6 ms·

Pakistan is a classic case of what moral bankruptcy looks like when you harbour terror just so you can hurt your neighbours. For decades, they allowed terror ca

Pakistan is a classic case of what moral bankruptcy looks like when you harbour terror just so you can hurt your neighbours. For decades, they allowed terror camps and bases because it would hurt India and in the process military was under supreme control of the state. All along, US supported them because a) they were always suspicious of India being a Russian ally and b) they somehow thought by some crazy logic that Pakistan is going to be their ally in war on terror. But then the snake they were growing in the backyard with the hope of hurting their neighbours started biting them. First the collapse in Afghanistan and then decade long war on terror followed by economic stagnation coupled with corruption at the military led the mass to basically become completely robbed. This is the populous that somehow thought India is their arch enemy and their leaders are all on their side because the state religion Islam was used as a tool. Ya I don’t have much sympathy for them.

helixfelix 4y ago
Lets not pretend that there is only a single guilty party here. No doubt pakistan tried to control mujahideen to fight their proxy wars. Just like Indian intelligence has funded the Balochistan insurgency inside Pakistan. This of course all started with US asking Pakistan to setup these mujahideen to counter Russia in 1980.
- mercy_dude 4y ago
  This is a false equivalency. The extent to which Pakistan used its military apparatus to train militias and other terrorist organizations is unparalleled. There is a reason Osama Bin Laden found a safe heaven. This is the what aboutism that most politicians toy with when they want to fool the public. But like I said this is a populous that are truly detached and delusional. They brought it on themselves.
  - getcrunk 4y ago
    Really its unparalleled? Even by america.
    - mercy_dude 4y ago
      Yes as long as America does not shelter a terrorist while taking billions of dollars of money in the name of “fighting” war on terror?
- kumarvvr 4y ago
  Yeah no. Pakistan has always used terror as a weapon, in various ways, from the moment it was split from India. Setting up of the mujahideen gave a semi legitimate veneer to its activities and a funnel for money.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
skinnymuch 4y ago
This commentary is pretending the US had any legit reasons for supporting the corruption and evilness beyond America’s own immediate power hungry thinking.
throwawaylinux 4y ago
> military was under supreme control of the state Many would argue the military should be under supreme control of the state. Do you mean the state was under supreme control of the military (i.e., when Pakistan was under military rule)?
dirtybird04 4y ago
You're not wrong about things as they stand. However, you do conveniently leave out that it was the US toppling the Shah of Iran that resulted in a religious wave taking over the whole region. And it was the US, again, that armed and trained everyone in Afghanistan to the teeth to help them fight the commies. And it was the US, yet once again, that just bailed as soon as USSR collapsed, leaving a massive power vacuum in the Afghanistan, which led to the Taliban takeover. Pakistani army merely tried to use that power vacuum to their advantage. And it failed miserably, might I add. The army has gotten used to the boatload of USDs for being an war ally, but all the US hatred now is creating fractions within it. My point is, every country plays this game, and they all play it dirty. Why assign moral bankruptcy to a minor player while completely overlooking the major player that's stirring all the global shitstorms?
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > the US toppling the Shah of Iran that resulted in a religious wave taking over the whole region If we're looking for a founding mistake, it's probably the British (and French) betraying the Hashemite king [1][2][3], thereby permitting Wahhabism to take hold. That and the absence of a Marshall Plan for the post-WWII de-colonised world. > every country plays this game, and they all play it dirty The Mujahideen plotted attacks on Soviet military targets in Afghanistan. They're analogous to the Taliban post invasion. To my knowledge, the U.S. wasn't knowingly supporting terrorism in e.g. Moscow the way the ISI has supported militants striking Bombay. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemites#World_War_I_and_the_Arab_Revolt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemites#World_War_I_and_the... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Revolt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Revolt [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon–Hussein_Correspondence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon–Hussein_Correspondence
- mercy_dude 4y ago
  I don’t think you understand geopolitics in that part of the world. Shia dominated Iran has very little influence on Sunni Pakistan. As far as I can recall, Pakistan always had their entire existence centred around anti-India perspective, the war they fought with India over Kashmir in 65 and then over Bangladesh in 71 predates the shah movement. Soms of their most fanatic military leaders were actually before the 71 war. Every country plays games but not in a self destructive manner. If Pakistani leadership had any sense and if their people were not always fooled by thinking that their leaders are leading a jihad and protecting Islam, they would have realized focusing your entire foreign and economic policy based on the geopolitical rivalry over a piece of land that has less than 1% of total GDP is not a good cause. Just wait till they have a balance of payment problem. Their reserves are drying up too all because of these stupid economic policies. Instead of doing trade deals with your closest neighbour and one of the largest economic powers, they actively sabotage any economic influence. These people are really stupid.
bfuller 4y ago
I advise you to sit down and have a serious conversation with some Pakistani people. I don't entirely disagree with you but there are some glaringly ignorant statements that seem to stem from a lack of experience with the actual cultural experience in Pakistan.
- neosat 4y ago
  would you care to point out at least one "glaringly ignorant statement" backed by a fact that shows it is glaringly ignorant?

helixfelix 4y ago

Lets not pretend that there is only a single guilty party here. No doubt pakistan tried to control mujahideen to fight their proxy wars. Just like Indian intelligence has funded the Balochistan insurgency inside Pakistan. This of course all started with US asking Pakistan to setup these mujahideen to counter Russia in 1980.

mercy_dude 4y ago
This is a false equivalency. The extent to which Pakistan used its military apparatus to train militias and other terrorist organizations is unparalleled. There is a reason Osama Bin Laden found a safe heaven. This is the what aboutism that most politicians toy with when they want to fool the public. But like I said this is a populous that are truly detached and delusional. They brought it on themselves.
- getcrunk 4y ago
  Really its unparalleled? Even by america.
  - mercy_dude 4y ago
    Yes as long as America does not shelter a terrorist while taking billions of dollars of money in the name of “fighting” war on terror?
kumarvvr 4y ago
Yeah no. Pakistan has always used terror as a weapon, in various ways, from the moment it was split from India. Setting up of the mujahideen gave a semi legitimate veneer to its activities and a funnel for money.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

skinnymuch 4y ago

This commentary is pretending the US had any legit reasons for supporting the corruption and evilness beyond America’s own immediate power hungry thinking.

throwawaylinux 4y ago

> military was under supreme control of the state Many would argue the military should be under supreme control of the state. Do you mean the state was under supreme control of the military (i.e., when Pakistan was under military rule)?

dirtybird04 4y ago

You're not wrong about things as they stand. However, you do conveniently leave out that it was the US toppling the Shah of Iran that resulted in a religious wave taking over the whole region. And it was the US, again, that armed and trained everyone in Afghanistan to the teeth to help them fight the commies. And it was the US, yet once again, that just bailed as soon as USSR collapsed, leaving a massive power vacuum in the Afghanistan, which led to the Taliban takeover. Pakistani army merely tried to use that power vacuum to their advantage. And it failed miserably, might I add. The army has gotten used to the boatload of USDs for being an war ally, but all the US hatred now is creating fractions within it. My point is, every country plays this game, and they all play it dirty. Why assign moral bankruptcy to a minor player while completely overlooking the major player that's stirring all the global shitstorms?

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> the US toppling the Shah of Iran that resulted in a religious wave taking over the whole region If we're looking for a founding mistake, it's probably the British (and French) betraying the Hashemite king [1][2][3], thereby permitting Wahhabism to take hold. That and the absence of a Marshall Plan for the post-WWII de-colonised world. > every country plays this game, and they all play it dirty The Mujahideen plotted attacks on Soviet military targets in Afghanistan. They're analogous to the Taliban post invasion. To my knowledge, the U.S. wasn't knowingly supporting terrorism in e.g. Moscow the way the ISI has supported militants striking Bombay. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemites#World_War_I_and_the_Arab_Revolt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hashemites#World_War_I_and_the... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Revolt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_Revolt [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon–Hussein_Correspondence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McMahon–Hussein_Correspondence
mercy_dude 4y ago
I don’t think you understand geopolitics in that part of the world. Shia dominated Iran has very little influence on Sunni Pakistan. As far as I can recall, Pakistan always had their entire existence centred around anti-India perspective, the war they fought with India over Kashmir in 65 and then over Bangladesh in 71 predates the shah movement. Soms of their most fanatic military leaders were actually before the 71 war. Every country plays games but not in a self destructive manner. If Pakistani leadership had any sense and if their people were not always fooled by thinking that their leaders are leading a jihad and protecting Islam, they would have realized focusing your entire foreign and economic policy based on the geopolitical rivalry over a piece of land that has less than 1% of total GDP is not a good cause. Just wait till they have a balance of payment problem. Their reserves are drying up too all because of these stupid economic policies. Instead of doing trade deals with your closest neighbour and one of the largest economic powers, they actively sabotage any economic influence. These people are really stupid.

bfuller 4y ago

I advise you to sit down and have a serious conversation with some Pakistani people. I don't entirely disagree with you but there are some glaringly ignorant statements that seem to stem from a lack of experience with the actual cultural experience in Pakistan.

neosat 4y ago
would you care to point out at least one "glaringly ignorant statement" backed by a fact that shows it is glaringly ignorant?