.Muslim fanatics believe and propagate that Islam is tormented by other religions and it's the duty every Jighadi(Sacred Fighter) to wage war on non muslims whatever the country be in question.That's why you hear pakistan trained terrorists operate in Russia,Indonesia apart form Gulf and India.Recently there is a report that they're operating in China also.It's a fact that Pakistan has become the virtual stronghold of terrorists of the World.[/quote]

K,VEE,

India and Pakistan are threats to each other but how is that relevant here and what role does terrorism play in your inane disputes.[/quote]



I wrote my views while fully aware of the question "Whether Pakistan Is a danger to the World Peace".For a moment Keep aside what's happening in India.

1)I've said about the complaints of Russia,Indonesia and China.

2)It has been reported that Iran has made much progress in nuclear technology with the help of Pakistan.

3)It's also a well known fact that North Korea exchanged Missile technology with Pakistan's nuke technology.

These are appart from the well established support Al-Queida has in Pakistan.Parvez may proclaim Anti-Terrorisim rehtoric. But,his military and ISI work in the opposite direction
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2003 10:16 am
Looks like the second attempt on Musharref has propelled him to proclaim a more forceful clampdown on pro-al-Quaida insurgents. (So says news reports.)

Continually amazed he's still alive.
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Fri 26 Dec, 2003 05:30 pm
?
It may be people in the Military for all we know.

In my view Pakistan is more of a danger than Iraq or N.Korea ever will be.
0 Replies
 
K VEE SHANKER
 
  1  
Reply Sat 27 Dec, 2003 07:36 am
Re: ?
pistoff wrote:
It may be people in the Military for all we know.

In my view Pakistan is more of a danger than Iraq or N.Korea ever will be.


I quite agree.Even if we grant that Mushraf is against Terrorism people who matter my continue their internecine activities without any let up.Worse is such people large in number in Pakistan
0 Replies
 
pistoff
 
  1  
Reply Sun 28 Dec, 2003 07:39 pm
Ignoring.
The Musharraf Mysteries
By The New York Times


Saturday 27 December 2003

A succession of startling developments in Pakistan has left analysts from Islamabad to Washington guessing. At the center of the puzzle is Pakistan's military ruler, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, who is either losing or tightening his grip on power and either democratizing his rule or moving closer to hard-line Islamic radicals.

Twice in the last two weeks would-be assassins have nearly blown up General Musharraf's car as his motorcade drove through the tightly guarded military center of Rawalpindi. Between the two attempts, General Musharraf announced a surprising deal with an alliance of anti-American Islamic parties in which he pledged to give up his powerful post as army chief by next December and submit to a parliamentary vote on completing the rest of his presidential term, originally set to run through 2007.

Even at its most transparent, Pakistani politics are difficult to decode. The shifting domestic and international alliances made by its leaders do not always turn out to be what they seem. Right now, things are even murkier than usual. Large numbers of radical Islamists, military officers and secular democrats are furious with General Musharraf. Other members of these same groups are making tactical alliances with him. He has been America's ally in Afghanistan, for which Washington has rewarded him and Pakistan well. Yet he has been unable to secure Pakistan's borders against a resurgent Taliban and has been equivocal toward Kashmiri terrorists.

The military is Pakistan's dominant institution, and General Musharraf is its most visible representative. His public break with the Taliban and recent conciliatory statements over Kashmir might have alienated important military supporters. Some Pakistanis say that the Rawalpindi attacks could never have breached tight security without army help. No clear explanation has emerged yetfor his deal with Islamic parties and promise to resign as army chief.

President Bush recently declared that Washington would end its bad habit of relying on authoritarian leaders like General Musharraf to ensure American security. "Stability," he rightly said, "cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty." That insight should guide Washington's long-term strategy toward Pakistan. Its immediate challenge is to unravel the mysteries around General Musharraf and discover what is really going on there.
0 Replies
 
K VEE SHANKER
 
  1  
Reply Mon 29 Dec, 2003 08:30 am
Hmm.Let us hope sanity prevails in pakistan atleast now.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 04:21:50