Should the U.S. Deem Pakistan a state sponsor of terrorism? ( in the UN)

Discussion in 'Pakistan' started by JayATL, Oct 10, 2011.

  1. JayATL

    JayATL Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    189
    Location:
    USA
    Should the U.S. Deem Pakistan a State Sponsor of Terrorism? - Global Spin - TIME.com



    For its part, the United States should not be timid about publicly discussing the ISI's record of sponsoring terrorist networks in Pakistan and Afghanistan. The Pakistani and Afghan networks that the ISI created in the late 1980s and the 1990s and have fostered inside Pakistan are the main source of the Islamist terrorism ripping apart Afghanistan and threatening the United States and its allies. Three ISI connected Pakistani religio-terrorist organizations—Lashkar-i Taiba, Jaish-i Mohammad and Harakat ul Mujahidin—are on the State Department's list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The three ISI-supported Afghan terrorist groups keeping Afghanistan in a state of continuous war are the Afghan Taliban led by Mullah Omar plus the Haqqani and Hekmatyar fronts. They are lined up shoulder-to-shoulder on the Afghan-Pakistani border with the Afghan Taliban in northwest Pakistan, the Haqqani network in the central sector, and the Hekmatyar group in far northeastern Pakistan. Despite the killing of thousands of U.S.-led coalition troops, foreign aid workers attempting to reconstruct Afghanistan, as well as Afghan security personnel and civilians, Washington has still not designated these three Afghan terrorist groups as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. Long overdue and mandated by U.S. law, this action should be taken immediately.

    Tomsen goes on to stress that the same tired approach of mixed messaging and high-profile summitry with counterparts in Pakistan has got U.S. officials nowhere and that Washington should not underestimate the leverage it has over the Pakistanis. Pakistan may invoke the China card, but the Sino-Pakistani relationship is bound by thin thread and the U.S., Tomsen suggests, should call their bluff.

    He suggests severing aid to Pakistan and even presenting Islamabad in the U.N. Security Council as a regime that sponsors terrorism. From Tomsen's perspective, nobody from the Taliban, including those in the notorious Haqqani network, should be allowed a place at the table in any future Afghan coalition government. "They are poison pills that have destroyed past Afghan peace efforts," he says.

    And therein lies the rub, for it's impossible to imagine peace in Afghanistan — especially as the U.S. prepares to withdraw by 2014 — without some negotiated accommodation with the Taliban. Nor is it possible to imagine the U.S. right now risking such diplomatic brinkmanship with the Pakistanis. But, as the steady drumbeat of attacks continues with little real cooperation from the Pakistanis in sight, something will have to give.
     
  2.  
  3. trackwhack

    trackwhack Tihar Jail Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    3,757
    Likes Received:
    2,573
    really? duh!
     
  4. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,117
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Shouldn't it?
     
  5. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    They'd be idiots to do so because then usa itself would be terrorist sympathizer because it gives money and weapons to pakistan.
     
  6. Bangalorean

    Bangalorean Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Messages:
    6,207
    Likes Received:
    6,497
    ^^ Good one there. :D
     
  7. Adux

    Adux Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    Good one, that said, but does the US have any option? The only other option which would give them a decisive result is to have a complete war with Pakistan; they can't do that. It is also not good for us, since even if India remains neutral, I expect the Pakistan lob their nukes into India as well as into Afghanistan and Israel. So, the only option for them, is what they are doing now. Its not perfect, its not good, but its all we have.
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  8. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    If only GoI had some initiative we'd be near a 3 layer shield that would make paki nukes impotent. Also im sure the yanks have a fairly good idea where the nukes are stored. There are only 2 solution to paki problem:

    1. Internal revolution by sane pakis themselves.
    2. Outside intervention.

    The scum calling the shots right now wont change there tune.
     
  9. Adux

    Adux Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    That is possible, but the tech hasnt matured enough, it is going to take more time.
    There is no such thing as a sane paki.

    Nukes and more Nukes. Any intervention. Expect Pakistani's to lob nukes at us.

    The best option is to bleed Pakistan slowly very slowly...internally break them up.
     
  10. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    By sane i dont mean rushing to India with roses and sweets but rather being balanced enough to see the ramifications of terrorism and religious fundamentalism. In the cold war the yanks would have anyone believe that the soviets were blood thirsty maniacs but they were quite sane. If the current paki elite were running the then ussr they would have started ww3.

    Pakis dont have nuclear triad so they can only use one route (missiles fired over the land border) so we must be prepared for that. All along the border we should have dozens of abm's. But GoI lacks foresight.
     
  11. Adux

    Adux Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    I didnt really get you here. We have to be patient and brace, do the best to protect ourselves.

    There is only so much we can do with so much money. Budgeting, Its a pain. The Tech is simply not there, especially in the Indian context where there is no reaction time, and also will have to deal with atleast 30-40 coming our way in a span of 2-3 days from 3-4 different types.
     
  12. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,528
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  13. Adux

    Adux Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    To be honest, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan would be more worthy of that title any other nation on the last. But as long as Saudi's are the opinion makers of Islam and has oil, along with Pakistan as the easiest route to the end of WoT, But neither Pakistan nor Saudi Arabia are committed, but their idea is to bleed USA, Americans know it but the next option is escalation to a level Americans dont want to go.
     
  14. NSG_Blackcats

    NSG_Blackcats Member of The Month OCTOBER 2009 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2009
    Messages:
    3,485
    Likes Received:
    1,548
    Location:
    Delhi
    Good question but my answer is a big no. USA will never declare Pakistan even a state sponsoring terrorism let alone declaring it a terrorist state. The simple reason is that they just cannot afford to do it. NATO supply line depends on Pakistan you know.

    We should rephrase the question; does India have the guts to declare Pakistan as a terrorist state??
     
  15. Tianshan

    Tianshan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    249
    hah, if you think the current leadership is bad, then wait until the religious extremists take power.

    bad news for everyone, even us.
     
  16. Adux

    Adux Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    You would be surprised, that Nukes are already in the hands of the Jihadi's, Just because they current group doesnt have any beard and speaks RP english doesnt mean that they are not Jihadi's. There is no worse group than what is helm in ISI now, but there will be worse situation which you would see them manipulate and slowly open up as time passes. Heck, who controls the religious extremist - ISI and PA, who created and brainwashes them- ISI and PA, and you think those buggers will be worse? They are one and the same. The deed is already done; Pakistan is firmly in the hands of religious extremist.
     
  17. Tianshan

    Tianshan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    249
    well, after america leaves the region, those extremists from af-pak will target pakistan, india, and china too.

    i never wanted america in this region in the first place, but now they are there, i don't want them to leave. >_<
     
    SPIEZ likes this.
  18. Adux

    Adux Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    The targeting inside Pakistan, is not the same as India, Europe, China or USA. It is sectarian.


    After India, it is most definitely China. You could see the ground work and critical mass being done in your country.

    As of now, only they have the capability and resources to take on these buggers.
     
  19. Tianshan

    Tianshan Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2011
    Messages:
    675
    Likes Received:
    249
    they already do infiltrate in.

    most important function of SCO for us is to prevent cross boundary infiltration into our western border.

    dangerous times ahead, the borders of xinjiang are much too long to seal off.

    cpc will lose patience one day. but we are not strong enough like america, to launch strikes across borders
     
    Last edited: Oct 11, 2011
  20. Adux

    Adux Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    4,020
    Likes Received:
    1,695
    Its not about infiltration, its more about Saudi inspired Mosque's setting up in China, money coming in to those bodies, conversion of locals etc etc. Those are the indicators.
    Striking across borders or doing a conventional war with Pakistan or any country along the borders of China, is quite achievable for CPC. But this is not a conventional war, this is a war of intelligence, technology and special forces. Something US, learnt quite late in the game of War on Terror.
     
    nrj likes this.

Share This Page