No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
61

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Not sure how this thread has become a US thread when it was specifically about Pakistan. And when we are mentioning figures around how many people killed during the Afghanistan wars please separate out the number of civilians killed directly by US and those killed by 'taliban'/iraqi sunni groups.
Anyway back to having cake and eating it, I can have mine and eat it as have always been of the thought that anyone targeting innocents/civilians is wrong. Never believed conspiracy theories ever.

62

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Its a simple issue of hypocrisy. Condemn the Taliban for killing kids all good.

Condemn the US for killing kids and everybody worries about their freaking green card.

63

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

I think you mentioned and i will repeat, 2 wrongs dont make a right. anyway, can you show me an article from Washington post that explicitly said that we deserved Peshawar massacre?

Zafra bhai, not sure why you brought my nationality into this discussion ... there was no need for that and i feel like you are hitting below the belt. Anyway, i never mince my words and i will reiterate that i am a100% supporter of drone attacks. There is so much propaganda by taliban apologists against drone attacks. Drone attack was the only weapon which scared these animals to death becasue it was hurting them so much. They were not able to conduct their centralized meetings or strategize easily. The taliban leadership was always on move and could not spend more than 2 nites at the same place. There is a reason why our army was such a big supporter of drone attacks and under the cover they not only supported drone attacks but also provided info to usa about targets for these attacks. In public, our military and govt kept on condemning drone attacks just to save their reputation in our public.

64

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

In Iraq there was no "terrorism", thanks to 2003 invasion now Iraq has thousands of terrorists (if not in millions), why? Why could US not stop that terrorism? Try to understand, don't just blame Pakistan for "not supporting US invasion, played double game, couldn't finish terrorism".

65

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

no sir, it is not a case of hypocrisy. You avoided the topic and converted the whole thread into USA bashing (how ironic!). "USA has done this so we will do the same" is your line of argument. More importantly and i hope you realize that you are also getting personal by bringing dual nationalities into discussion and accusing folks of being selfish and less patriotic than you. Who told you that USA will revoke green cards based on anti-usa comments? anyway, please carry on. thx

66

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

So you have to condemn one before the other or is one allowed if the other ones allowed? And again what's the US got to do with this discussion. Re-read the OP.

Also please can you provide examples of where the US has deliberately targeted children or innocent civilians. As that is the main difference. The Taliban and other groups like ISIS target innocents on purpose.

67

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

They could not stop them because fighting terrorists isn't like fighting an army. They hide amongst the people. I don't get your point. I realise English isn't your first language but its really difficult to understand what your argument is.

68

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

This is why I said don't bring in Iraq into this discussion as all it does is allow obfuscation. We cannot discuss Iraq adequately here because the topic is something else and we are unable to discuss the topic on hand because some of you keep reaching and derailing.

No USA is not responsible for creating terrorists whether it be in Iraq or Pakistan. Yeah if they stay in Iraq or Pakistan they can certainly subdue the terrorists but then you all will start shouting western imperialism and hegemony if they do that.

Why is it so difficult for you all to readily agree that using terrorism as a strategy and not be bitten by it, as has been happening in Pakistan, have been proven impossible, akin to eating the cake and wanting to have it. You have to either give up terrorism or keep getting bitten by it - isn't the answer straight forward?

When STEM is not taught, whether it is a Madrassah or western school, you cannot have engineers. You have to either add STEM or import engineers.

When you don't produce oil but consume it, you either have to import it or stop consuming it.

69

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Yes English is not my strong point, same is the case with my ability to explain things/events. The point is "terrorists" are not going to create a "village" or "town" or "housing/compound" for themselves to become an easy target for any stronger army, they will live within civilians. War in any country will create reactionary forces. There were no terrorists in Iraq before US's invasion of Iraq, but when they devastated Iraq and removed its government it became an open field for every powerful criminal to carve out an area for his control as well as invite "jihadis" from around the world.

Both Iraq and Afghanista/Iraq have a parallel, it has to be brought into discussion. Iraq's example is a clear indication that you can't eliminate terrorists by bombing. US had full authority and full fledge army in Iraq but still failed to control terrorism. Now lets move to Afghanistan, US keeps harping about Pakistan playing double game to deflect its failures in Afghanistan but at the same time it shies away from failure in Iraq.

70

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Even in america they have accepted that the iraq war diverted resources (special ops, drones) when it was much needed to finish the job in afghanistan. I know that you are an indian of gujrati or some north indian descent who has to hate Pakistan like a religion, but facts are facts.

Pakistan should have done more in FATA and US should have done more in afghanistan (not allow poppy to grow or the british pay-for-stay deals with taliban in helmand) but what happened did happen.

71

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Ofcourse there are strong parallels and ofcourse you cannot eliminate terrorism by just bombing...that is not the discussion here.

To eliminate terrorists there needs to be elimination of their ideology and the support structures provided by governments such as what Pakistani state has been proven to have done.

72

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

if by doing more you mean bomb and hunt more, yeah but that by itself doesn't stop terrorism. As long as your government agencies keep making excuses and distinctions amongst schools of terrorism, they just keep multiplying faster

73

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

and what stopped US from carrying out the same and eliminate terrorism in Iraq?

74

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

PhoenixDesi jee, I am not a Taliban apologist. I believe in complete freedom of religion, that is freedom to believe in anything you like, or nothing at all. I will never make excuses for the atrocities committed by Taliban. Likewise, I can not make excuses for the atrocities directly caused by American military intervention in Afghanistan.

Reasons can be many, such as resources, military presence in the region, political influence in the region and so on. My sole point is that perceiving USA's intervention as intentions of working unconditionally for the greater good of the region, is wrong. USA, like Pakistan and India, has its reasons for getting involved in this matter.

Reports show that the Bush administration was contemplating military actions in Afghanistan and Iraq even before 9/11. Albeit under the same pretext as post 9/11 (fighting terrorism/Al Qaeda). But reports also show that the whole Iraq debacle was mostly about controlling the oil fields in Iraq. Yet the Bush administration lied to the rest of the world of their intentions. When they lied to us about Iraq, why could they not have lied to us about Afghanistan? US and Nato have (for example) been pushing for a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan through Afghanistan, to Pakistan and India (TAPI). The alternative is a pipeline from Iran.

What they have mostly achieved in Iraq and Afghanistan is creating even more turmoil, and a vicious cycle of violence, which will continue to live on in the region, long after US have pulled out its troops. American warmongering and military intervention have not been for the benefit of the region, neither in Iraq, nor in Afghanistan.

Just for clarification, I am not anti-USA, and certainly do not hold any animosity whatsoever towards Americans, but yes I am anti certain elements of American foreign policy.

Yes, we must accept that (secretly) feeding the monster and keeping it alive has not been a wise strategy by Pakistan. And I apologize if I conveyed the opposite in my earlier posts. Obviously calls for hatred and violence, and actual acts of violence, by the terrorists, would eventually catch up with Pakistan. But what ultimately needs to change is the mindset of people in Pakistan. The sanctity of human life must be valued higher than the (perceived) sanctity of religion. Only then can we completely eradicate terrorism in name of religion. I hope we will one day get there.

75

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

Mr Mirchandani, where in my posts did I excuse terrorism? Please don't make such assumptions, its extremely saddening and agitating to be blamed of such. I can be anti-terrorism, and be anti-"war on terrorism" at the same time, because both are leading to suffering for human beings. I believe in the utmost sanctity of human life, regardless of national and religious background.

All nations are at all times looking after their geopolitical and geostrategic interests. Just because I'm of Pakistani origin, I'm not going to blindly believe in the Pakistani narrative. I expect likewise, from any peace loving Indian and American. Because none of India, Pakistan and US, are working unconditionally for the greater good, which is 100% (unconditional) peace in the region. Not when that peace comes at the price of what they perceive as the best interests of their nation.

Am I wrong in pointing this out? Am I wrong in being able to distinguish between an objective view on the matter, from a biased one?

I would also like to know, what correlation does condemning American military intervention have to do with supporting terrorism? I'm baffled how you can correlate the two, so please do elaborate on this? Its rather simplistic to believe that America is unconditionally working for the greater good, when facts prove otherwise, no?

76

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

thank you

we are actually pretty aligned in our analysis...so not much to debate. Your last para is also spot on.

My core message is that we shd start owning our mistakes. I made a simple request that we shd stop supporting terrorism in any form and condemn it unconditionally no matter where it takes place. that is all i said and boom....the whole thread converted into usa bashing, iraq war, afghanistan war, Palestine israel issue.........USA did this, USA did that, USA USA USA.........kohram mich gaya har soo

look USA will always act for its own benefit. it is our establishment job to protect pakistan interets. USA wanted to use turkey's air space and have land access and offered a huge aid package but turkish Parliament said no. Americans moved on. Mahatir Mohammad said NO to USA many times. India said NO to USA many times...but when USA called Zia and msuahraff to help USA achieve its objectives, they opened everything for americans. so why blame USA? They took billions from USA both in 80s and 2000s and then started to play double games as well. Ofcourse americans will react to double game. I wish we would have said NO to USA.............and gain some respect of USA and rest of the world.

77

Re: No Sir no…you can’t have your cake and eat it too!

Can Pakistan finally give up the ‘good Taliban’? - The Washington Post

BOOM!

78

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

You re-read the OP he linked the 9/11 discussion with that of Peshawar. So by default they are linked. And thus the hypocrisy.

You can't read can you?

Mashallah. So if its collateral damage a dead kid is okay?

79

Re: No Sir no…you can’t have your cake and eat it too!

BOOM? what boom…theek hai sir jee. Jaisay app kee marziee. You claimed that the article said that pakistanis “deserved” Peshawar kids to be massacred. I did not get that feeling at all.As a matter of fact i have read so many similar articles in Pakistani press these days in which Pakistani analysts made the same points … plus all the points are made against terrorists not in their subtle favor like pakistani intelligentsia used to do

like i said before, for many sections of Pakistani public and for a lot of pakistani analysts and columnists, OBL and taliban were mujahedeen not terrorists..they would never condemn TTP by calling its name plus those analysts used to come up with indirect excuses in favor of terrorists…is this article claiming the same?

Now you disagree with it..so fine.

anyway, i said this before… we can agree to disagree because we are repeating our narrative. thx

80

Re: No Sir no...you can't have your cake and eat it too!

And you had the same articles when 9/11 happened. You act like Pakistanis are the only ones who have double standards. How many Americans believe the conspiracy theories? A good many.

How many believe that the US deserved 9/11? A good many. Or did you forget the Michael Moore movie which said the exact same thing? Don't you remember the amount of on line pieces that said this is because of our policies in the middle east?

You compare the US and Pakistan and the double standards, yet state that drone killing kids is acceptable.

Here is the simple thing whether you like it or not. The Washington Post article goes into great detail to state that we provided patronage to the TTP. Which we never did. The TTP and the Quetta Shura are two very distinct entities with the ISI supporting one and the NDS supporting the other.

The US articles lump them all together and say we provided patronage to all and we got this as blow back. The Washington Post piece says just that.

We can agree to disagree but if you maintain a double standard I will call you out on it.