Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–38 of 38 posts

Re: What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

#31

Post by selimthegrim »

svenkatesh wrote: post #25
selimthegrim wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may want to look in to what happened when Hyderabad was annexed to India in 1948.

Are you referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Polo "After a stalemate in negotiations between the Nizam and India, mass killing and rape of the Hindu population by Razakars, and wary of a hostile independent state in the centre of India, Deputy Prime Minister Sardar Patel decided to annex the state of Hyderabad." Wow, good thing that genocidal Nizam was forcibly put down...

Er, how about the section of the article titled "Aftermath"

"After having received information that widespread communal violence against Muslims in reprisal for previous atrocities against Hindus,[17] Prime Minister Nehru sent congressman Pandit Sunderlal and a mixed-faith team to investigate. Reporting back the team estimated that between 27,000 and 40,000 civilians have died and that some members of the Indian army and police force participated in violent acts.[18]" I wouldn't call that a minor overreaction. My grandfather didn't leave Gulbarga in 1948 because he was sick of the climate.

The article also fails to mention that Nehru's agent to Hyderabad was the incredibly communal http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K._M._Munshi

Re: What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

#32

Post by tptacek »

svenkatesh wrote: post #30
tptacek wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can call it whatever you want. No part of my point hinges on me litigating the distinction you're trying to make.

I'm a bit lost. What genocidal violence was it, that caused the formation of the state of Pakistan?

You know what, if we want to attribute the state of Pakistan and its conflict with India to the British occupation, I'm fine with that too. I'm not spoiling for an argument over this.

Re: What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

#33

Post by virtuabhi »

svenkatesh wrote: post #30
tptacek wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can call it whatever you want. No part of my point hinges on me litigating the distinction you're trying to make.

I'm a bit lost. What genocidal violence was it, that caused the formation of the state of Pakistan?

No point in arguing with tptacek. Just consider him a right-wing nut job and move on.

Re: What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

#34

Post by unsupak »

svenkatesh wrote: post #21
rrrazdan wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US funds or gives aid to the Pakistani State. The Pakistani state diverts its own money to fund the ISI. So the US does bankroll ISI. Pakistan is not really one of the most paranoid and aggressive in the world. And that is coming from an Indian here. It is much more civilized than many nations and has much of the institutions that make a modern nation. Just that the military and religious extremism( which inciden…

>It is much more civilized than many nations and has much of the institutions that make a modern nation. Just that the military and religious extremism Given that the Pakistani military and ISI control so much of Pakistan's government, is this a worthwhile distinction?

India has led the genocide in Kashmir of over 100,000 kashmiris, Mr Venkatesh, Can India even be regarded as a civilized?

Re: What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

#35

Post by balladeer »

tptacek wrote: post #14
firstOrder wrote: post #11

...and the US government does and always has supported the right wingers in Pakistan who are bemoaned in this article. Who do you think the US supported - the PPP and the Bhuttos? The PPP, whose founding manifesto was written by the self-described communist Jalaludin Abdur Rahim? These right wing ISI generals and military establishment with ties to religious fundamentalism have always been who the US backed - going b…

What does this have to do with anything? The US does not bankroll the ISI. The US is in an undeclared war with the ISI. My guess is 100% of HN readers know about the US's role in bankrolling the Afghan insurgency, using a terrible Pakastani dictator as a vector. There are no good guys in that story: the Soviet occupation was horrifically violent and repressive, and there was never any chance that the Afghani warlords…

> not least because the state of Pakistan was in part a reaction to genocidal violence against Muslim Indians.

Are you actually naive or you are just playing this? Do you even have iota of an idea of India, Muslims, Pakistan, genocide or anything about this subcontinent?

I have seen you comment here on almost all the topics and your comment is generally a "scramble" of things without a backup, without a flow, without any intellectual merit, you just say things. But that's mostly about technology but this time you ventured into a field which you seem to have mastered minutes before writing this comment.

Not only that, you embed history in it and make it worse. I wanted to respond to your comment instead of this rant but this one particular statement just stuck out and how do I respond to this factually absurd statement. I've lived here for 28 years. I am a native with friends (and distant family) on both sides of the border so I can safely say that there really aren't many comments that I have found as meaningless on HN as yours, well in a negative way.

Re: What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

#37

Post by svenkatesh »

selimthegrim wrote: post #31
svenkatesh wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you referring to this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Polo "After a stalemate in negotiations between the Nizam and India, mass killing and rape of the Hindu population by Razakars, and wary of a hostile independent state in the centre of India, Deputy Prime Minister Sardar Patel decided to annex the state of Hyderabad." Wow, good thing that genocidal Nizam was forcibly put down...

Er, how about the section of the article titled "Aftermath" "After having received information that widespread communal violence against Muslims in reprisal for previous atrocities against Hindus,[17] Prime Minister Nehru sent congressman Pandit Sunderlal and a mixed-faith team to investigate. Reporting back the team estimated that between 27,000 and 40,000 civilians have died and that some members of the Indian army…

From the cited BBC article: "The investigation team also reported, however, that in many other instances the Indian Army had behaved well and protected Muslims.

The backlash was said to have been in response to many years of intimidation and violence against Hindus by the Razakars."

It's clear we each have our biases, and this discussion could go on.

I only brought up the wikipedia article in the first place to show that violence against Muslims resulting from the annex of Hyderabad wasn't unprovoked. Both sides were wrong in some of their actions though.

Re: What Pakistan Knew About Bin Laden

#38

Post by mercurial »

olenhad wrote: post #17

As a Pakistani I find this report alarming. However I also believe that the situation, especially the army's view of the Taliban, in particular groups under the TTP, has drastically changed. The TTP's brazen attacks on the Pakistani military in recent months have prompted the army to respond with force. In particular, the army actually is waiting for the govt's green light to clean up North Waziristan. It recently la…

> However I also believe that the situation, especially the army's view of the Taliban, in particular groups under the TTP, has drastically changed.

That's possible, but it's pretty clear that ISI is a state within the state. As long as it isn't broken up and brought under civilian control, it is impossible to ensure it does not continue supporting these Talibans it deems acceptable. The testimony of the unnamed former intelligence official in the article speaks volume about it: "In 2007, a former senior intelligence official who worked on tracking members of Al Qaeda after Sept. 11 told me that while one part of the ISI was engaged in hunting down militants, another part continued to work with them." As long as they're willing to fund LeT actions like the Mumbai bombings, it's unlikely they will care that Pakistanis also become victims of terrorism.

Post reply on HN