/* */

PDA

View Full Version : What role is Pakistan playing?



I R Paki
08-16-2006, 09:14 PM
... In the Lebanon/Israeli conflict?
With Hezballah?
With the USA and the UK?

As far as I know, they are just suck ups to the USA and the UK, do everything they say for financial gain.
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Zulkiflim
08-17-2006, 01:35 PM
Salaam,

It would seem that way but allah knows best.

Inshallah,these leaders will have much to answer for and theyw ere given position of wealth and power as a test for themselves,to see if they will be just and follow justice.

In the end each of creation will stand alone.

But that does not mean just becasue our leaders follow a way we are are supposed to follow their way.
as the Prophet said,respect your aprent but do not follow them if they lead you to wrong doings.

So again it is a test,should we just step back and say it is their fault when we too ahve ahdn and legs and mind to do as we SEE FIT.
Reply

afriend2
08-17-2006, 01:57 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
pakistan govt is mashed up, uncle musharraf needs 2 stop actin gay & act like a man & stick up for himself & his country!

but whereas the govt is mashed the cricket team make up 4 it & they r heavyyy :p :D:D:D:D
salaam,

i understand where youre coming from........but i dont think that that language is needed. keep in mind the Islamic etiquettes please!

wassalam :peace:
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 01:57 PM
sowy i didnt no any ova word 2 describe :D:p:D but gay isnt a bad word is it :D
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Hashim_507
08-17-2006, 02:02 PM
I dont think musharif is puppet ruler, his playing politics with u.s and uk...
Reply

AvarAllahNoor
08-17-2006, 04:03 PM
He's better than that idiot Benazir, she grassed on the Sikhs that were in training in Pakistan!!
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 05:51 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by AvarAllahNoor
He's better than that idiot Benazir, she grassed on the Sikhs that were in training in Pakistan!!
lol ive neva understood dis, i hav a few radical sikh mateys yeh (babbar khalsah :p big up) lol :D and some really like pakistan & say pakistan helped us, but then the less radical ones that you hear about on the news or summin always hav summin againist pakistan why? :D:D:D:D
Reply

Keltoi
08-17-2006, 05:56 PM
Mushareff is playing a balancing act. He is smart enough to realize that a good relationship with the United States is in the best interests of Pakistan. Pakistan gets financial aid, fighter jets, and other stuff for aiding the Western world against terrorist organizations. This also puts him in great danger, as he has survived several assassination attempts. Not to mention that since both India and Pakistan are now U.S. allies, it stops the U.S. from giving all its military aid to India. Politics is the name of the game.
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 06:01 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
Mushareff is playing a balancing act. He is smart enough to realize that a good relationship with the United States is in the best interests of Pakistan. Pakistan gets financial aid, fighter jets, and other stuff for aiding the Western world against terrorist organizations. This also puts him in great danger, as he has survived several assassination attempts. Not to mention that since both India and Pakistan are now U.S. allies, it stops the U.S. from giving all its military aid to India. Politics is the name of the game.
when i read that post it jus looked like bla bla bla bla :p naa lol its tru wot kelty matey is sayin

the problem is musharraf has done well for pakistan, but he has done bad 4 islam! if he put all his faith in Allah (swt) and didnt let the US use pakistani bases for attackin afghanistan, im sure wit 100% conviction that Allah (swt) wud hav helped him & pakistan wud hav taken ova america & inzamam wud have been president :p :D:D:D:D lol, he needs 2 stop actin scardy & stand up like a real souljah :D:D
Reply

Geronimo
08-17-2006, 06:12 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
when i read that post it jus looked like bla bla bla bla :p naa lol its tru wot kelty matey is sayin

the problem is musharraf has done well for pakistan, but he has done bad 4 islam! if he put all his faith in Allah (swt) and didnt let the US use pakistani bases for attackin afghanistan, im sure wit 100% conviction that Allah (swt) wud hav helped him & pakistan wud hav taken ova america & inzamam wud have been president :p :D:D:D:D lol, he needs 2 stop actin scardy & stand up like a real souljah :D:D
No the US would have just used India and as a staging ground and would have supplied the firepower to India to spank Pakistan if they would have gotten out of line.
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 06:15 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
No the US would have just used India and as a staging ground and would have supplied the firepower to India to spank Pakistan if they would have gotten out of line.
well if musharraf had sed no 2 america, n had full belief in Allah (swt), Allah (swt) wud have helped him & no matter what, even if india & america & uk & whoeva else, got 2geva they wudnt be able 2 beat up pakistan :D:D and u know thats true, look how small pakistan is compared to india, yet india still fears pakistan! :D:D:D
Reply

Geronimo
08-17-2006, 06:19 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
well if musharraf had sed no 2 america, n had full belief in Allah (swt), Allah (swt) wud have helped him & no matter what, even if india & america & uk & whoeva else, got 2geva they wudnt be able 2 beat up pakistan :D:D and u know thats true, look how small pakistan is compared to india, yet india still fears pakistan! :D:D:D
Yeah that worked so well for Iraq and Afghanistan. I guess they didn't have enough faith :rollseyes
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 06:23 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
Yeah that worked so well for Iraq and Afghanistan. I guess they didn't have enough faith :rollseyes
hahaahah (fake) :p

yesh they didnt have faith :D thats what i believe!

there are many people that have been succesful fightin agenst enemies, like hezbollah, israel cudnt destroy em, because hezbollah had the true belief & they were fightin for the rite reasons :D:D:D
Reply

sameer
08-17-2006, 06:31 PM
didnt musharraf overthrow an elected governement? so is he not a terrorist to democracy? so why does the west support him?
Reply

Woodrow
08-17-2006, 06:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
Mushareff is playing a balancing act. He is smart enough to realize that a good relationship with the United States is in the best interests of Pakistan. Pakistan gets financial aid, fighter jets, and other stuff for aiding the Western world against terrorist organizations. This also puts him in great danger, as he has survived several assassination attempts. Not to mention that since both India and Pakistan are now U.S. allies, it stops the U.S. from giving all its military aid to India. Politics is the name of the game.
Very true.

Although we often hear of the US interest in Pakistan, we have to remember that Pakistan has a large interest in the US. There are quite a few Pakistanis living here, many have come into the USA for the purpose of taking advantage of the Minority Small Business laws. Starting Businesses here, but sending the profits to family in Pakistan. It is a good and legal practice, but it causes the best Pakistani entrepeneurs to establish their businesses in the USA. So, we end up with families living in Pakistan, being dependent on the income generated by businesses they or family members own in the USA. as a result many Pakistanis are now paying taxes in the USA. That makes them entitled to US benefits, which are seen as a gift from the US but are actually paid for with money earned by Pakistanis. Although they are earning the money in the USA
Reply

AFDAL
08-17-2006, 06:43 PM
No the US would have just used India and as a staging ground and would have supplied the firepower to India to spank Pakistan if they would have gotten out of line.
I am a muslim from india , I think mussaraf have played with the muslims of india and sold it out to the non muslims . And this no paki sees
Reply

Keltoi
08-17-2006, 06:45 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
didnt musharraf overthrow an elected governement? so is he not a terrorist to democracy? so why does the west support him?
It's about circumstances. Mushareff is the leader of Pakistan, a military leader who was not elected. In ordinary times, the U.S. would have thrown all of its support to India. However, these aren't ordinary times, and Mushareff has gone out of his way to provide the U.S. and others with plenty of intelligence and arrests of terrorists in his own country and abroad. Mushareff has no reason to be friends with the terrorist element, since they have tried to kill him on numerious occasions.
Reply

afriend
08-17-2006, 06:46 PM
Ohh come on...When it comes to politics I'm blank....But Musharraf couldn't care about Muslims or islam....It's all about:

Nuke India.

The people of Pakistan however, are surely much more active [demonstrating/rioting].....

To answer the question...Don't get me wrong....

They play good cricket ;)
Reply

Keltoi
08-17-2006, 06:49 PM
The leader of a country has much more on his plate than religious concerns. One can be pious as a saint, and watch the country crumble around him. You have to make choices that will hopefully benefit your people and the country.
Reply

AFDAL
08-17-2006, 06:52 PM
either in india or in pakistan or in bangla , every where there are problems for the general public .
Reply

afriend
08-17-2006, 06:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
The leader of a country has much more on his plate than religious concerns. One can be pious as a saint, and watch the country crumble around him. You have to make choices that will hopefully benefit your people and the country.
It's what the people want right?
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 06:57 PM
at the end of the day, how musharraf handled the whole situation was wrong, he should have thought about everyone & not jus himself & his country:D:D
Reply

Geronimo
08-17-2006, 07:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
hahaahah (fake) :p

yesh they didnt have faith :D thats what i believe!

there are many people that have been succesful fightin agenst enemies, like hezbollah, israel cudnt destroy em, because hezbollah had the true belief & they were fightin for the rite reasons :D:D:D
No Israel didn't do it right
with me in charge there would have been no reason to return to lebanon not unless you're a fan of rocks.
Reply

Azhar786
08-17-2006, 07:45 PM
salaam nobody is doin anythin beside talkin about it!!
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 07:55 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
No Israel didn't do it right
with me in charge there would have been no reason to return to lebanon not unless you're a fan of rocks.
i neva said israel dun it rite? i sed hezbollah had firm belief in Allah (swt) dats why dey dint loose & israelites cudnt do anytin about them,

with you in charge? well ur not in charge :p so hush :D:D:D lol

wot u mean fan of rocks lol explain matey :D:D:D
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 07:56 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Azhar786
salaam nobody is doin anythin beside talkin about it!!
yeh thats why there is a thread on the topic :p so people can talk about it duh duh :D:D:D:D :p
Reply

Geronimo
08-17-2006, 07:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
i neva said israel dun it rite? i sed hezbollah had firm belief in Allah (swt) dats why dey dint loose & israelites cudnt do anytin about them,

with you in charge? well ur not in charge :p so hush :D:D:D lol

wot u mean fan of rocks lol explain matey :D:D:D
fan of rubble, is that better? Meaning there would be a structure taller than 2 feet standing.
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 08:01 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
fan of rubble, is that better? Meaning there would be a structure taller than 2 feet standing.
erm :D swiftly movin on :p

so geronimo, what do you think of pakistan overall? as a country? its successes and failures?
Reply

chacha_jalebi
08-17-2006, 08:01 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
fan of rubble, is that better? Meaning there would be a structure taller than 2 feet standing.
erm :D swiftly movin on :p

so geronimo, what do you think of pakistan overall? as a country? its successes and failures? :D:D:D:D
Reply

therebbe
08-17-2006, 08:02 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
didnt musharraf overthrow an elected governement? so is he not a terrorist to democracy? so why does the west support him?
In a vote of confidence on January 1, 2004, Musharraf won 658 out of 1,170 votes in the Electoral College of Pakistan, and according to Article 41(8) of the Constitution of Pakistan, was "deemed to be elected" to the office of President until October 2007.
Reply

sameer
08-17-2006, 08:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by therebbe
In a vote of confidence on January 1, 2004, Musharraf won 658 out of 1,170 votes in the Electoral College of Pakistan, and according to Article 41(8) of the Constitution of Pakistan, was "deemed to be elected" to the office of President until October 2007.
Since he came to power through a coup and is a dictator...how can we be sure that the poll was a fair one and not influenced in anyway?
Reply

Geronimo
08-17-2006, 08:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
erm :D swiftly movin on :p

so geronimo, what do you think of pakistan overall? as a country? its successes and failures? :D:D:D:D
I don't think of Pakistan at all except in terms of negotiations. I would say we can take all the Jews here in the US from Israel and give that land to the Arabs only if all muslims leave the West and give Pakistan back to India.
Reply

Hashim_507
08-17-2006, 08:09 PM
Salam

Musharaf dont want to push himself to war or conflict. Pakistan is already dealing with kashmir issues from the past and present. Pakistan have nuclear not many western countries confortable seeing Pakistan having nukes. I agree he have been acting towards u.s and u.k, his playing politics for pakistan interest. He dont need to be acting agressive towards u.s and u.k , if he does. He will not have allies backing him or support him from the muslim countries. Its not easy situation, you must think before you do your actions.
Reply

therebbe
08-17-2006, 08:10 PM
Since he came to power through a coup and is a dictator...how can we be sure that the poll was a fair one and not influenced in anyway?
Hey I never said I liked Pakistan. I was just pointing out that Musharraf supposidly won an election and no international moderators pointed out any foul play.
Reply

sameer
08-17-2006, 08:14 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by therebbe
Hey I never said I liked Pakistan. I was just pointing out that Musharraf supposidly won an election and no international moderators pointed out any foul play.
why should they? is it not in their interest that he is in power?
Reply

sameer
08-17-2006, 08:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
I don't think of Pakistan at all except in terms of negotiations. I would say we can take all the Jews here in the US from Israel and give that land to the Arabs only if all muslims leave the West and give Pakistan back to India.
Where u think all indigenous indians (liek ure self) of america be placed?
Reply

therebbe
08-17-2006, 08:17 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
why should they? is it not in their interest that he is in power?
International observers are from not just the west but a selected number of nuetral countries.

If you want to dispute if the countries are nuetral or not, that is to get deeper than I have time for.

Your welcome to research it though. I would most certainly read any type of information you found.
Reply

Keltoi
08-17-2006, 08:26 PM
Last time I checked, we "Indians" live in the United States...
Reply

Geronimo
08-17-2006, 08:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
I just asked seeing that u think that all muslims should be in arabia, and pakistan should be given back to india etc......so since u have apoint of view on muslims and others..what ure point of view on ure people?
My people are doing just fine. We have our own land with our own laws. The US government cannot interfer with our affairs unles we say so. As for those living off the reservation we are also doing fine. Most of us are prosperous and love our country. Not all "Indians" fought the white man;)
Reply

Keltoi
08-17-2006, 08:42 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
My people are doing just fine. We have our own land with our own laws. The US government cannot interfer with our affairs unles we say so. As for those living off the reservation we are also doing fine. Most of us are prosperous and love our country. Not all "Indians" fought the white man;)
I don't think the issue of fighting the white man really matters. My people did fight the white man for about a century. The issue is what is happening today. I do not feel oppressed. I own my own land, which isn't that great since I have to mow it almost every day. I recieved a college education thanks to the US government(BIA). I don't have many complaints, and what complaints I have don't have anything to do with the white man.

Way off topic....
Reply

AFDAL
08-17-2006, 08:45 PM
Not all "Indians" fought the white man
Your statement should be " Not all Hindus fought the british colonial power "

Simple example is the Phyco Mr A. B. Vaspayee - the fomer PM of india gave the names of the resistance fighter of india to the British colonial Power in 1942
Reply

Keltoi
08-17-2006, 08:47 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by AFDAL
Your statement should be " Not all Hindus fought the british colonial power "

Simple example is the Phyco Mr A. B. Vaspayee - the fomer PM of india gave the names of the resistance fighter of india to the British colonial Power in 1942
lol...sorry. The use of the term "Indian" in that sense was referring to Native Americans. Unfortunately, since Columbus thought he discovered a new route to the West Indies, he named the inhabitants "Indians"...so our people have been called that for 500 years.
Reply

Geronimo
08-17-2006, 08:53 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Keltoi
lol...sorry. The use of the term "Indian" in that sense was referring to Native Americans. Unfortunately, since Columbus thought he discovered a new route to the West Indies, he named the inhabitants "Indians"...so our people have been called that for 500 years.
lol right. I don't know about other people but my family prefer to say we are Shawano (or Shawnee) versus saying we are Indian or Native American.
Reply

Keltoi
08-17-2006, 08:55 PM
To get back on topic. Pakistan hasn't been totally helpful in the War on Terror. Mushareff has given in to the demands of his people by not allowing US forces to enter Pakistani soil, at least not in large numbers. Which I don't blame him for.
Reply

KAding
08-17-2006, 10:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
Since he came to power through a coup and is a dictator...how can we be sure that the poll was a fair one and not influenced in anyway?
We are not. In fact, most Western countries, including the US, put in place sanctions after his coup in protest. But eventually we had to deal with him, just like we had to deal with all these dictators that are produced by muslim countries. The process of acceptance by the international community was speeded up because of his help in the so-called 'war on terrorism'.
Reply

KAding
08-17-2006, 10:36 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
I don't think of Pakistan at all except in terms of negotiations. I would say we can take all the Jews here in the US from Israel and give that land to the Arabs only if all muslims leave the West and give Pakistan back to India.
And don't forget, 'we' also want back Constantinople! :D At least, I want it back, it is so nice :grumbling :(
Reply

Woodrow
08-18-2006, 01:16 AM
I believe the Pakistani Government is going to have to get off the fence and choose a side. Bangladesh has just pledged two Battalions to be used as UN forces in South Lebannon. (ie Remove Hizbullah and keep them out). To me I view this as backing Pakastan into the posistion it will either have to be against Bangladesh and visibly support Hizbullah, or it will have to show solidarity with Bangladesh and pledge troops to the UN.

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Nearly 50 countries that could contribute the 13,000 new troops needed to expand the U.N. peacekeeping force in Lebanon met Thursday amid concern over the ground rules and firepower the soldiers could use.
Bangladesh pledged up to 2,000 troops and France offered 200 new troops in addition to 200 already in the force, a disappointment to some who expected more from the country likely to lead the force.

In an opening speech, Deputy Secretary-General Mark Malloch Brown said at least 3,500 troops are needed to deploy within 10 days to expand the 2,000-strong U.N. force trying to help maintain an uneasy truce between Israel and Hezbollah militants.

"Every moment we delay is a moment of risk that the fighting could re-erupt," he said.

Malloch Brown told diplomats from the 49 countries invited to the meeting that details on how the expanded force will operate and the rules of engagement will make clear that "this will be a strong, robust force, equipped and authorized to take all necessary action in its key tasks."

The U.N. resolution that led to Monday's cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah after a brutal 34-day war authorized up to 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers to help 15,000 Lebanese troops extend their authority throughout south Lebanon, which Hezbollah controls, as Israeli troops withdraw. The aim is to create a buffer zone free of Hezbollah fighters between the Litani River and the U.N.-drawn border, about 18 miles to the south.

Malloch Brown said the draft rules of engagement call for the use of force to prevent hostile activities in the buffer zone and to resist attempts to prevent the U.N. force, known as UNIFIL, from discharging its duties. The rules also allow UNIFIL to use force in assisting the Lebanese government if asked to secure its borders to prevent foreign forces, weapons and ammunition from entering the country, he said.

France and Italy said earlier Thursday that the peacekeeping mandate — partly written by the French — is not explicit enough, and demanded the U.N. set clear rules of engagement for troops that would bolster the force. A key concern, not mentioned by Malloch Brown, is whether the force will be called on to disarm Hezbollah fighters, as called for in a September 2004 U.N. resolution.

Even though the Israel withdrawal and handover to U.N. forces has gone well thus far, some potential contributors are believed to be concerned about avoiding confrontation with Hezbollah or being caught in the middle of a future conflict. Germany — uneasy given its Nazi past of any possible military confrontation with Israeli soldiers — said it wouldn't send any but is expected to provide logistical support.

Before the meeting, French President Jacques Chirac announced

that France will immediately double its 200-strong contingent already in the U.N. force to 400. The announcement said Chirac told U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan in a phone call that France is prepared to command the strengthened force until February.

Yahya Mahmassani, the Arab League's envoy to the United Nations, said he had been officially informed that Bangladesh is going to contribute two battalions to the force, "and the number will be between 1,600 and 2,000."

"That's good. That will enhance the force," he said. "I hope that France and other countries will be able to beef up UNIFIL to the expected number required by the United Nations resolution 1701."

Italy has said it could quickly send as many as 3,000 soldiers — up from its current contribution of about 50 — but Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi's office said that he was pushing for explicit ground rules. In a telephone conversation late Wednesday with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, Prodi called for "a clear mandate, without any ambiguity and with very precise rules of engagement, for the soldiers who will be deployed," the premier's office said.

Malloch Brown said "a rapidly reinforced UNIFIL is key to a historic reassertion of Lebanese sovereignty over the south. And most important of all, it is key to establishing conditions needed for the kind of broader political process required to underpin a permanent cease-fire."

"The key to resolving this conflict and many of the wider challenges faced in the region is not military but political ... and it is very important that the parties to the conflict understand this," he said in the speech to the closed meeting, which was released by United Nations.


Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Posted 8/17/2006 1:18 PM ET
source:http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2...n_x.htm?csp=24
Reply

therebbe
08-18-2006, 01:19 AM
Correct me if I am wrong Woodrow, but it seems that in the past Pakistans foreign policy descions have been based on whatever the opposite of Indias foreign policy is.
Reply

Woodrow
08-18-2006, 01:26 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by therebbe
Correct me if I am wrong Woodrow, but it seems that in the past Pakistans foreign policy descions have been based on whatever the opposite of Indias foreign policy is.
That is true, but many Pakistanis still have strong family ties in Bangladesh.

Bangladesh is ethnically homogeneous, with 98% of the population being Bengalis (as are most in neighboring West Bengal, India), though Bengalis are a heterogeneous and physically diverse ethnic group. They speak Bangla, an eastern Indo-Aryan language. The remainder of the population is comprised mostly of Biharis and various tribal groups (concentrated in the Chittagong Hill Tracts).

The religions practiced in the region have changed significantly through history. At various times in the distance past, Buddhism and Hinduism were each the dominant religions. The 1947 partition of Bengal along religious lines augmented the existing Muslim majority in the region. The 1991 census provides the most recent estimate of the religious makeup, with 88.3% Muslim and 10.5% Hindu.[1] The balance is made up of Buddhists, Christians and animists. About 5% of the Muslims (and most of the Biharis) are Shia.
source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Bangladesh
Reply

Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн
08-18-2006, 01:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by chacha_jalebi
lol ive neva understood dis, i hav a few radical sikh mateys yeh (babbar khalsah :p big up) lol :D and some really like pakistan & say pakistan helped us, but then the less radical ones that you hear about on the news or summin always hav summin againist pakistan why? :D:D:D:D
i dunno bout sikhs but my parents tell me shes no good and all fake. Her father wasnt a very good person. i forget what they told me. My uncle used to be a politician and they used to want my dad to lead. But he hated it cuz they were all liars. All talk on the outside and fake inside. The masses in the country are more supportive than its government.
Reply

therebbe
08-18-2006, 01:32 AM
Bangladesh is certainly one of those "cricket" countries. lol.
Reply

Dawud_uk
08-18-2006, 12:32 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Geronimo
No the US would have just used India and as a staging ground and would have supplied the firepower to India to spank Pakistan if they would have gotten out of line.
says all we need to know about the US attitude towards others, 'do it our way or die'

nice...

Daw'ud
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-17-2009, 06:56 PM
  2. Replies: 20
    Last Post: 02-17-2008, 04:15 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-27-2007, 03:38 PM
  4. Replies: 19
    Last Post: 09-27-2007, 07:45 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-01-2007, 09:51 AM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!