Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Idea Of The Day -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (46263)	5/22/2004 3:36:41 PM
From: IQBAL LATIF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 50167

<It is YOU who is the liar because Hersh only reported that the US and Israel has contingency plans to neutralize Pakistan's nuclear capability. Hersh never included India in that alliance.> Hersh makes outrageous claims and lies but whose hypothesis was this anyway let’s go back...fiction and figment of small mind.. <I also said that it is entirely conceivable that Israel would be a partner in such an enterprise. All of this was part of what Hersh alleged. I speculated that India could also be coopted if it came to this. It would not be in India's interests to have a nuclear fundamentalist Islamic regime as its neighbor and especially one that has fought several wars with India - but India, like Israel, will take its lead from the US.> Fact as emerged in 24 hours..Brajesh Mishra,s doctrine of developing a “triad” or a “core alliance” of India, Israel and the United Stats for evolving a joint strategy in war on international terrorism) in the dust bin. Than may be the ‘non entity coward’ is liar along with his mentor or his theories are like wishful thinking once core triad theory is thrown in dustbin...look at his words few days ago.. < <would venture to say that I know more about your part of the world than you do about the political and cultural dynamics as it pertains to the US.> This much he knew about my part of the world that the thing he was theorising was thrown first thing from the options of new government. He knows nothing about my part of the world, your whole convenience analogy is based on pre- 911 scenarios, it was USA who had to give every conceivable concession to get Pakis on board, even today Pakis and Indians are two states with declared nuke programmes receiving billion dollar a year for being nice kids on the block, this is not convenience this is swallowing hard ball realism, and it is hard for you and remember it that USA would need these countries post 911, you know what Pakis got out of Afghan war, I think that war was a front to go through their entire nuke programmes, if you think that USA used Pakis until Afghan war don’t forget that someone took your entire leadership on a ride by the time the war was over Pak was a nuclear power, much as I disagree to that the fact remains the in politics Pakistan and US have used and utilised each other. When the third world stone age draconian methods bring down first world economy on kneels the third world hinterlands need to be allied; Period. If Pakistan fools around and act like Saddam or try to rape a nation like Bangladesh again we should suffer the same fate as Iraq, we should know how to live in this world as a respectable nation. Post 911 scenario is built on new strategy that of inclusion of ex- rogue states as principal partners in getting chopped these sordid Alqaeda tentacles, Saudis and Pakistanis matter in this whole equation know it well, and this is the reason that Bush administration has sown this alliance that has crippled Alqaeda. If Pakistan would have been treated like Iraq I think the mess in north of India would have crippled the region of South Asia, we are numbers and 1.5 billion people live there, India realises it, they are not going to listen to Israel to destroy Pakistan, your whole theory is cooked up in your mind and has no relevance..

To: IQBAL LATIF who wrote (46263)	5/23/2004 5:41:40 PM
From: malibuca	Respond to of 50167

I am asked that Osama is liked by most of Pakistan so we should hit Pakistan I have no idea what you are talking about - there is no such inference or suggestion from me. I am the liberal who, after all, feels that the invasion of Iraq was huge blunder, because premption as a strategy is fraught with risk. Pakistan, or for that matter, any other country should only be the focus of our attention for premptive action, if it is actively involved in actions that are an imminent threat to us. Other than that, we should work with other nations to minimize the environment that foments terrorism. I certainly don’t espouse the Bush approach of using shifting rationales to invade a country such as Iraq. I face lesser animosity in my country for my views than I face here I have no animosity towards you. I have followed your views on geopolitics and the war against terrorism ever since you changed the direction of this thread away from the market. I have not been able to read every post by any means. I have been tempted on many occasions to respond to some of your totally inaccurate posts, half-truths or one sided views. However, I refrained from doing so in order to avoid acrimony. I always hoped that someone else would challenge you instead. If you check my history of posting on SI you will see that most of my posts have had to do with technical computer related issues. It is ironic that a ludicrous post by an individual who sought to abridge our first amendment rights was the catalyst for my first post on your thread. Once the genie was out of the bottle, I was willing to take you on and correct some of the more glaring inaccuracies, half-truths and outright falsehoods that you have posted. I more than willing to go back into SI oblivion if you are willing to be candid and balanced in your posts. If not, I will continue to correct the more glaring inaccuracies and biases that you post - as and when time permits. There is a vast difference between posting good faith opinions that honest people may have differing views as opposed to half truths and outright lies. It is misleading to praise Musharraf's belated and ambivalent attempt to fight terrorists in your country and in the tribal areas without stating all of the facts. You omitted mention of the widespread support that bin Laden enjoys in your country among the masses and you conveniently refrained from commenting on the strategy of the Pakistani government that entails negotiating with Al Qaeda and offering them amnesty.