Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Agreeing to be allies and capitulating to every demand are two different things.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Generally in Pak the consensus is that Pak should not have provided US with any support after 9/11 and in US's quest to find and capture/kill those responsible for 9/11.
Just curious to know what do PA members think about the the scenario of Pak not providing US with any level of support after 9/11. What would have happened to situation in post 9/11 Pak, Extremism in Pak, Pak/AFG/India relationships and global position of Pak.
I personally believe that it was right to support and join the Coalition and even if it provided no support to US, the terrorists would have always escaped Afghanistan and poured into safe houses in Pakistan where they would have the logistical support by ISI and sympathy of Pak people (In name of Islam/Jihad) and eventually they still would have turned violent and caused problems in Pakistan.
If Pakistan had to provided Support to US, India was there, since it was not like 100 years ago, one can search the news item/statements of Indian Govt/politicians, offering USA all the support it may need... the only difference would have been that war would have been in Pakistan and not in Afghanistan... So it was wise decision... although forced one... more over, there was a resolution of UNO as well... so by not allowing/cooperating, Pakistan would have been a non-existent entity by now...
Any political leader saying he opposed it or he was/is against it is just for political mileage and nothing else...
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
In case you did not notice, Pakistan is still flooded with terrorists ;)
Please have a stay in Baghdad, where Iraqi people are attacked both by Airforce and by the terrorists... atleast American air force is not bombing Lahore, Karachi, ISB etc!!! we would have been Iraq...
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
If Pakistan had to provided Support to US, India was there, since it was not like 100 years ago, one can search the news item/statements of Indian Govt/politicians, offering USA all the support it may need... the only difference would have been that war would have been in Pakistan and not in Afghanistan... So it was wise decision... although forced one... more over, there was a resolution of UNO as well... so by not allowing/cooperating, Pakistan would have been a non-existent entity by now...
Any political leader saying he opposed it or he was/is against it is just for political mileage and nothing else...
I can't stop laughing at your statement. How would India provide support to USA, if it doesn't share a border with Afghanistan? Mate, before you say something think about it. The war needed logistics and Pakistani army cared about $$$ and nothing else. Geographically, India is not in the position to have direct links with Afghanistan and that is way they build the chahbahar port recently.
Through out the history indian muslims including current day Pakistan has always betrayed the Afghans/pahktoons. It was these muslim leaguers who were at the service of brits by provding foot soldiers to attack Afghans/Pakhtoons. This unfortunate history was repeated in last 35 years quite a few times.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
I can't stop laughing at your statement. How would India provide support to USA, if it doesn't share a border with Afghanistan? Mate, before you say something think about it. The war needed logistics and Pakistani army cared about $$$ and nothing else. Geographically, India is not in the position to have direct links with Afghanistan and that is way they build the chahbahar port recently.
Through out the history indian muslims including current day Pakistan has always betrayed the Afghans/pahktoons. It was these muslim leaguers who were at the service of brits by provding foot soldiers to attack Afghans/Pakhtoons. This unfortunate history was repeated in last 35 years quite a few times.
If you had stopped laughing and tried to comprehend what has written... you may written a different reply... please read again and then reply...
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Pakistan supporting US after 9/11?
Pakistan if it had sane leaders should have never supported US starting from 1979. What makes Pakistan think that USA is their great friend and ally, if anyone has any doubt just show me one project that makes difference in daily life of a common pakistani. Apart from a few weapons and F16s they have not given Pakistan any thing, but even to get those things Pakistan has created enemies for themselves. USA has given Pakistan some money but at cost, and no one knows what happened to that money it is sitting in the pockets of BRAVE ARMY generals. What has the army done for Pakistan apart from losing wars. If some people in Pakistan think that army is great and defender of Pakistan, then look around you and judge the role of army since 1947, what is their achievement, I know one surrendering 91 thousands in Bangladesh in 1971 and breaking Pakistan up, proving the theory of two nation wrong.
I can't stop laughing at your statement. How would India provide support to USA, if it doesn't share a border with Afghanistan? Mate, before you say something think about it. The war needed logistics and Pakistani army cared about $$$ and nothing else. Geographically, India is not in the position to have direct links with Afghanistan and that is way they build the chahbahar port recently.
Through out the history indian muslims including current day Pakistan has always betrayed the Afghans/pahktoons. It was these muslim leaguers who were at the service of brits by provding foot soldiers to attack Afghans/Pakhtoons. This unfortunate history was repeated in last 35 years quite a few times.
Your grudge towards Pakistan Army in particular (and "Muslim leaguers" in general) is obvious and might have its own merits but to think that any civilian Govt would have taken stand against collation after 9/11 is just like thinking that Afridi can make test 300 at the strike rate of below 40. Sorry cant think of any other insane analogy.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Your grudge towards Pakistan Army in particular (and "Muslim leaguers" in general) is obvious and might have its own merits but to think that any civilian Govt would have taken stand against collation after 9/11 is just like thinking that Afridi can make test 300 at the strike rate of below 40. Sorry cant think of any other insane analogy.
Mate, if you are a muslim then think rationally. Since 1947 Pakistani leaders and particularly its army are the at the service of west and Yahood. How is it possible that the great championof black September General zia ul haq the killer of 20,000 palestenian refugeesin Jordan becomes the chief of Pakistan army. In a country that was created onthe basis of religion, kills innocent muslims who were preparing a resistance,and a few years later he becomes the head of the army and leader of Pakistan andstarts the Afghan Jihad on the name of Islam. I don’t buy this **** mate. Themajor sins committed by Pakistani leaders are the major cause of todaysproblems and who suffering the most Afghans/pakhtoons, while people in Punjaband Sindh do not even allow the IDPs in their province. WHAT A GREAT COUNTRYCALLED PAKISTAN.
[FONT=Times New Roman]
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Mate, if you are a muslim then think rationally. Since 1947 Pakistani leaders and particularly its army are the at the service of west and Yahood. How is it possible that the great championof black September General zia ul haq the killer of 20,000 palestenian refugeesin Jordan becomes the chief of Pakistan army. In a country that was created onthe basis of religion, kills innocent muslims who were preparing a resistance,and a few years later he becomes the head of the army and leader of Pakistan andstarts the Afghan Jihad on the name of Islam. I don’t buy this **** mate. Themajor sins committed by Pakistani leaders are the major cause of todaysproblems and who suffering the most Afghans/pakhtoons, while people in Punjaband Sindh do not even allow the IDPs in their province. WHAT A GREAT COUNTRYCALLED PAKISTAN. [FONT=Times New Roman]
I am not sure what are you trying to preach here has anything to do with the TOPIC of the thread. Please feel free to open a thread on shortcomings of Army but in your 3 posts so far you have failed to reply to OP's question.
World politics are not as simple as you are trying to paint them.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
-Pakistan would have been out of its mind to oppose the U.S. propositions at the time. There were no options they had to cooperate.
-agreed with a poster above that to cooperate IS moral - Islam isn't 911 and it's not about blowing up innocent people. These terrorists have taken more innocent Pakistani lives in suicide bombs and violence. They attach Shias. They attack harmless historical sites. Their idea of justice is barbaric. They put bullets in people's heads for speaking out or having a different opinion. They close down girls schools and are barbaric with their treatment of women. It's some warped version of Islamic military history they have been brainwashed into that they are following. So, Pakistan is in every moral right to join a fight against them and they should stay consistent in that goal if we are true Muslims.
- Someone mentioned the Indian muslims have back stabbed the afghans and pushtoons. I fail to see this. Did you ever think the Wahhabi ideas propogated by Arab monkeys igniting war and strife in the area (probably on beckoning of further international intrigues), is the actual enemy to the afghan and pushtoon people? The enemy isn't Afghanistan it's the terrorists. Reason why afghans are angry with the Pakistani government is that they truly believe Pakistan is sponsoring these terrorists behind closed doors. To fight these terrorists we would be supporting and saving our afghan and phantoon peoples of a horrible group of people that have made the gross error of thinking their thuggery is Islamic.
Bottom line if Pakistan is playing a double game it is in no one's interest since we are just angering Allah by protecting and using these animals for proxy wars.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
-Pakistan would have been out of its mind to oppose the U.S. propositions at the time. There were no options they had to cooperate.
-agreed with a poster above that to cooperate IS moral - Islam isn't 911 and it's not about blowing up innocent people. These terrorists have taken more innocent Pakistani lives in suicide bombs and violence. They attach Shias. They attack harmless historical sites. Their idea of justice is barbaric. They put bullets in people's heads for speaking out or having a different opinion. They close down girls schools and are barbaric with their treatment of women. It's some warped version of Islamic military history they have been brainwashed into that they are following. So, Pakistan is in every moral right to join a fight against them and they should stay consistent in that goal if we are true Muslims.
- Someone mentioned the Indian muslims have back stabbed the afghans and pushtoons. I fail to see this. Did you ever think the Wahhabi ideas propogated by Arab monkeys igniting war and strife in the area (probably on beckoning of further international intrigues), is the actual enemy to the afghan and pushtoon people? The enemy isn't Afghanistan it's the terrorists. Reason why afghans are angry with the Pakistani government is that they truly believe Pakistan is sponsoring these terrorists behind closed doors. To fight these terrorists we would be supporting and saving our afghan and phantoon peoples of a horrible group of people that have made the gross error of thinking their thuggery is Islamic.
Bottom line if Pakistan is playing a double game it is in no one's interest since we are just angering Allah by protecting and using these animals for proxy wars.
You have said half of the truth, let me say the rest. It is true that terrorist be it Taliban, TTP, Alqaeda or ISIS are killing innocent people from all sects and ethnicities. But how about our nicely shaven, booted, washed and smartly clothed army. Have they not killed innocent people?
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Please have a stay in Baghdad, where Iraqi people are attacked both by Airforce and by the terrorists... atleast American air force is not bombing Lahore, Karachi, ISB etc!!! we would have been Iraq...
Its because they have bases, its because Iraq was dead in 1990s, its because Iraq could not materialize its nuclear program... there are many 'its because'.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Either you're with us, or you're against us. Bush and his hawks would have had no qualms about bringing another nation to "justice". In fact we're still being brought to justice.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Generally in Pak the consensus is that Pak should not have provided US with any support after 9/11 and in US's quest to find and capture/kill those responsible for 9/11.
Just curious to know what do PA members think about the the scenario of Pak not providing US with any level of support after 9/11. What would have happened to situation in post 9/11 Pak, Extremism in Pak, Pak/AFG/India relationships and global position of Pak.
I personally believe that it was right to support and join the Coalition and even if it provided no support to US, the terrorists would have always escaped Afghanistan and poured into safe houses in Pakistan where they would have the logistical support by ISI and sympathy of Pak people (In name of Islam/Jihad) and eventually they still would have turned violent and caused problems in Pakistan.
Pakistan would have been better of if it had somehow maintained a neutral policy during 911 era. Instead of double cross, it should have shun the polices of creating jehadis and suicide bombers e.g. there was no need to yet creating another fitna of TTP or so called good Taliban.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Logistic support to NATO forces in Afghanistan: I think, many people may not know due to dishonesty of politicians, journalists, anchor persons on TV and other Pakistani media, that Pakistan support to NATO forces in Afghanistan*is not due to just phone call or request from USA,* but due to UN resolutions 1368 (Passed on 12 Sept, 2001 … a day after New York attack on 11 Sept 2001). Many later resolutions also followed in this respect.
Pakistan being member of UN had obligation to follow UN resolutions, as UN is body that gives protection to Pakistan in international arena. Even Pakistani border is recognised international border due to UN charter, including sea territorial boundary, and many other rights that Pakistan has in international laws. With no UN protection and recognition, Pakistan would have been a piece of land with no legal status. Pakistan would have had no right on water coming from India, nor any say on Kashmir issue. If not for UN, strong countries would have enslaved weaker countries militarily, and certainly Pakistan would have been at big disadvantage with India and China next door. India with huge numerical and military advantage (spend ~50 billion dollars on military compared to Pakistani ~5 billion dollars) would have started grabbing internationally unprotected Pakistani land. Any country without reason could have enforced sanctions on Pakistan and Pakistani passport would have got unrecognised and useless as travelling document (just like Passport of Azad Kashmir).
So, not supporting ‘war against terrorism’ and NATO forces in Afghanistan would have been rejecting UN resolution, that was against Pakistani interest, and could have endangered Pakistan. It could have given NATO forces excuse for attacking Pakistan (at least bombing areas they would have liked to bomb) or weakening Pakistan using strict sanctions … all under the cover of UN resolution. NATO could have taken the war to Pakistan (making Pakistan an extended Afghanistan … a hint already given to Pakistan by Bush administration), and India helping NATO, would have taken advantage of NATO and UN, could have ended all international disputes in Kashmir making it part of internationally recognised part of India endorsed by UN, and using force, could have taken Azad Kashmir claiming that they are liberating an occupied area belonging to them.
On the other hand, why Pakistan should not have given logistic support to ‘war against terrorism’ in Afghanistan, as Pakistan was victim themselves, getting terrorized by sectarian outfits at that time, who were using Afghanistan under Taliban as refuge after bombing and killing people in Pakistan.
That is different matter that most Pakistanis have no ego or self-respect unlike Americans, and love to lay down flat when anyone gives them bashing in the name of Islam, however deviant their Islam could be, the way sectarian outfits were doing in Pakistan and then taking refuge in Afghanistan (before Taliban kicked out of power in Afghanistan). Today TTP, LJ and other sectarian outfits are doing the same, and many Pakistanis love them even though these outfits would not hesitate to kill them too.
In my opinion, if Pakistan had any self-respect than instead of Americans, it should have been Pakistan army entering Afghanistan to dislodge Taliban and arrest Pakistani criminals taking refuge in Afghanistan.
Here is UN resolutions 1368 on 9/11, the cause Pakistan gave logistic support to NATO in Afghanistan:
UN resolution 1368 (12 Sept 2001) … Clause 3: Calls on all States to work together urgently to bring to justice the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of these terrorist attacks and stresses that those responsible for aiding, supporting or harbouring the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of these acts will be held accountable;
Thus, UN called all states (including Pakistan) to work together and punish perpetrators, organizers, and sponsors of terrorist attacks (9/11 incident … as this resolution was with reference to 9/11 incident). Further, the resolution also makes it clear (stresses) that … if any one become responsible of aiding, supporting or harbouring the perpetrators, organisers and supporters of 9/11 than they would be held accountable (NATO can act against them too).
Apart of above resolution, there are many other UN resolutions on 9/11, one other I am putting down here.
UN resolution 1386 (20 Dec 2001) … Clause 2: Calls upon Member States to contribute personnel, equipment and other resources to the International Security Assistance Force, and invites those Member States to inform the leadership of the Force and the Secretary-General;
Thus on 20 Dec 2001, UN calls all member states (including Pakistan) to contribute personnel, equipment, and other resources to international security assistance force (NATO and other powers acting in Afghanistan) …
So, why Pakistan (or Musharraf) should have said 'No' to United Nation and should have rejected the resolution passed by UN, endangering Pakistan? … Pakistan had commitment with UN, but Pakistan had no commitment with thugs ruling Afghanistan, thugs who were not even recognised as legitimate government in Afghanistan, and were also harming Pakistan.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Logistic support to NATO forces in Afghanistan: I think, many people may not know due to dishonesty of politicians, journalists, anchor persons on TV and other Pakistani media, that Pakistan support to NATO forces in Afghanistan*is not due to just phone call or request from USA,* but due to UN resolutions 1368 (Passed on 12 Sept, 2001 … a day after New York attack on 11 Sept 2001). Many later resolutions also followed in this respect.
Pakistan being member of UN had obligation to follow UN resolutions, as UN is body that gives protection to Pakistan in international arena. Even Pakistani border is recognised international border due to UN charter, including sea territorial boundary, and many other rights that Pakistan has in international laws. With no UN protection and recognition, Pakistan would have been a piece of land with no legal status. Pakistan would have had no right on water coming from India, nor any say on Kashmir issue. If not for UN, strong countries would have enslaved weaker countries militarily, and certainly Pakistan would have been at big disadvantage with India and China next door. India with huge numerical and military advantage (spend ~50 billion dollars on military compared to Pakistani ~5 billion dollars) would have started grabbing internationally unprotected Pakistani land. Any country without reason could have enforced sanctions on Pakistan and Pakistani passport would have got unrecognised and useless as travelling document (just like Passport of Azad Kashmir).
So, not supporting ‘war against terrorism’ and NATO forces in Afghanistan would have been rejecting UN resolution, that was against Pakistani interest, and could have endangered Pakistan. It could have given NATO forces excuse for attacking Pakistan (at least bombing areas they would have liked to bomb) or weakening Pakistan using strict sanctions … all under the cover of UN resolution. NATO could have taken the war to Pakistan (making Pakistan an extended Afghanistan … a hint already given to Pakistan by Bush administration), and India helping NATO, would have taken advantage of NATO and UN, could have ended all international disputes in Kashmir making it part of internationally recognised part of India endorsed by UN, and using force, could have taken Azad Kashmir claiming that they are liberating an occupied area belonging to them.
On the other hand, why Pakistan should not have given logistic support to ‘war against terrorism’ in Afghanistan, as Pakistan was victim themselves, getting terrorized by sectarian outfits at that time, who were using Afghanistan under Taliban as refuge after bombing and killing people in Pakistan.
That is different matter that most Pakistanis have no ego or self-respect unlike Americans, and love to lay down flat when anyone gives them bashing in the name of Islam, however deviant their Islam could be, the way sectarian outfits were doing in Pakistan and then taking refuge in Afghanistan (before Taliban kicked out of power in Afghanistan). Today TTP, LJ and other sectarian outfits are doing the same, and many Pakistanis love them even though these outfits would not hesitate to kill them too.
In my opinion, if Pakistan had any self-respect than instead of Americans, it should have been Pakistan army entering Afghanistan to dislodge Taliban and arrest Pakistani criminals taking refuge in Afghanistan.
Here is UN resolutions 1368 on 9/11, the cause Pakistan gave logistic support to NATO in Afghanistan:
UN resolution 1368 (12 Sept 2001) … Clause 3: Calls on all States to work together urgently to bring to justice the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of these terrorist attacks and stresses that those responsible for aiding, supporting or harbouring the perpetrators, organizers and sponsors of these acts will be held accountable;
Thus, UN called all states (including Pakistan) to work together and punish perpetrators, organizers, and sponsors of terrorist attacks (9/11 incident … as this resolution was with reference to 9/11 incident). Further, the resolution also makes it clear (stresses) that … if any one become responsible of aiding, supporting or harbouring the perpetrators, organisers and supporters of 9/11 than they would be held accountable (NATO can act against them too).
Apart of above resolution, there are many other UN resolutions on 9/11, one other I am putting down here.
UN resolution 1386 (20 Dec 2001) … Clause 2: Calls upon Member States to contribute personnel, equipment and other resources to the International Security Assistance Force, and invites those Member States to inform the leadership of the Force and the Secretary-General;
Thus on 20 Dec 2001, UN calls all member states (including Pakistan) to contribute personnel, equipment, and other resources to international security assistance force (NATO and other powers acting in Afghanistan) …
So, why Pakistan (or Musharraf) should have said 'No' to United Nation and should have rejected the resolution passed by UN, endangering Pakistan? … Pakistan had commitment with UN, but Pakistan had no commitment with thugs ruling Afghanistan, thugs who were not even recognised as legitimate government in Afghanistan, and were also harming Pakistan.
The problem with using UN to understand this problem is, not all countries think that highly of UN. It has been used by powerful countries to hammer the weak ones. US has set aside resolutions by citing that the US Congress has not ratified them. Israel does that without citing any reasons and without consequences. I do agree with you that Pakistan had no choice and in retrospect did the right thing, but not for the reasons mentioned here.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
we. pakistan would have been a democratic country.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Either you're with us, or you're against us. Bush and his hawks would have had no qualms about bringing another nation to "justice".** In fact we're still being brought to justice**.
ek bakray ko bhooka qurban kia jata hay, ek ko khila pila ke....
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
The problem with using UN to understand this problem is, not all countries think that highly of UN. It has been used by powerful countries to hammer the weak ones. US has set aside resolutions by citing that the US Congress has not ratified them. Israel does that without citing any reasons and without consequences. I do agree with you that Pakistan had no choice and in retrospect did the right thing, but not for the reasons mentioned here.
America foot most of UN financial bills, and have big influence over UN, but Pakistan is not USA, so we cannot act like them. Israel is also playing with UN resolution because of American backing and Veto.
Anyhow, I think India, Israel as well as many (including some in American government) who wanted to see Pakistan harmed, were wishing or hoping that Pakistan do not comply with UN resolution 1368, so that they can take advantage of Pakistan violating UN resolution to harm Pakistan.
But there are many ignorant who think that America attacking Saddam's Iraq means Iraqi army capturing USA, or that America attacking Taliban means Angels would defend Afghanistan and would destroy USA, wanted Pakistan violate UN resolution and fight NATO in support of Monkeys ruling Afghanistan ... but why? ... for them, because Taliban was Angels and Mullah Umar was Khalifa, when in reality these monkeys were worse than animals, and were source of terror in Pakistan even before 9/11.
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
Its because they have bases, its because Iraq was dead in 1990s, its because Iraq could not materialize its nuclear program... there are many 'its because'.
in 1990 when Iraq Invaded Kuwait... it have a standing army of One Million, chemical and biological weapons and lots of Russian stuff... but was still destroyed and sent back to Stone Age and then completely destroyed...
same could have done to Pakistan... please keep in mind that Iraq had huge oil reserves and it somehow managed to keep the things on move by selling it in the black market....
Re: Post 9/11 - What if Pak didn't support US?
You have said half of the truth, let me say the rest. It is true that terrorist be it Taliban, TTP, Alqaeda or ISIS are killing innocent people from all sects and ethnicities. But how about our nicely shaven, booted, washed and smartly clothed army. Have they not killed innocent people?
Who has the Pakistani army killed, in the illegal sense, outside the boundaries of war? Last I checked, it's not the military folks that are blowing themselves up in fruit markets or hiding bombs in vegetable crates, or blowing up shias in shia masjids or putting christians to fire.