The best thing about siding with the US is that the hold of the Mollahs in Pakistan has been broken, the fundos have been wiped out, and even though we will continue to see a few more internal terrorist attacks in Pakistan as a result of sheer desperation, fundoism in Pakistan will become a thing of the past.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Spock: *
Ramo, I suggest you have a look at the US intelligence link dhir provided.
[/QUOTE]
I, or nobodyelse, never claimed that link to be american, its your own cooked up story.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Spock: *
The best thing about siding with the US is that the hold of the Mollahs in Pakistan has been broken, the fundos have been wiped out, and even though we will continue to see a few more internal terrorist attacks in Pakistan as a result of sheer desperation, fundoism in Pakistan will become a thing of the past.
[/QUOTE]
Don't you think these things were there in the first place because of your siding with US and adopting policies which were of interest to US.
There are some inconsistencies in this article if you read it carefully. At the start of the article it claims that al-qaeda smuggled itself out of pakistan via karachi along with its gold. Fair enough, and totally believable seeing as i know what conidtions are like in karachi. It then says the plan was to establish itself in North Africa, yet later on the article says pakistan was to become the new base for chemical and nuclear weapons development? Am i the only one who sees the confilct in those 2 statements?
Also the comments about pakistani advisors being assigned to the taliban to assist against the americans isnt attributed to any sources, and hasnt ever been mentioned on any other sites. In addition, if the Taliban wanted to go with a geurilla strategy, why would they install Zubaida who had experience of guerilla warfare in Pakistan?? What use would he be there? Doesnt make any sense and it detracts from the credibilty of the article. Its a nice story, but not very believable unless you’re from New Delhi or thereabouts.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by dhir: *
Don't you think these things were there in the first place because of your siding with US and adopting policies which were of interest to US.
[/QUOTE]
No, these things were there because of Zia-al-Huqs policies in the 80s. He set pakistan down the path of islamic fundamentalism, not the US.
Yeah and why was Zia doing it, and why nobody in Pakistan resisted his moves. US hand was evident all through.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by dhir: *
Yeah and why was Zia doing it, and why nobody in Pakistan resisted his moves. US hand was evident all through.
[/QUOTE]
Huh? Now you've totally lost me? It was the americans who encouraged all the madrassas, mullahs and hudood laws? I dont think they'd agree with that
Dang! 
You nailed him down Ramo 
Ramo, Pakistan is the only country in the world which works on piecemeals. It is strange how pakistanis blame their leaders easily after they are no more and put them in the soup rather than taking the blame as a country and nation as one entity (incl. its leaders). If it was Zia, what did Pakistan do about it then.
Q: What pak is getting for being an american ally?
A: Free Fingerprinting for all it's nationals desirous of travel to the US.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by dhir: *
Ramo, Pakistan is the only country in the world which works on piecemeals. It is strange how pakistanis blame their leaders easily after they are no more and put them in the soup rather than taking the blame as a country and nation as one entity (incl. its leaders). If it was Zia, what did Pakistan do about it then.
[/QUOTE]
Dhir, why wouldn't you say the same thing about your own country?
Pakistanis have always criticize politicians and dictators whatever they have done.
Fact is, media and press in Pakistan wasn't free so much as it is today now.
The only thing pak is getting is a BIGGER house for musharraf.