It's interesting how often I hear about NATO (mainly US) warplanes bombing areas known to contain children - targeting civilians - and yet, when it happens, our media doesn't say a word.
Don't they claim that this is the fundamental difference between "us" and "them"?
Don't they claim that this is the fundamental difference between "us" and "them"?
The NATO lunacy
By GHULAM ASGHAR KHAN submitted 1 day 4 hours ago
The most recent blatant missile attack by the NATO drones in the Bajaur Agency that killed about 20 men, women and children and destroyed a mosque and a house was foolish, outlandish and sheer madness.
It was not an attempt to bring peace in the area, but to jeopardise Pakistan's ongoing efforts to restore normalcy in the tribal areas. It was a deliberate attempt to sabotage the positive moves made by the new political government to win back the confidence of the tribesmen and dissipate the virtual revolt through productive dialogues rather than the use of force. It is not the failure of Pakistan that has all along been bearing the brunt of Bush's so-called War on Terror.
Whenever there is a possibility of reaching an agreement with the tribal leaders, a crisis situation is created to shake the trust, credibility and sincerity of the Pakistan government that any agreement reached without the US consent would not be acceptable to Bush and his NATO allies. How long Washington and its western stooges would pitch our national army against its own people? When would Washington stop treating Pakistan as its feudality rather than a sovereign state, or do they have some gospel commission to police the world?
From western prospective, the situation in Afghanistan looks precarious. Some NATO countries are already slithering over sending more troops and some are being frugal with financial support. President Karzai, who faces the election next year, is quarrelling with UK over the deals it has been making with the former Taliban leaders to get them to change sides. Recent think-tank reports warn of the possible collapse of the whole government leaving a vacuum that Taliban would fill. And to cover up their failure in Afghanistan, the US-allied forces are once again making Pakistan as a nexus of the so-called Islamist terror.
Once again fabricating lies, as was done in Iraq, Pakistani tribesmen are accused of working on a plan in concert with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda to launch another attack on the US and its western allies. To convince the allies of the looming Taliban attack, another Twin Towers like drama is being planned in which Pakistan is the villain apparent while the US-installed Afghan president is ruling the roost. He has 40,000 highly equipped US and NATO forces in addition to the US-trained Afghan army against scattered Taliban militants whose strength hardly exceeds ten thousand. Instead of fighting with them fair and square in Afghanistan, he conveniently shifts the blame onto Pakistan.
Wednesday's barbaric provocation was designed to bring to a standstill the ongoing peace negotiations between the government and tribal elders. It certainly was a conspiracy that fell short of a flare up because the tribal leaders showed their resolve to continue with their peace dialogue to restore normalcy in the area.
It was an exhibition of naked aggression on a sovereign state on the pretext that the US would "drone" any part of the tribal belt if and when their intelligence networks mark any areas dangerous to the security of the United States of America. What if the CIA or any other US agency mark Islamabad, Lahore, Peshawar, Karachi and Quetta? These are the same agencies that prompted the genocidal war on Iraq in 2003 on the basis of built up lies that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Hitler once said, "Make the lie big, make it simple or the means of acquiring it; is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or, perhaps both." The question is who in Pakistan allowed them to drone innocent people as if they are not human beings but the sacrificial lambs for the blood-thirsty ISAF vampires. ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) was initially launched to bring peace, security and reconstruction of the infrastructure in Afghanistan that was destroyed after the invasion in October 2001. With each newly minted crisis, the US leaders roll out the same time-tested scenario.
They start demonising the tribal leaders as dangerously aggressive and genocidal, given to terrorism and harbouring Osama bin-Laden and his top aides, and are out to destroy America and the west. Lacking any credible information to the contrary, the frightened people are swept along.
The US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte in his address to National Endowment for Democracy (NED) outlined the US policy vis-à-vis Pakistan in the remaining months of the Bush administration. Rarely does a top diplomat speak so openly in a public forum as Negroponte did on the centrality of Pakistan for US national security.
He said, "More than ever, our national security depends on the security and stability of Pakistan. We recognise that our fate, our security, our freedom and prosperity are linked to the fate of the people of Pakistan, implying thereby that Washington would categorically assure Pakistan that no matter the change of administration in the White House next year, the US commitment to 'long-term' substantial and comprehensive partnership with Pakistan will remain a cornerstone of US regional policies."
He expressed his worries that allies like Pakistan were increasingly beginning to look beyond US (Pakistan's recent overtures towards China) and that was not going to help the US War on Terror in Afghanistan. Negroponte emphasised that Bush administration would endeavour to establish a new framework of political, economic and security assistance to Pakistan and singled out military cooperation as an important feature of the partnership.
As could be expected, Negroponte put stress on Pakistan's transition to democracy as a development that was "strategically important" insofar as the people rejected extremism by supporting moderate pro-democratic forces and parties in February 18 polls that in turn provided an opportunity to Washington to build a broad national to defeat terrorism. He re-affirmed the US commitment to strengthen Pakistani civil society and civilian institutions.
On the side of Pakistani political scenario, Negroponte singled out Zardari as Washington's principal confabulator in Islamabad. Bush administration banks on a working relationship to develop between Musharraf and Zardari that will go a long way in ensuring that Pakistan remains a dependable ally in its so-called War on Terror and in the conduct of security operations in the tribal areas along the Pak-Afghan border. And in this strange strategy, Nawaz Sharif has no mention. Washington wants that the locus of the War on Terror should be kept on the Pakistani side of the border.
By wholly solely depending on Zardari, Washington is once again committing the blunder of selecting one man with Musharraf in the background to accomplish its dirty mission. By cornering Nawaz Sharif, they are mounting on a dangerous venture by creating bad blood between the two major parties, the PPP and the PML-N. At the same time Washington is running the risk of alienating whole of Pakistan, because the elected governments in Sindh, Balochistan, NWFP and the Punjab cannot afford to defy the public mood, which is anti-American and disfavours Islamabad's ties with Washington on its War on Terror that has shattered the peace and tranquillity of the country.
At the same time Musharraf's continuation in office at the behest of the US administration amounts to denying the public mandate conferred on the elected representatives in the February 18 polls. It is high time for Washington to realise that its policy to woo Pakistani political parties, including the PPP is severely limited and would lead to further chaos and bloodshed.
http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Columns/22-May-2008/The-NATO-lunacy
By GHULAM ASGHAR KHAN submitted 1 day 4 hours ago
The most recent blatant missile attack by the NATO drones in the Bajaur Agency that killed about 20 men, women and children and destroyed a mosque and a house was foolish, outlandish and sheer madness.
It was not an attempt to bring peace in the area, but to jeopardise Pakistan's ongoing efforts to restore normalcy in the tribal areas. It was a deliberate attempt to sabotage the positive moves made by the new political government to win back the confidence of the tribesmen and dissipate the virtual revolt through productive dialogues rather than the use of force. It is not the failure of Pakistan that has all along been bearing the brunt of Bush's so-called War on Terror.
Whenever there is a possibility of reaching an agreement with the tribal leaders, a crisis situation is created to shake the trust, credibility and sincerity of the Pakistan government that any agreement reached without the US consent would not be acceptable to Bush and his NATO allies. How long Washington and its western stooges would pitch our national army against its own people? When would Washington stop treating Pakistan as its feudality rather than a sovereign state, or do they have some gospel commission to police the world?
From western prospective, the situation in Afghanistan looks precarious. Some NATO countries are already slithering over sending more troops and some are being frugal with financial support. President Karzai, who faces the election next year, is quarrelling with UK over the deals it has been making with the former Taliban leaders to get them to change sides. Recent think-tank reports warn of the possible collapse of the whole government leaving a vacuum that Taliban would fill. And to cover up their failure in Afghanistan, the US-allied forces are once again making Pakistan as a nexus of the so-called Islamist terror.
Once again fabricating lies, as was done in Iraq, Pakistani tribesmen are accused of working on a plan in concert with the Taliban and Al-Qaeda to launch another attack on the US and its western allies. To convince the allies of the looming Taliban attack, another Twin Towers like drama is being planned in which Pakistan is the villain apparent while the US-installed Afghan president is ruling the roost. He has 40,000 highly equipped US and NATO forces in addition to the US-trained Afghan army against scattered Taliban militants whose strength hardly exceeds ten thousand. Instead of fighting with them fair and square in Afghanistan, he conveniently shifts the blame onto Pakistan.
Wednesday's barbaric provocation was designed to bring to a standstill the ongoing peace negotiations between the government and tribal elders. It certainly was a conspiracy that fell short of a flare up because the tribal leaders showed their resolve to continue with their peace dialogue to restore normalcy in the area.
It was an exhibition of naked aggression on a sovereign state on the pretext that the US would "drone" any part of the tribal belt if and when their intelligence networks mark any areas dangerous to the security of the United States of America. What if the CIA or any other US agency mark Islamabad, Lahore, Peshawar, Karachi and Quetta? These are the same agencies that prompted the genocidal war on Iraq in 2003 on the basis of built up lies that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Hitler once said, "Make the lie big, make it simple or the means of acquiring it; is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or, perhaps both." The question is who in Pakistan allowed them to drone innocent people as if they are not human beings but the sacrificial lambs for the blood-thirsty ISAF vampires. ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) was initially launched to bring peace, security and reconstruction of the infrastructure in Afghanistan that was destroyed after the invasion in October 2001. With each newly minted crisis, the US leaders roll out the same time-tested scenario.
They start demonising the tribal leaders as dangerously aggressive and genocidal, given to terrorism and harbouring Osama bin-Laden and his top aides, and are out to destroy America and the west. Lacking any credible information to the contrary, the frightened people are swept along.
The US Deputy Secretary of State John Negroponte in his address to National Endowment for Democracy (NED) outlined the US policy vis-à-vis Pakistan in the remaining months of the Bush administration. Rarely does a top diplomat speak so openly in a public forum as Negroponte did on the centrality of Pakistan for US national security.
He said, "More than ever, our national security depends on the security and stability of Pakistan. We recognise that our fate, our security, our freedom and prosperity are linked to the fate of the people of Pakistan, implying thereby that Washington would categorically assure Pakistan that no matter the change of administration in the White House next year, the US commitment to 'long-term' substantial and comprehensive partnership with Pakistan will remain a cornerstone of US regional policies."
He expressed his worries that allies like Pakistan were increasingly beginning to look beyond US (Pakistan's recent overtures towards China) and that was not going to help the US War on Terror in Afghanistan. Negroponte emphasised that Bush administration would endeavour to establish a new framework of political, economic and security assistance to Pakistan and singled out military cooperation as an important feature of the partnership.
As could be expected, Negroponte put stress on Pakistan's transition to democracy as a development that was "strategically important" insofar as the people rejected extremism by supporting moderate pro-democratic forces and parties in February 18 polls that in turn provided an opportunity to Washington to build a broad national to defeat terrorism. He re-affirmed the US commitment to strengthen Pakistani civil society and civilian institutions.
On the side of Pakistani political scenario, Negroponte singled out Zardari as Washington's principal confabulator in Islamabad. Bush administration banks on a working relationship to develop between Musharraf and Zardari that will go a long way in ensuring that Pakistan remains a dependable ally in its so-called War on Terror and in the conduct of security operations in the tribal areas along the Pak-Afghan border. And in this strange strategy, Nawaz Sharif has no mention. Washington wants that the locus of the War on Terror should be kept on the Pakistani side of the border.
By wholly solely depending on Zardari, Washington is once again committing the blunder of selecting one man with Musharraf in the background to accomplish its dirty mission. By cornering Nawaz Sharif, they are mounting on a dangerous venture by creating bad blood between the two major parties, the PPP and the PML-N. At the same time Washington is running the risk of alienating whole of Pakistan, because the elected governments in Sindh, Balochistan, NWFP and the Punjab cannot afford to defy the public mood, which is anti-American and disfavours Islamabad's ties with Washington on its War on Terror that has shattered the peace and tranquillity of the country.
At the same time Musharraf's continuation in office at the behest of the US administration amounts to denying the public mandate conferred on the elected representatives in the February 18 polls. It is high time for Washington to realise that its policy to woo Pakistani political parties, including the PPP is severely limited and would lead to further chaos and bloodshed.
http://www.nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Opinions/Columns/22-May-2008/The-NATO-lunacy 
