Reply #248: Diclotican [View All]

[ohio2007]

I think we both understand the tightrope Musharraf walked with the post 9/11 attacks reigning in the ISI operations in Afghanistan and the ISI was not pleased by the western arm twisting. Due to the attack in 2002 on India's Parliament building, Kashmir separatists ( some say they are under the control of the ISI )almost pulled off a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. Musharraf cut a deal for big $$ in order to prevent a war between India and Pakistan in 2002 and an agreement to "clamp down" on terrorism in his own country.Again, meaning clamp down on the ISI
All bets are off as Bush and Musharraf era comes to a close.
But the ISI is still intact as the new Pakistan government has to come to terms with what has spiraled out of their control.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008022419_peshawar28.html
The current leadership is not a Musharraf strongman and when they sent a "peace delegation" into the frontier to "talk peace with the Taliban,
well, they had their throats cut.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/26/world/asia/26pstan.html?_r=2&oref=slogin

No respect for anything but brute superior force.
And in your own words " parts of ISI are not under government control "
ISI also receives covert funding from an oil rich fundamentalist state. Some of the funding is used to 'educate' the children and keeping the red mosque operating in the black
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=552_1201538050
but the game has changed.

Musharraf and Bush are gone.

How strong are the new players? I would suspect when the dust settles, the sabers will be rattling in Indian Parliament for action soon. The fingers will be pointing at the usual suspects.