PDA

View Full Version : Pak to build a fence on the Afghan-Pak Border



Asim Aquil
10 Sep 05,, 11:57
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_10-9-2005_pg1_1


RAWALPINDI: Pakistan’s president said on Friday that Islamabad had proposed setting up a barbed-wire fence along the border with Afghanistan to help keep Islamic insurgents from crossing the rugged area.

But Gen Pervez Musharraf told The Associated Press in an exclusive interview that Pakistan couldn’t afford the major undertaking through mountainous terrain and deeply conservative tribal regions “by itself”. “We could do selective fencing,” he suggested as an alternative to an unbroken barrier.

Musharraf praised Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s efforts to unite a country with no history of national unity and ravaged by decades of war, but said the military needed to improve security.

President Musharraf praised Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as “courageous” for ordering the withdrawal of Jewish settlements from Gaza, but said he didn’t plan on following up a recent diplomatic breakthrough between the countries by meeting him at the United Nations this month.

“Why should there be a rush?” Musharraf said. “We are clear in our stance. We want to progress towards resolution of the Palestinian dispute, and as progress is made, Pakistan would like to keep reviewing its diplomatic stance.”

“I think such actions need courage and boldness,” Musharraf said. “(From) what we have seen on the TV, Israelis not wanting to leave, being forced out, is a courageous thing to do. We hope that he shows (an) equal amount of courage in the final creation of a Palestinian state.” “I can’t really give a (dead) line,” he said about when formal ties could be established, “but I’m always a believer in reacting before events, of foreseeing events and reacting accordingly ... I don’t believe in reaction, I believe in action.”

Despite calls by a hard-line Pakistani Islamic coalition for protests against his initiation of contacts with Israel, Musharraf said the response in Pakistan to the Turkey meeting had been good. “I see a positive response on the domestic side,” he said.

The president said that Pakistan and India were both optimistic about resolving their bitter dispute over Kashmir, and he hoped for a settlement while both current leaders were in power.

Musharraf said he had established a good personal rapport with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. The two leaders will meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly session in New York later this month. “We will discuss Kashmir,” said the president.

“I feel there’s optimism on both sides,” Musharraf said. “There’s a positive response towards the resolution of the dispute on both sides. We need to achieve this within our tenures. That’s the time frame.”

The president confirmed for the first time that one of the suspects in the July terror bombings in London briefly visited a Pakistani Islamic school linked with militants.

But he dismissed suggestions that the trip to a madrassa in Lahore influenced the beliefs or motivations of Shahzad Tanweer, saying it was too short and that Tanweer’s “indoctrination” was likely the result of his lack of assimilation into British society.

The president praised former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto’s main opposition Pakistan People’s Party, but said she could not become premier again. “Benazir (Bhutto) has had two tenures,” he said. “According to the Constitution of Pakistan at the moment, she is not eligible to become prime minister again.”

dabrownguy
10 Sep 05,, 19:35
Then Pak can not tell India to stop building fences in Kashmir and Bandladesh. Fences are seriously needed. Kashmir has insurgents meaning no peace unless it is stopped. Bangladesh is exporting prostitutes and poor Bengales. India is already over populated. Al though I don't mind seeing other races in India.

Vaman
11 Sep 05,, 19:38
The Durand line is just as contentious as the LOC.
If Pakistan can justify building a fence, then Indias stand on fencing the LOC is just as valid.

lemontree
12 Sep 05,, 06:52
The funny thing is that the Taliban is infilterating from Pakistan to Afghanistan and not the other way around. It means that the fence is to keep the bad guys within Pakistan. I am sure MAD comics will pick this up as a subject. :biggrin:

Srirangan
12 Sep 05,, 08:07
Aren't they stealing poor Afghan's lands just as Israel stope Palestini lands? :D

Asim Aquil
12 Sep 05,, 08:23
I think its going to be a joint venture, since we certainly are in no mood to be the only bearer of the costs for this undertaking.

lemontree
12 Sep 05,, 08:39
Aren't they stealing poor Afghan's lands just as Israel stope Palestini lands? :D
Actually Israeli invasion of 1967 was to pre-empt another joint arab invasion. Those lands that Israel invaded were occupied by Jordan (West Bank and East Jerusalem) and Egypt had occupied Gaza. For 19 years after the 1948 Israeli-Arab war there was no establishment of Palestine by Jordan and Egypt - Hupocrisy at its best.

I think its going to be a joint venture, since we certainly are in no mood to be the only bearer of the costs for this undertaking.
Asim,
Are there any statements from politicians/generals (Afghani or Pakistani) to this effect?

indianguy4u
12 Sep 05,, 09:05
I think its going to be a joint venture, since we certainly are in no mood to be the only bearer of the costs for this undertaking. Ha Ha :biggrin:. And talking of building pipeline from iran & tajikistan alone.

Srirangan
12 Sep 05,, 09:08
Ha Ha :biggrin:. And talking of building pipeline from iran & tajikistan alone.
Those are just postures to get more concessions from Uncle Sam. Pak can't afford to build a pipeline alone, and even if it does, the venture won't break even.

raj
12 Sep 05,, 09:13
Actually Israeli invasion of 1967 was to pre-empt another joint arab invasion. Those lands that Israel invaded were occupied by Jordan (West Bank and East Jerusalem) and Egypt had occupied Gaza. For 19 years after the 1948 Israeli-Arab war there was no establishment of Palestine by Jordan and Egypt - Hupocrisy at its best.

Asim,
Are there any statements from politicians/generals (Afghani or Pakistani) to this effect?

BTW discussion of palestine needs a whole thread for itself, and as lemmon tree has pointed it out establishment of Palestine by Jordan and Egypt - Hupocrisy at its best.these guys support pakistan to break into lands after cease fire has been declared by UN, but they would not give up fight for the land that got annexed in to ISRAEL before the cease fire :mad:
-raj

Asim Aquil
12 Sep 05,, 10:38
Actually Israeli invasion of 1967 was to pre-empt another joint arab invasion. Those lands that Israel invaded were occupied by Jordan (West Bank and East Jerusalem) and Egypt had occupied Gaza. For 19 years after the 1948 Israeli-Arab war there was no establishment of Palestine by Jordan and Egypt - Hupocrisy at its best.

Asim,
Are there any statements from politicians/generals (Afghani or Pakistani) to this effect?
Yes, Musharrafs.


Ha Ha . And talking of building pipeline from iran & tajikistan alone.

From Iran.

And thats for our benefit. The fence is for America.

Samudra
12 Sep 05,, 10:50
No pipeline is going to happen without Amreeka's consent!

I'd be glad if Pakistan tried.
It would do us a lot of good. ;)

bull
12 Sep 05,, 10:50
Actually Israeli invasion of 1967 was to pre-empt another joint arab invasion. Those lands that Israel invaded were occupied by Jordan (West Bank and East Jerusalem) and Egypt had occupied Gaza. For 19 years after the 1948 Israeli-Arab war there was no establishment of Palestine by Jordan and Egypt - Hupocrisy at its best.

well i was ignorant to this

Samudra
12 Sep 05,, 10:51
I think its going to be a joint venture, since we certainly are in no mood to be the only bearer of the costs for this undertaking

Put it this way , "We dont have enough money to build this fence , so will you open your purse , please ? ". ;)

Thats more like it. *:)*

Srirangan
12 Sep 05,, 10:55
well i was ignorant to this
I fail to understand the need for Palestine when there already is a state of Jordan. And if there were to be a Palestine state, why should only Israel concede land? Why not Jordan? Wasn't Jordan also carved out of the same deal on Ottomon lands?

Samudra
12 Sep 05,, 10:59
Where is the fatwa ?
Where is the damn fatwa ?

Here SriRangan , you just got one.
Dont ask too many uncomfortable questions.gRRR.

lemontree
12 Sep 05,, 11:00
I fail to understand the need for Palestine when there already is a state of Jordan. And if there were to be a Palestine state, why should only Israel concede land? Why not Jordan? Wasn't Jordan also carved out of the same deal on Ottomon lands?
Paletine is the original name (as known) and Israel was the biblical name of the region for the Jews (as the promised land by God). Today Jordan does bot occupy any major area of Palestine, they got kicked out during the 6 day war in 1967.

Srirangan
12 Sep 05,, 11:42
Paletine is the original name (as known) and Israel was the biblical name of the region for the Jews (as the promised land by God). Today Jordan does bot occupy any major area of Palestine, they got kicked out during the 6 day war in 1967.
Was there ever an historical "palestine" state? Anyhow the Brits dived the land betw Jews and Palestinians. So technically Jordan is the Palestinian state. We don't find the king of Jordan claiming any land from Israel do we? Btw Arabs, Turks and Persians through out history have occupied the so called "palestinian" state.

Think about it this way. Hyptothetically speaking, within India today what if there's a call for another "muslim" homeland? Should there be another country created? Or the "muslims" demanding the new homeland be asked to just go to Pakistan under the 1947 provisions?

Same. Palestinians demanding a new homeland need to migrate to Jordan. And if Israel does occupy territory, the leadership of Jordan should make the demands. Not Egypt, not Syria and definitely not the House of Saud.

Asim Aquil
12 Sep 05,, 11:56
Put it this way , "We dont have enough money to build this fence , so will you open your purse , please ? ". ;)

Thats more like it. *:)*
Right, we should pay for someone else's benefit?

Never get into trade.

Srirangan
12 Sep 05,, 12:01
Right, we should pay for someone else's benefit?

Never get into trade.
Asim,
That's a very short sighted assesment by you. If I were the leader of Pakistan, I'ld take pains to get the fence built while the Americans are in Kabul. It's like almost solving all Pakhutnistan/Durrand Line Expiry controversy without even dealing with the Afghans.

Asim Aquil
12 Sep 05,, 12:24
Asim,
That's a very short sighted assesment by you. If I were the leader of Pakistan, I'ld take pains to get the fence built while the Americans are in Kabul. It's like almost solving all Pakhutnistan/Durrand Line Expiry controversy without even dealing with the Afghans.
That might be the Indian way of creating solutions, but Pakistan's just aiming to build a fence to help out the American forces, who keep getting attacked.

Till we have Pakistanis living on our side of the Durrand line, there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it.

In all probability the Afghans don't even have the document that was signed by the British in the 1800s.

bull
12 Sep 05,, 13:10
That might be the Indian way of creating solutions, but Pakistan's just aiming to build a fence to help out the American forces, who keep getting attacked.

Till we have Pakistanis living on our side of the Durrand line, there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it.

In all probability the Afghans don't even have the document that was signed by the British in the 1800s.

Asim there are three issues with it.

1.You/Pakistani govt admit they are the core of these jihadi scums

2.By building a fence you/pakistani govt admit they can do nothing to guard their borders

3.Again you/Pakistani govt is incapable of solving a problem which is emanating from there own land.

So the how will they protect their won citizens???

Neo
12 Sep 05,, 13:22
Actually Israeli invasion of 1967 was to pre-empt another joint arab invasion. Those lands that Israel invaded were occupied by Jordan (West Bank and East Jerusalem) and Egypt had occupied Gaza. For 19 years after the 1948 Israeli-Arab war there was no establishment of Palestine by Jordan and Egypt - Hupocrisy at its best.

Palestine issue is very complicated. If you really want to understand the Jewish claim in this land, you'll have to go way back in the history.
In a way the claim is leagle and illeagle at the same time...!!
I'd be more then happy to explain the historical and religous backgrounds abut this claim.

Asim Aquil
12 Sep 05,, 15:36
1. If you're talking about the people that go into Afghanistan and attack from the tribal areas? Yes those people are scums.

2a. We don't NEED to gaurd our borders. The scums as they may be, are attacking a foreign force. We condemn their attacks and feel responsibile thats why we'll pitch in to a cause that'll weaken their attempts to cross over.

2b. We've got bigger fish to fry in Pakistan, if someone's got a problem with the border, they should seal it. We're at least offering to do it mutually.

3. Actually if we wouldn't have done anything you wouldn't have hundreds of fighters armed with rifles ready to attack America, sitting in jails.

We see the by-product of protecting those American forces, as a means to protect our own. We've crushed the backbone of Al Qaida and they cannot operate in Paksitan openly any more.

Sameer
12 Sep 05,, 15:40
But most Al Queda leaders caught by the FBI so far have been found in Pakistani cities like Karachi, so I dont know how much one can use the tribal areas only send Jehadis excuse. Afterall there are training camps all around Pakistan. 15 mins outside of Lahore..... etc etc etc

Samudra
12 Sep 05,, 15:42
We've crushed the backbone of Al Qaida and they cannot operate in Paksitan openly any more.

Hear , hear....;)

Srirangan
12 Sep 05,, 15:53
We've crushed the backbone of Al Qaida and they cannot operate in Paksitan openly any more.
A lot of truth was said.

Sameer
12 Sep 05,, 17:27
There have been more terror attacks in the post 911 world, most terror leaders operate in Pakistani cities, US intel believes that musharaff is not in full command and believe that the ISI is providing valuable info to the terrorists because even though steps have been taken, they are not being caught.

The latest CIA assessment says that Al Queda has been able to recreate a crude command and control network again, the "crush" bruhaha does not appear to fit the reality on the ground.

lemontree
13 Sep 05,, 05:55
Palestine issue is very complicated. If you really want to understand the Jewish claim in this land, you'll have to go way back in the history.
In a way the claim is leagle and illeagle at the same time...!!
I'd be more then happy to explain the historical and religous backgrounds abut this claim.
That would be great start another thread and we can exchange notes. :)

lemontree
13 Sep 05,, 06:00
2a. We don't NEED to gaurd our borders. The scums as they may be, are attacking a foreign force. We condemn their attacks and feel responsibile thats why we'll pitch in to a cause that'll weaken their attempts to cross over.
But then that is the trump card of Pak Army to keep the US embroiled in Afghanistan. It keeps Pakistan as an WOT ally and she keeps getting the rent money from the US for the use of its bases.

3. Actually if we wouldn't have done anything you wouldn't have hundreds of fighters armed with rifles ready to attack America, sitting in jails.

We see the by-product of protecting those American forces, as a means to protect our own. We've crushed the backbone of Al Qaida and they cannot operate in Paksitan openly any more.
My firend it is NOT Al Qaida that is attacking the US forces in Afghanistan but THE Taliaban. The Tabilbs are the ace up Musharaffs sleeve to keep the Afghans in check.

bull
13 Sep 05,, 07:49
Right, we should pay for someone else's benefit?

Never get into trade.

Someone elses benefit?? wtf!!!

Its not someone else benefit.Its your responsibilty to see that none of your citizens or land is not used for destructive purposes on your neighbours land.How on earth can you make such statements "well if scums are coming from my ass,its not my responsibilty but yours to wipe it off.."

You are putting shame on your other sane pakistani friends over here.

Neo
13 Sep 05,, 16:51
Palestine issue is very complicated. If you really want to understand the Jewish claim in this land, you'll have to go way back in the history.
In a way the claim is leagle and illeagle at the same time...!!
I'd be more then happy to explain the historical and religous backgrounds abut this claim.


That would be great start another thread and we can exchange notes. :)

I'd love to start a new thread, but the subject it too damn sensitive :confused:

Neo
13 Sep 05,, 16:54
The jooooooos will kill me.. :eek:

Samudra
13 Sep 05,, 17:03
Never you mind Neo.
Just start one.

Give a clean unbiased story and every one would follow up with their questions or answers or opinions.

Sensitive ? Yes.
Sensible ? That depends on how you make it. ;)

Neo
13 Sep 05,, 17:18
Never you mind Neo.
Just start one.

Give a clean unbiased story and every one would follow up with their questions or answers or opinions.

Sensitive ? Yes.
Sensible ? That depends on how you make it. ;)

I'll just stick to historical facts, play it safe :)

lemontree
14 Sep 05,, 05:34
I'll just stick to historical facts, play it safe :)
That would be the correct way to go about it. :), and this would clear many cobwebs for many people.
BTW Gen. Moshe Dayan happened to be one of my role models when I was a teenager.

bull
14 Sep 05,, 08:26
2a. We don't NEED to gaurd our borders. The scums as they may be, are attacking a foreign force. We condemn their attacks and feel responsibile thats why we'll pitch in to a cause that'll weaken their attempts to cross over.,


Its your responsibility to see that you dont cause disturbances to your neighbour.Thats a gentle mans behaviour u shud know that.


3. Actually if we wouldn't have done anything you wouldn't have hundreds of fighters armed with rifles ready to attack America, sitting in jails.,


But wht abt the '000 outside.That will take time i know,till then its your suty that htis not spill over to other territory.


We see the by-product of protecting those American forces, as a means to protect our own. We've crushed the backbone of Al Qaida and they cannot operate in Paksitan openly any more.,


So where they operating openly till date

lemontree
14 Sep 05,, 08:35
2a. We don't NEED to gaurd our borders. The scums as they may be, are attacking a foreign force. We condemn their attacks and feel responsibile thats why we'll pitch in to a cause that'll weaken their attempts to cross over.

That "foreign force" happens to be your biggest benifactor and ally. Condemning is the easiest way out, and you also condemn when they cross over in hot-persuit and kill those scum in Pakistan.
But it looks like Musharraf has offered to build the fence alone.
http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=54599

In an interview to the New York Times published today, he has defended himself against the charge that Pakistan is not doing enough to root out the Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Then, in talks with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Musharraf has offered to build a fence along the Pak-Afghan border to prevent further incursions by the Al Qaeda and Taliban into Afghanistan.
Let us see if this gets done, there can always be a slip between the cup and the lip. ;)
The Indian fence on the LOC in J&K costed Rs.4.20 billion (aproxx USD 9.6 million)for 1682 kms of fencing. It requires 260 tons of cement, iron pickets and barbed wire to construct 1 km. So it should not be very difficult for Pakistan to make the fence.

Ludin
22 Oct 06,, 22:56
well they are very welcome to build a fence once we afghans take the land(pashtunistan and baluchistan) back.. so they can fence punjab and sindh..

Tronic
23 Oct 06,, 04:33
well they are very welcome to build a fence once we afghans take the land(pashtunistan and baluchistan) back.. so they can fence punjab and sindh..
I think Afghanistan should concentrate more on building up economically and bringing stability, then afterwards Afghanistan can resolve its problems diplomatically because i'm sure there will be plenty of nations willing to back Afghanistan.... but it has to continue with the growth of stability and economy first...

Ludin
23 Oct 06,, 16:45
I think Afghanistan should concentrate more on building up economically and bringing stability, then afterwards Afghanistan can resolve its problems diplomatically because i'm sure there will be plenty of nations willing to back Afghanistan.... but it has to continue with the growth of stability and economy first...



there will be no stablitiy and security in afghanistan until we don't solve this DURRAND LINE issue.. the fight, suicide bombing will continue..

that is the thing.. stable afghanistan means dividing pakistan in half which pakistan doesn't want.. so pakistan is doing their best and will continue to do their best in destablizing afghanistan..

once this issue is resolved and afghansitan takes its land back than they can actually PROGRESS..

Tronic
23 Oct 06,, 20:09
Well, what ways do you think you will be able to solve that problem??? IMO, How about calling upon the UNSC for a vote in the Pashtun and Balcoh areas if they want to join Afghanistan? But for that, and diplomatic support to go through, Afghanistan has to be economically and diplomatically recognized... For THAT to happen, Afghanistan needs a strong and effective army to control the terrorists first....

Ludin
23 Oct 06,, 23:26
Well, what ways do you think you will be able to solve that problem??? IMO, How about calling upon the UNSC for a vote in the Pashtun and Balcoh areas if they want to join Afghanistan? But for that, and diplomatic support to go through, Afghanistan has to be economically and diplomatically recognized... For THAT to happen, Afghanistan needs a strong and effective army to control the terrorists first....



that is the problem.. thsoe terrorists are supported by ISI.. the only way to solve that problem is destruction of ISI.. your are an indian.. you tell me how much have they destablized india over a tiny part of kashmir?? remember pashtunistan and baluchistan make over half of pakistan.. baluchistan is where they get all their natural resources from and pashtunistan is where they get all their hydro energy from..

for the economy to grow afghistan needs SECURITY.. no investor will invest in a country where there is no security.. and pakistan is doing their best to create problems in afghanistan..

afghans are not involved in the current bombings.. it is the *****.. why would an afghan blow a bomb in a market and kill innocent afghans?? no reason.. if they want to blow some one than it would be only the westerners.. however 90% of the suicide bombings have killed only civilians in the cities..

Tronic
23 Oct 06,, 23:43
that is the problem.. thsoe terrorists are supported by ISI.. the only way to solve that problem is destruction of ISI.. your are an indian.. you tell me how much have they destablized india over a tiny part of kashmir??
I agree with you that ISI is the problem but I wouldn't say they have destabilized India as a whole... they have destabilized parts of Kashmir, which ironically, even though being under constant terrorist threat have continued to grow...



for the economy to grow afghistan needs SECURITY.. no investor will invest in a country where there is no security.. and pakistan is doing their best to create problems in afghanistan..
agreed, but then Afghanistan has to boost up its security... As long as their is good internal security provided (including building up of Afghan intelligence agency to keep track of threats), investors will still invest. Take Israel for example, they are under constant threat from bombings and all yet they still have a vibrant economy... Another example is the Kargil Conflict between India and Pakistan; although their was practically a war being fought in Kashmir, India's stock market was actually growing by leaps... So yes, even if Pakistan is causing problems, first it would be wise to build up a strong effective detterent.. remember, first you have to build up your defenses before you start planning offensive capabilities.... Afghanistan needs to be strong defensively to be able to handle a lot of the security threats and it has to be strong offensively so as to be able to talk hardline on the terrorism issues with Pak...


afghans are not involved in the current bombings.. it is the *****.. why would an afghan blow a bomb in a market and kill innocent afghans?? no reason.. if they want to blow some one than it would be only the westerners.. however 90% of the suicide bombings have killed only civilians in the cities..

Yes, it is without a doubt a work of ISI... even Indian engineers had been kidnapped and killed in Afghanistan, whereelse India does not even have any troops stationed in an offensive role... Indian troops are only in Afghanistan as a protection force for the Indian engineers stationed there trying to rebuild Afghanistan... only one country can be unhappy to see Indians there, and I doubt it is Afghanis...