A Secret Army's Vow

NEWSWEEK ^ | June 17 2002 | Zahid Hussain and Ron Moreau

[lyonesse]

THE MOOD GREW TENSE, Atif says, as soon as a major general from the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency began speaking.

[lepton]

Kashmiri militants, with their spectacular suicide attacks on the Indian Parliament in December and an Indian Army base on May 14, have brought the world closer to nuclear war than perhaps at any time in 40 years.

Well, except maybe the leaking of advanced nuclear weapons technology to China, which scared India into reigniting their weapons program, which scared Pakistan into demonstrating theirs. This was only stopped when the U.S. and Russia threatened to end any nuclear war between India and Pakistan.

[mikeIII]

And now the plea is that even the "powerful ISI" is incapable of controlling these terrorists? Note the general's "we" in "We don't have a choice..."!

[Free the USA]

Bump list

[etcetera]

It would appear that the only way to deal with Islamic extremists is to kill them.

[DeaconBenjamin]

“We don’t have a choice, given the tremendous pressure on Pakistan,” the ISI man said, almost apologetically. “So you are ordered to stop immediately all cross-border operations.”

As in -- we don't have a choice but to give you these orders. As the article makes clear (albeit Newsweek), the militants have a choice whether to submit. Meaning, the ISI does not control them, Indian media notwithstanding.

[mikeIII]

Ok, if there weren't the "tremendous pressure", they, the ISI, would have had the choice NOT to give the orders. And encourage, perhaps?

[neutrino]

It would appear that the only way to deal with Islamic extremists is to kill them.

Now the question is....are there any who aren't extremists? I think not!

[DeaconBenjamin]

Do I think that ISI encourages the Kashmiri militants? Yes.

Do I think that ISI has provided support to the Kashmiri militants? Yes.

Do I think that ISI controls the Kashmiri militants? No.

Do I think that Kashmiri militants are a creation of the ISI? No.

Do I think that ISI can stop the Kashmiri militants? No.

[fporretto]

“We will continue to fight,” says Atif. “God always creates ways for us.”

This sort of thing is high-octane fodder for those who believe that to be a Muslim is to be completely off your rocker, round the bend, froot-loopy.

In a showdown between India and Pakistan, which these "guerrillas" are trying to precipitate, Pakistan would be destroyed. So either the "gurerillas" are sub-imbecile defective, or they are knowingly working to bring about the destruction of a country of millions.

Either way, it doesn't speak well for the "guerrillas." Can't America find allies in the region that are within hailing distance of sanity and possess at least the brains God gave a flea?

Freedom, Wealth, and Peace,
Francis W. Porretto
Visit the Palace Of Reason: http://palaceofreason.com

[mikeIII]

The critical question is "Does the ISI want to stop the Kashmiri militants"? For that matter, does Musharraf?

[DeaconBenjamin]

Why is that the critical question?

[mikeIII]

It's critical for obvious reasons. Among other things, it may help toward averting a nuclear war, for example. But never mind if you don't think it's a critical question. Care to answer it, anyway?

[DeaconBenjamin]

Why is it important to consider what the ISI WANTS to do? I do things I don't want to do all the time. Perhaps a better question is -- to what extent does Musharraf control the ISI? According to Newsweek, the ISI is making the right noises. Beyond that -- your guess is as good as mine.

[mikeIII]

It need not be pure guesswork - this report says the ISI was "apologetic" about the order to stop cross-border terrorism. That's a clear indication on how committed they are - no matter what they are reported to be claiming.