Regarding IMF payments, the Paris club might or has rescheduled the payments but that just means that the country (Pak) is going deeper in the tank unless its economy can do a complete reversal.

The copy/paste job was to simply allow you and the other members to see relevant facts from the article. If you can only rebutt my commentary (which is just that), then you should read the article again. You might have read it, but you don't seem to comprehend it. While you are at it, check the footnotes aswell and add them to the growing mountain of evidence.

Good job of posting the articles from the Brookings Institude. This think tank has had the past 8 years to get something done in Washington, and as you can tell not much has happenned. Prof. Hass and Cohen have moderated their stance towards India and now consider the main issue in the region to be the economy and nukes.

Regarding the Stimson site; if you want point-counter points from an Indo-Pak perspective, then I don't think that there will be much of a chance for Pakistan to make its case. There is a much stronger academic voice that is Indo centric.

But a post at Stimson that caught by attention was that of Prof Mohammed Ayoob. I I don't know if you have read his most recent foreign policy paper, but apparently that forms the basis of Gov. Bush's Asia policy. Dr. Rice who will most likely be the NSA in a prospective Bush administration considers Prof Ayoob a close confidante. I would suggest you look up that paper.

Apart from that, I don't see anything new on this thread. I don't consider it my responsibility to try and change your mind, but I am just gonna say that of the 200 posts here around 60-70 rebutt all your points. Go back and read, them. I'm outta here.

SDavis,

---
Slider, I notice that Gen Zia seems to be your guniea pig du jour. I would contend that the one man did not bring Pakistan to the state it is in today, and apart from that if you were to look at Pakistan's past you would see similar behaviour from many others in power. Btw, Gen Musharaf was hand picked by none other than Gen Zia.
---

I keep picking on him, because I know that he was the single most responsible person for creating fundamentalism in the area. And this is not a secret; his policies speak for themselves.

And as for Gen. Zia picking Gen. Musharraf, that is just your normal military hierarchy structure. Nothing sinister there IMO.

---
Regarding IMF payments, the Paris club might or has rescheduled the payments but that just means that the country (Pak) is going deeper in the tank unless its economy can do a complete reversal.
---

Like I said before, Pakistan would rather take its chances with not receiving IMF loans then to tangle with the Taliban.

---
The copy/paste job was to simply allow you and the other members to see relevant facts from the article. If you can only rebutt my commentary (which is just that), then you should read the article again. You might have read it, but you don't seem to comprehend it. While you are at it, check the footnotes aswell and add them to the growing mountain of evidence.
---

And a nice job at that to. And I have read the article before, so I know EXACTLY what it means and tries to imply. But I still believe it’s wrong. It is after all an opinion article on what the US should do in the region and I happen to have a different opinion. And as they say, everyone is entitled to his own opinion.

And I frankly fail to see this “mountain of evidence” that you describe. I know a lot more about the goings in Pakistan since 1989 then most on this forum, so it would be fare to assume that what I have said is probably true. I have already mentioned a short timeline of all the events that happened during Zia’s rule and afterwards, and nobody has yet disputed them. I wonder why?

And frankly I don’t have the time or patience to counter every single point in all the articles posted on the internet. But I am more then willing to discuss any members’ valid points here.

---
Good job of posting the articles from the Brookings Institude. This think tank has had the past 8 years to get something done in Washington, and as you can tell not much has happenned. Prof. Hass and Cohen have moderated their stance towards India and now consider the main issue in the region to be the economy and nukes.
---

Well, good for Prof. Hass and Cohen. I was just merely trying to point out a different opinion then some have here. It really is irrelevant to this discussion whether Washington changes its course or not.

---
Regarding the Stimson site; if you want point-counter points from an Indo-Pak perspective, then I don't think that there will be much of a chance for Pakistan to make its case. There is a much stronger academic voice that is Indo centric.
---

Strange, the Pakistanis didn’t do so badly on the Stimson discussion. Maybe these indo-centric academics were on leave.

---
Apart from that, I don't see anything new on this thread. I don't consider it my responsibility to try and change your mind, but I am just gonna say that of the 200 posts here around 60-70 rebutt all your points. Go back and read, them. I'm outta here.
---

I’ve read all of the posts, and I still cannot see how any of my points are rebutted convincingly. And on that same note, I would ask everyone to reread my posts as well, and try to fully understand the ground realities. This idealistic approach (Taliban bad; Pakistan evil) will not get us anywhere.

Thanks,
Slider18

P.S I think you are missing my point. I know exactly what Afghan alumni are up to. The only way it can realistically be stopped is if Pakistan can influence the Taliban in a positive manner. But that will take time. Thankfully, since the Taliban are busy elsewhere then Pakistan, we do have some time.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slider18:
I keep picking on him(Gen. Zia), because I know that he was the single most responsible person for creating fundamentalism in the area.

---

Quick correction: Gen. Zia did not introduce Islamic fundamentalism or the policy of state support of terrorism. This goes all the way to Independence. In 1948 Pakistan armed and unleashed Islamic militants into Kashmir. In 1965 Pakistan again unleashed a wave of Islamic militants into Kashmir, this time supplied with heavy weapons. So Pakistan's creation of the Taliban and its support for the current wave of terrorist activity in Kashmir are nothing new.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slider18:
Div, some of my relatives have been to Bangladesh, and they told me that they were very hospitable to the Pakistanis. In fact, they were even slightly "anti-Indian".

---

That's strange, they probably didn't run across family members or friends of the hundreds of thousands of Bangaladeshis who were massacarred by the Pakistani army. This has to be one of the least known genocides of the past century.

http://www.virtualbangladesh.com/history/holocaust.html http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/8182/index.html http://www.ais-dhaka.net/SENIORS/okke http://www.management.mcgill.ca/people/students/phd/rahman/dhaka71/

You should try to get some views from the relatives/friends of some of these doctors, teachers, journalists, artists, professors, etc. who were killed by the Pakistani army. I think they would paint a very different picture.
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Crete/8182/files/intellectuals.htm

If you think that hate and mayhem started in Pakistan with Zia, then you need to look at the links above.

Maybe that's why the good General of Pak didn't meet the Bangladeshi PM at the UN summit cause the Bangladeshis still wanna get their hands on these murderers.

In 1965, it was I believe the Azad Kashmiris trained by Pakistan. Kind of like the Bay of Pigs Invasion. Almost the same end results. But in either case they were in no way fundamentalists, and they were not even fighting for Islam.

The Afridis, for example, went in their for the loot.

Fundamentalism only gained a foothold in Pakistan after 1977. In fact did you know that originally all the Islamist parties were against the creation of Pakistan in 1947 and even for some years afterwards?

If you want me to talk about Pakistans actions in Bangladesh, we could start a new thread.

And, despite what happened in 1971, many Bangladeshi's now resent India's big brother attitude towards their country. In fact after the war, India tried to annex BD.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Div:

If you think that hate and mayhem started in Pakistan with Zia, then you need to look at the links above.

---

This was my point regarding your earlier comments.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Slider18:

You may have noticed that during an India-Pakistan cricket match in Dhaka, the Bangladeshis are usually waiving a Pakistani flag. Just gives you an insight of the Bangkadeshi AND Indian mindset I think.

---

THIS IS CALLED PUTTING YOUR FOOT IN YOUR MOUTH!

And btw, the cricket story is true.

---
If you think that hate and mayhem started in Pakistan with Zia, then you need to look at the links above.
---

----
President Reagan's astounding description of the mujahideen as "the moral equivalent of our [the United States's] founding fathers".
----

P.S This comment goes equally to Pakistani and Indians.