Pakistan militants killed 2,500 in 2010, report says

[laevanay]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13085776


Now create excuses......

[ScimitarXEdge]

they were mainly Punjabis.

[khyaal]

they were mainly Punjabis.

Not quite. Most of them are Pashtuns. It will be there in the main report but I'm sure of it.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-south-asia-13085776


Now create excuses......

No problem, its called war and its called the presence of an occupier right across the border. Remove the stimulus and you'll find less carnage. Its called a Pakistani government that is attempting to play both sides of the fence by simulataneously supporting the NATO presence to reap a war profit, indicating that it is an unIslamic government, and yet it tells young tribals to willingly go to their death across the border to meet killing machines shipped across Pakistani soil.

To have made a point you would have had to have produced these statistics pre 2001. Otherwise, like most of your work they are meaningless.

Insurgencies generally work with low resolution weaponry, and are multi faceted, with many different groups involved. That is exactly why decapitation attempts do not work on these groups (i.e. Baitullah was replaced by Hakimullah, etc).

Now, how about you give Mehsud and his men some targeting drones, some laser guided weaponry, etc and I am sure you will fix this problem. Otherwise save your horse crap for a more gullible crowd that doesnt understand that occupier instigated war is very likely to lead to such results. Especially in the setting of assymetric warfare.

[Toramana]

No problem, its called war and its called the presence of an occupier right across the border. Remove the stimulus and you'll find less carnage. Its called a Pakistani government that is attempting to play both sides of the fence by simulataneously supporting the NATO presence to reap a war profit, indicating that it is an unIslamic government, and yet it tells young tribals to willingly go to their death across the border to meet killing machines shipped across Pakistani soil.

To have made a point you would have had to have produced these statistics pre 2001. Otherwise, like most of your work they are meaningless.

Insurgencies generally work with low resolution weaponry, and are multi faceted, with many different groups involved. That is exactly why decapitation attempts do not work on these groups (i.e. Baitullah was replaced by Hakimullah, etc).

Now, how about you give Mehsud and his men some targeting drones, some laser guided weaponry, etc and I am sure you will fix this problem. Otherwise save your horse crap for a more gullible crowd that doesnt understand that occupier instigated war is very likely to lead to such results. Especially in the setting of assymetric warfare.

Barakzai, you also save your horse crap for a more gullible crowd...sitting in a post-modern country, enjoying its security and lavishness, building your career, paying taxes to the very power that you call the occupier and that you despise, yet want my poor people to win a war in an asymetric warfare....

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai, you also save your horse crap for a more gullible crowd...sitting in a post-modern country, enjoying its security and lavishness, building your career, paying taxes to the very power that you call the occupier and that you despise, yet want my poor people to win a war in an asymetric warfare....

Wrong my brother. You seek to invert reality. Everyone has their own decision to make. There are those that seek to continue working their land and tilling the soil, so be it; there is no harm in their decision. There are those that run to Canada to make their wages, so be it. There are those like Mr. Karzai who leave their country high and dry and return as opportunists.

Then, there are those that decided to die standing on their feet. They are no different than the American revolutionaries, than Che Geuevara, Simon Bolivar, Omar Mukhtaar, or all those that chose to do what man has done since time immemorial, which is to fight an occupier. However, just as you give the farmer his right, to still till his land, then give the fighter his right as well. You seek to conflate his choice, and trust me brother, it was a hard choice he made, to eat a few pieces of bread in the mountains, while fighting an immeasurably more powerful empire amassed in his ancestors lands. So then, because he has his grandfather's rifle, and that is all he has, you choose to mock his bravery. Me, I choose to understand it. Should he decide to give up his way and till his land, so be it, I applaud him. However, should he obey his human nature, as Tecumseh the Brave did, or as Metacom did before him, I refuse to malign him for entering eternity on his feet and not on his knees.

Tell me, what think you of Tecumseh the Brave? What think you of Bolivar? What think you of Geuvara? Or of Wallace and De Bruce. History remembers them Toramana, not the colluders, the sell outs, and the abusers of history. And tell me Toramana, what think you of Shah Shuja? Tell me, does Mr. Karzai resemble the great Ahmad Shah Sadozaay or does he resemble Shah Shujah? And tell me, does that make you uncomfortable to know the true answer to that question? And tell me, does NajibuShaytaan not resemble Gurgin? So then, avoid maligning those that stood on their feet against the modern Gurgin and now against the modern Shujaa. In the least then, people will not remember Toramana, the Great Pashtun Nationalist of the Era as an obstructor of justice.

Let the fighting men be fighting men, let the farmers till their land, and let the rest to their own fate.

[emkhan]

domra gran gran english ba sok read kawi... marra lag pa asana english ke likay che nor khalaq pre hom pohegi... Lol