1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Anti-Pakistan Rant. Like the phoney Iraq War Propaganda?

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by glynch, May 8, 2009.

Tags:
Page 4 of 4
  1. HayesStreet

    HayesStreet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    8,507
    Likes Received:
    181
    Unfortunately, a March poll doesn't really have much significance in May when the context of the conflict has changed. Although even then some of the numbers you left out provide a different picture:

    "A large proportion of Pakistanis (72 percent) indicated in a recent poll that they were concerned by the rise of Islamist extremism. Public tolerance of violence in pursuance of Islamism has fallen from 41 percent in 2004 to 5 percent four years later. In the same poll, 74 percent disapproved of the destruction of girls’ schools by the Taliban — evidently one of the things that has upset the public most about their takeover of Swat."

    http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\05\13\story_13-5-2009_pg3_2

    Thanks, though. Also, interesting that you'd complain about an editorial piece and then post one yourself, lol.

    From today:

    NA echoes with support for Swat operation

    * MNAs warn govt against leaving operation unfinished
    * Demand similar operations in others areas to eliminate terrorists’ bastions

    By Irfan Ghauri

    ISLAMABAD: Members of the National Assembly on Tuesday unanimously backed government and army efforts aimed at crushing the Taliban and those challenging the writ of the state in troubled areas.

    Members from almost all major parties – the ruling PPP, the PML-N, the PML-Q, the MQM, the ANP – and independents who took part in a discussion on the situation in Swat and Malakand assured the government and the armed forces of their full support in the military operation. However, they warned that if the operation was halted before it reached its logical end, it could prove ‘disastrous’. The parliamentarians also called for eliminating ‘sleeper cells’ in other parts of the country.

    The MNAs called for action against all those challenging the writ of the state, and pointed out that “terrorists have already established their bastions in Southern Punjab, Sindh and Balochistan”. They feared that embattled Taliban could sneak into other parts of the country.

    The MQM’s Haider Abbass Rizvi demanded that the government come up with a national policy “dissimilar to earlier policies ... [that] took into account strategic depth in Afghanistan”.

    The PML-Q’s Marvi Memon said it was time to decide if “we are against the extremists or not”.

    The PML-N’s Ayaz Amir urged political parties to fully support the armed forces. “Failure ... can prove disastrous for the country,” he said.

    Federal Religious Affairs Minister Hamid Kazmi said, “Similar operations are needed in ... other parts of the country [as well].”

    http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2009\05\13\story_13-5-2009_pg1_1
     
    #61 HayesStreet, May 13, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: May 13, 2009
  2. HayesStreet

    HayesStreet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    8,507
    Likes Received:
    181
    I suggest you try it. :)

    You're an idiot. Do you think I'm being emotionally honest now? I have already explained in depth why your interpretation is wrong re: realists, neoconservatives, conservatives, etal. I have already explained in depth why they are not the same and why acting as if they are the same produces flawed conclusions. Factually your interpretation is undefendable. Whether or not I happen to be a neoconservative isn't really relevant. But when you get called out for making no sense you mash everything together, I think it's from confusion so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

    I wondered when you'd resort to the glynch hail mary. It was a dumb argument the first time you said it years ago and it's still a dumb argument. Why be an armchair pacifist? Why aren't you camped out in Washington protesting? Why didn't you go to jail for your anti-Vietnam/anti-draft beliefs instead of running away?
     
    #62 HayesStreet, May 13, 2009
  3. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,218
    Likes Received:
    15,420
    At least, that is what the Army says.
     
    #63 Ottomaton, May 13, 2009
  4. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,218
    Likes Received:
    15,420
    I'm sorry; this is just silly and true to form. I complained about an editorial because it has no basis in reality, not because it was an editorial. That isn’t a repudiation of the editorial form in all of its many hued splendors. Just a rejection of one individual - divorced from reality - attempting to project his own personal hawkish opinions on all Pakistanis.

    Then, you dismiss a one month old poll as entirely irrelevant and hopelessly outdated (without anything better to supplant it), but then spend a whole bunch of effort trying to take that hopelessly irrelevant poll apart - sort of like OJ's "I didn't do it, but here's how I would have done it if I did."

    The fact that I don’t try to parry your octopodal thrusts doesn't mean that I believe that you are right; it just means I don't have enough energy to want to make the effort to engage.
     
    #64 Ottomaton, May 13, 2009
  5. HayesStreet

    HayesStreet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    8,507
    Likes Received:
    181
    Strange that you deride his opinion as separated from 'all pakistanis' when his editorial is from THIS WEEK, as compared to MARCH, and considering his opinion is echoed by the unanimous vote by the Pakistani legislature. You might as well by drawing conclusions from a poll taken in 1960.

    Uh, yes - I do both indict your interpretation of the poll and the poll itself. Wow, that's crazy!

    The conclusions you make from the poll in March aren't valid considering the fluidity of the situation AND more importantly the radical (no pun intended) turn it has taken in MAY. I don't believe you do have enough energy to overcome that - good to pick your battles.
     
    #65 HayesStreet, May 13, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: May 13, 2009
  6. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,218
    Likes Received:
    15,420
    Once you deign, in your great wisdom, that the poll is worthless, my interpretation of it is about as relevant to the discussions as my interpretation of the terms of the Treaty of Shimonoseki, at least from your stated dubious point of view regarding its irrelevance. The only reason to proceed to then dissect my interpretation of that poll is, in fact, that you do think it is more relevant than you are claiming, or you are suffering from OCD and just feel compelled to wash your hands again.
     
    #66 Ottomaton, May 13, 2009
  7. HayesStreet

    HayesStreet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    8,507
    Likes Received:
    181
    Sorry, but no. I can argue both that the parts of the poll you point to are incomplete, and that circumstances have changed enough to make your use of the poll flawed. Further, I didn't anticipate you giving up the poll, so I've just made an "even if" argument. However, if you want to give up the poll and make the second point unnecessary, be my guest. :)

    One more thing: I certainly have been on the opposite end of things with glynch for about a decade now, but don't think we've been on opposite sides that much. Not sure what your attitude is about.
     
    #67 HayesStreet, May 13, 2009
  8. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,170
    Likes Received:
    48,346
    So perhaps the Taliban are lying too when they say they are in combat with the Pakistani military:
    http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/05/13/pakistan.taliban.threat/index.html#cnnSTCText

    [rquoter]The Taliban spokesman said militants and soldiers have been fighting in the mountains around Peochar since Tuesday, and that the clashes continue. He said two Taliban fighters had been killed so far in the battle, along with five Pakistani troops.[/rquoter]
     
    #68 rocketsjudoka, May 13, 2009
  9. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,218
    Likes Received:
    15,420
    This is a great illustration of my point.

    Compare with the following:

    [rquoter]
    Pakistan's army said on Tuesday that its troops had killed 751 militants in Swat and neighboring districts so far.

    29 security personnel were also killed and 77 others were wounded in the operations.

    [/rquoter]

    I will absolutely agree that a handful of Taliban fodder and a handful of low level Army infantrymen are shooting quite a bit at each other, mostly from great distance. But it isn't the great Battle of Waterloo-like struggle to the death between the Army and the Taliban that the Army is portraying it to be.

    From all the first hand accounts I've read, the ferocity of the fight is extremely exaggerated, and though there is quite a bit of shooting and artillery fire, most of the ordinance ends up destroying empty fields or the property of innocent bystanders. That is why I say it is show. They absolutely are doing lots of shooting, but they are doing it for the benefit of relieving American pressure, not because they are really trying to eliminate these so-called "Taliban" tribesmen. They certainly aren't invested in particularly risking their own necks in order to drive these Taliban back.

    It's not that they aren't fighting, but more that they are pretty much going through the motions for the benefit of the USA. If the leaders of Pakistan really were interested in and commited to driving these Pashtun tribesmen back to the FATA, they would be gone by now.
     
    #69 Ottomaton, May 13, 2009
    Last edited: May 13, 2009
  10. HayesStreet

    HayesStreet Member

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 1999
    Messages:
    8,507
    Likes Received:
    181
    You're going to have to go all Mango on his ass! ;)
     
    #70 HayesStreet, May 13, 2009
  11. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,170
    Likes Received:
    48,346

    I also suspect the Pakistani military's claims are exagerated but it is undeniable that there is fighting going on. Now to which extent that is I'm willing to say that we don't know for sure. Whay you are saying maybe correct but you haven't presented much factual information to back it up and seem to be speculating on incomplete information.

    It is an absolute fact there is an offensive going on by the Pakistani military. Its scope and effect are debatable but the offensive isn't.
     
    #71 rocketsjudoka, May 13, 2009
  12. glynch

    glynch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    18,096
    Likes Received:
    3,609
    Another good article.
    ****************

    Obama worsening Afghan-Pak state
    By Graham E. Fuller

    For all the talk of “smart power,” President Obama is pressing down the same path of failure in Pakistan marked out by George Bush. The realities suggest need for drastic revision of US strategic thinking.
    • Military force will not win the day in either Afghanistan or Pakistan; crises have only grown worse under the US military footprint.
    • The Taleban represent zealous and largely ignorant mountain Islamists. They are also all ethnic Pashtuns. Most Pashtuns see the Taleban -- like them or not -- as the primary vehicle for restoration of Pashtun power in Afghanistan, lost in 2001. Pashtuns are also among the most fiercely nationalist, tribalized and xenophobic peoples of the world, united only against the foreign invader. In the end, the Taleban are probably more Pashtun than they are Islamist.
    • It is a fantasy to think of ever sealing the Pakistan-Afghanistan border. The “Durand Line” is an arbitrary imperial line drawn through Pashtun tribes on both sides of the border. And there are twice as many Pashtuns in Pakistan as there are in Afghanistan. The struggle of 13 million Afghan Pashtuns has already enflamed Pakistan’s 28 million Pashtuns.
    • India is the primary geopolitical threat to Pakistan, not Afghanistan. Pakistan must therefore always maintain Afghanistan as a friendly state. India furthermore is intent upon gaining a serious foothold in Afghanistan - in the intelligence, economic and political arenas - that chills Islamabad.
    • Pakistan will therefore never rupture ties or abandon the Pashtuns, in either country, whether radical Islamist or not. Pakistan can never     afford to have Pashtuns hostile to Islamabad in control of Kabul, or at home.
    • Occupation everywhere creates hatred, as the US is learning. Yet Pashtuns remarkably have not been part of the jihadi movement at the international level, although many are indeed quick to ally themselves at home with Al-Qaeda against the US military.
    • The US had every reason to strike back at the Al-Qaeda presence in Afghanistan after the outrage of 9/11. The Taleban were furthermore poster children for an incompetent and harsh regime. But the Taleban retreated from, rather than lost, the war in 2001, in order to fight another day. Indeed, one can debate whether it might have been possible -- with sustained pressure from Pakistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia and almost all other Muslim countries that viewed the Taleban as primitives - to force the Taleban to yield up Al-Qaeda over time without war. That debate is in any case now moot. But the consequences of that war are baleful, debilitating and (BEGIN ITALICS) still (END ITALICS) spreading.
    • The situation in Pakistan has gone from bad to worse as a direct consequence of the US war raging on the Afghan border. US policy has now carried the Afghan war over the border into Pakistan with its incursions, drone bombings and assassinations - the classic response to a failure to deal with insurgency in one country. Remember the invasion of Cambodia to save Vietnam?
    • The deeply entrenched Islamic and tribal character of Pashtun rule in the Northwest Frontier Province in Pakistan will not be transformed by invasion or war. The task requires probably several generations to start to change the deeply embedded social and psychological character of the area. War induces visceral and atavistic response.
    • Pakistan is indeed now beginning to crack under the relentless pressure directly exerted by the US. Anti-American impulses in Pakistan are at high pitch, strengthening Islamic radicalism and forcing reluctant acquiescence to it even by non-Islamists.
    Only the withdrawal of American and NATO boots on the ground will begin to allow the process of near-frantic emotions to subside within Pakistan, and for the region to start to cool down. Pakistan is experienced in governance and is well able to deal with its own Islamists and tribalists under normal circumstances; until recently, Pakistani Islamists had one of the lowest rates of electoral success in the Muslim world.
    But US policies have now driven local nationalism, xenophobia and Islamism to combined fever pitch. As Washington demands that Pakistan redeem failed American policies in Afghanistan, Islamabad can no longer manage its domestic crisis.
    The Pakistani army is more than capable of maintaining state power against tribal militias and to defend its own nukes. Only a convulsive nationalist revolutionary spirit could change that - something most Pakistanis do not want. But Washington can still succeed in destabilizing Pakistan if it perpetuates its present hard-line strategies. A new chapter of military rule - not what Pakistan needs - will be the likely result, and even then Islamabad’s basic policies will not change, except at the cosmetic level.
    In the end, only moderate Islamists themselves can prevail over the radicals whose main source of legitimacy comes from inciting popular resistance against the external invader. Sadly, US forces and Islamist radicals are now approaching a state of co-dependency.
    It would be heartening to see a solid working democracy established in Afghanistan. Or widespread female rights and education - areas where Soviet occupation ironically did rather well. But these changes are not going to happen even within one generation, given the history of social and economic devastation of the country over 30 years.
    Al-Qaeda’s threat no longer emanates from the caves of the borderlands, but from its symbolism that has long since metastasized to other activists of the Muslim world. Meanwhile, the Pashtuns will fight on for a major national voice in Afghanistan. But few Pashtuns on either side of the border will long maintain a radical and international jihadi perspective once the incitement of the US presence is gone. Nobody on either side of the border really wants it.
    What can be done must be consonant with the political culture. Let non-military and neutral international organizations, free of geopolitical taint, take over the binding of Afghan wounds and the building of state structures. If the past eight years had shown ongoing success, perhaps an alternative case for US policies could be made. But the evidence on the ground demonstrates only continued deterioration and darkening of the prognosis. Will we have more of the same? Or will there be a US recognition that the American presence has now become more the problem than the solution? We do not hear that debate. – Global Viewpoint

    Graham E. Fuller is a former CIA station chief in Kabul and a former vice-chair of the CIA’s National Intelligence Council. He is author of numerous books on the Middle East, including “The Future of Political Islam.”

    http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentID=2009051037557
     
    #72 glynch, May 14, 2009
  13. insane man

    insane man Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2003
    Messages:
    2,892
    Likes Received:
    5
    #73 insane man, May 16, 2009
(You must log in or sign up to post here.)
Page 4 of 4

Share This Page