There is no ‘honour’ in killing

HP writes "Wow! Asadi, I just took you to task and you are already down to cussing me!
Please provide me link to where I said,"the US attacked Saddam to punish the Islamists"....I guess like the phobia neocons you can't see the difference in Islamist and the Arabs."

Salam and greetings of peace, HP sahib,

Where and when did you take me to task? You like tahmed are backtracking from your CIA training to obfuscate the facts. You wrote in that pathetic piece of manufactured BS :
"The destruction and control of Iraq was essential in shattering the Jihadi spirit and to stop the cycle of revenge let loose after the first Gulf war

http://www.chowk.com/articles/10431

Now please explain to us in your confusion if Jihadi=Arab and Arab=Jihadi. Even though it is immaterial you reason is so outlandish and stupid that it doesn't deserve a second thought.

Then he writes "Asadi, It does not hurt to learn new things. Some of what was written in 1955 may not apply now. Socialism is history it is not coming back because there is NO force that could bring socialism back..."

It doesn't matter when it was written if you can back up what you are out to prove with evidence as I do, it does indeed apply. Just because you say socialism is of the past doesn't make it so and just because you say foreign investment will work magic when it has not because in a greed based skewed economy it can never, does not mean you are right.

Then he writes "Marshall plan was in 1948 for countries that despite the ravages of the war, had a much larger industrial base than Pakistan has now. Why don't you read up on stuff instead of dreaming of socialist revolution in Afghanistan?"

They did not have a "larger industrial base" after the war was done with its ravages. It was built from near zero because the US wanted them built up, unlike the Third World that is given funds so that greater funds can be extracted. A whole history of examples is before us as is the condition of the world. You are the one imagining and running away from reality when you see the condition of the world and what the capitalist system has done to it and then pooh pooh the only viable alternative.

Jannat and the Taliban have nothing to do with it but just as a pathetic moron clinging at straws you try to do the same, the result of self stupification caused by private property relations, embodied in the escape offered by liquor that has fried your brain.....my friend

Have a nice day,

TNI Masadi

Asadi, It does not hurt to learn new things. Some of what was written 1955 may not apply now. Socialism is history it is not coming back because there is force that could bring socialism back..

Correction:
Asadi, It does not hurt to learn new things. Some of what was written in 1955 may not apply now. Socialism is history it is not coming back because there is NO force that could bring socialism back...

"BTW the amount you quote of Pakistan's manufacturing economy is still greater than the Marshall Aid that the US gave Europe post WW2"

Marshall plan was in 1948 for countries that despite the ravages of the war, had a much larger industrial base than Pakistan has now. Why don't you read up on stuff instead of dreaming of socialist revolution in Afghanistan?

"imagine what that can accomplish in the health and education sector. Imagine what the properly managed agricultural revenue could accomplish, imagine what a proper taxation scheme could accomplish and image what getting rid of the under and unemployment could accomplish."

I guess pragmatism is not in your dictionary! Politics and economics are serious business and most jannat seekers end up in some squalor. Hopes are good but you got to match them with realities on the ground! Sorry, my imagination will never fly as high as yours!

"From your Iraq article claiming that the US attacked Saddam to punish the Islamists (CIA magic trick)and other nonsense you've proven yourself to be a typical product of colonial education illiterate, regardless of the high pedestal you've put yourself on, on this site...."

Wow! Asadi, I just took you to task and you are already down to cussing me!
Please provide me link to where I said,"the US attacked Saddam to punish the Islamists"....I guess like the phobia neocons you can't see the difference in Islamist and the Arabs.

Asadi, It does not hurt to learn new things. Some of what was written 1955 may not apply now. Socialism is history it is not coming back because there is force that could bring socialism back...

Unless the cave dwellers and Taliban are thinking of creating a socialist state in Afghanistan! Well, you would know more about that for sure!

HP writes "I think you smoke more and read less. "

No sirji, I have read more in the past week I can guarantee you than you've read this year. And I don't smoke. The liquor self-stupification, pathetic and repulsive, that you partake in helps you make these ignorant comments...

Have a nice day,

TNI Masadi

HP wrote "his sums up your knowledge of the Pakistan manufacturing sector. I think you smoke more and read less. It is peanuts because $36 billion total manufacturing is really peanuts.

GDP (2007 est., official exchange rate): $143.8 billion.
Manufacturing 25% of the GDP about $36 billion.
30%(army owned) of the total Manufacturing = $10.8
You think you are going to change the economy by taking over manufacturing worth $10.8?
Some koolAid!"

What sums up your knowledge is a cheap skate copy paste. $10 billion over nearly a decade by the US made the Pakistan army jump up and down all over the place, imagine what that can accomplish in the health and education sector. Imagine what the properly managed agricultural revenue could accomplish, imagine what a proper taxation scheme could accomplish and image what getting rid of the under and unemployment could accomplish. BTW the amount you quote of Pakistan's manufacturing economy is still greater than the Marshall Aid that the US gave Europe post WW2, the entire region that with a better structure, a near socialist protected structure could emerge from rather than more of the same BS of the Musharraf era that you are suggesting without btw having any knowledge of the economics involved. You are a sellout just like tahmed, and as all sellouts you happen to be a word manipulator and certainly not a scholar...

Asadi,
"they might be riding the tide but when it goes down they will crash and crash bad."

Anything to back this up? Or this is just wishful thinking?
Let it go, you have no argument left.

"Only these countries that tried the socialist path were kept from being decimated during the lost decade of the 1980s that took your neo-liberally private capitalized countries down the tube."

And those countries are?
Don't just make speeches show something to back up your claims.

"HP sahib wants more of the same maybe so that Sindh can be liberated when Pakistan is destroyed"
Hp: This does not even deserve a response.

Why doesn't it deserve a response. You are an ethno-freak who wants Sindh seperate, why hide it like tahmed hides his worship of the white man? Your methodology of "saving" Pakistan has brought it to the condition that it is in, socialism will develop the country's human capital, and there is enough capital to do that, when it starts doing that your friends in the IMF and WB that are asking for and getting subsidy removal will stop the funds and try to starve the country, only releasing them when their "foreign investment" can further enslave the country by policies that have to date kept over 80% of the people living at the margins...

Have a nice day, and get an education, just because you can put two words together doesn't mean you know sh**. From your Iraq article claiming that the US attacked Saddam to punish the Islamists (CIA magic trick)and other nonsense you've proven yourself to be a typical product of colonial education illiterate, regardless of the high pedestal you've put yourself on, on this site....


TNI Masadi

"HP sahib wants more of the same maybe so that Sindh can be liberated when Pakistan is destroyed"
Hp: This does not even deserve a response.

Why doesn't it deserve a response. You are an ethno-freak who wants Sindh seperate, why hide it like tahmed hides his worship of the white man? Your methodology of "saving" Pakistan has brought it to the condition that it is in, socialism will develop the country's human capital, and there is enough capital to do that, when it starts doing that your friends in the IMF and WB that are asking for and getting subsidy removal will stop the funds and try to starve the country, only releasing them when their "foreign investment" can further enslave the country by policies that have to date kept over 80% of the people living at the margins...

Have a nice day, and get an education, just because you can put two words together doesn't mean you know sh**. From your Iraq article claiming that the US attacked Saddam to punish the Islamists (CIA magic trick)and other nonsense you've proven yourself to be a typical product of colonial education illiterate, regardless of the high pedestal you've put yourself on, on this site....


TNI Masadi

Asadi, your Razor wit is sharper than Marvi Memon's Tongue!

"30% of Pakistan's manufacturing economy is not peanuts,"

This sums up your knowledge of the Pakistan manufacturing sector. I think you smoke more and read less. It is peanuts because $36 billion total manufacturing is really peanuts.

GDP (2007 est., official exchange rate): $143.8 billion.
Manufacturing 25% of the GDP about $36 billion.
30%(army owned) of the total Manufacturing = $10.8
You think you are going to change the economy by taking over manufacturing worth $10.8?
Some koolAid!

For crying out loud: look at the shit they Are manufacturing!
http://www.pide.org.pk/pdf/Working%20Paper/Working%20Paper-27.pd f

Here is a snapshot of Pakistan's economy.
GDP (2007 est., official exchange rate): $143.8 billion.
Real GDP growth rate (2005): 7.8%.
Per capita GDP (2007 est., PPP): $2,600.
Natural resources: Arable land, natural gas, limited oil, substantial hydropower potential, coal, iron ore, copper, salt, limestone.
Agriculture: Products--wheat, cotton, rice, sugarcane, eggs, fruits, vegetables, milk, beef, mutton.
Industry: Types--textiles & apparel, food processing, pharmaceuticals, construction materials, shrimp, fertilizer, and paper products.
Trade (2007 est.): Exports--$16.31 billion: textiles (garments, bed linen, cotton cloth, and yarn), rice, leather goods, sports goods, carpets, rugs, chemicals and manufactures. Major partners--U.S. 21%, United Arab Emirates 9%, Afghanistan 7.7%, U.K. 5.1%, China 5.3%. Imports--$30.33 billion: petroleum, petroleum products, machinery, plastics, paper and paper board, transportation equipment, edible oils, pulses, iron and steel, tea. Major partners--China 13.8%, Saudi Arabia 10.5%, United Arab Emirates 9.7%, Japan 5.7%, U.S. 6.5%, Kuwait 4.7%, Germany 4.1%.
Pakistan's manufacturing sector accounts for about 25% of GDP. Cotton textile production and apparel manufacturing are Pakistan's largest industries, accounting for about 70% of total exports. Other major industries include food processing, beverages, construction materials, clothing, and paper products. As technology improves in the industrial sector, it continues to grow. In 2005/2006, the manufacturing sector grew by 8.6%. Despite government efforts to privatize large-scale parastatal units, the public sector continues to account for a significant proportion of industry. In the face of an increasing trade deficit, the government seeks to diversify the country's industrial base and bolster export industries.
Net foreign investment in Pakistani industries is only 0.5% of GDP.

I am done with this debate w/you.

HP writes "China the only socialist country showing some economic promise, was forced to look for the private investments as they realized the paucity of capital as the main reason for their slow pace of development.

Indian economy did not show any promise of improvement until the foreign capital was encouraged."

More BS from the "economics guru", they might be riding the tide but when it goes down they will crash and crash bad. Only these countries that tried the socialist path were kept from being decimated during the lost decade of the 1980s that took your neo-liberally private capitalized countries down the tube. What has private capital done for the people of Pakistan, please explain. So is it that you've changed your profession from the CIA to the neo-liberal "think tanks" which are going to "tank" thanks to your support?

TNI Masadi

Btw Mr. HP, salam and greetings of peace,

read a couple of books and get some education. Your posts show how much you lag behind in that area. Throwing together words that repeat the dictators arguments with claims, proves nothing. Foreign capital has not and will not do anything for Pakistan, period. 30% of Pakistan's manufacturing economy is not peanuts, why is that in hands of the military? Given food prices agriculture can be developed without foreign direct investment by land reform, to gain capital, for starters. Just saying it cannot be done so let us sell the nation to the lowest western bidder is horse dung.

Thank you kindly,

TNI Masadi

HP writes "However, following your pathetic knowledge of economics and insistence of implementing socialism through the force of State would result in faster destruction of the country."

Salam and good evening to you my worthy friend. How goes this fine day? Baal Bacha?

Your answer is a prime example of the Pakistani, rote learned student who cannot think worth sh** but writes pages and pages worth nonsense to impress his teacher. Your point that Pakistan doesn't have the "capital" to invest in industry is BS. Its capital problem resides in its badly structured economy which, and I offered you the equally pathetic nature of Korea, can be turned around. The example fo the past 60 years of private investment keeping the structure dependent falls on deaf ears because not only can you not rebut it, your BS regarding your knowledge of economics comes through clearly.

What should I rebut in your totally unbacked by evidence, undocumented, BS post that tries to add words without making one single concrete argument. Marx wasn't my economics guru but compared to illiterates like you (and that is what your posts amount to), he was an intellectual giant.

Thank you kindly and have a nice day,

TNI Masadi

Asadi,

“You are presenting a solution of "aggressive capitalism" to bypass the so called bloody solution regarding socialism. I was merely showing that capitalism is much more bloodier and not as holy and sacrosanct as you were presenting it.�

I explained what I meant by Aggressive capitalism. Yes, I will again insist that socialist solution failed and at two prime model locations, i.e. Russia and China it was brutally implemented completely disregarding the situation on the ground and put into action as an ideological solution rather than the economic solution. I think in over 60 countries in pretty much all continents, barring Western Europe and North America, Land reforms failed. The most recent failures are Zimbabwe and South Africa. A little search on the net will get you the information.

More countries have gone through the capitalism peacefully. The US follows its interests aggressively but that does not mean that capitalism be blamed for that as an economic system. Even your economic guru Karl Marx understood the need for capitalism before getting to the next phase. In the practical sense, in the socialist economy, the state instead of relying on the private capital, takes over the responsibility of providing capital. There is not a whole lot of difference in management. Socialism just means removing the personal greed and profit-making motives of the individual capitalists.

The reason this approach cannot succeed now is simple. Most of the states in the third world countries don’t have the capital to invest in industries. Some countries also don’t have the technical knowhow to manage complex projects and production.

China the only socialist country showing some economic promise, was forced to look for the private investments as they realized the paucity of capital as the main reason for their slow pace of development.

Indian economy did not show any promise of improvement until the foreign capital was encouraged.

You may have your ideological reasons to disagree with me but the reality is that Pakistan cannot afford the hackneyed solutions. Capitalists in the past too encouraged land reforms but the results are so pathetic that I doubt anyone should recommend land reforms as now there are plenty of ways to manage the productivity and development of large farms without going through yet another solution that may have some political value. Land reforms have not shown to have much economic value anyway.

In Pakistan, many consider feudalism as a political problem as large landholders can influence electoral decisions in some areas. That is the main reason for this demand of the land reforms but the reality in Pakistan is that so far electoral power has not changed much in the country. I seriously doubt that any political party would indulge in the luxury of land reforms and setting the rural areas in long-term economic turmoil.

“HP sahib's manufactured numbers and points regarding Pakistan being able to do nothing without foreign investment of the "blood sucking" type. He himself has admitted that the white man has no love lost for Pakistan or care for its people many a time.�

Actually you did not rebut anything. Show me where is excess capital in the Pak government hands?

I am astonished at your suggestion that taking over the Army owned industries would turn the country around. In principle, I agree that the army should not be in the private sector because that is not army’s job. However, taking over a few sugar mills, cement and cereal plants that army operates, is not the solution for the economy. It is a good thing to do politically, but sugar plants and cement plants are minor investments. They don’t turn the country around. It is funny that you think taking army’s industries over from the army Bureaucrats and transferring them over to civilian bureaucrats would help anything.

What that has to with what white man does? I have no problem with a White Capitalist. Every capitalist regardless of his/her color of skins operates for one purpose—make profits. It is your job to negotiate a better deal. 90% of new investments that could possibly come to Pakistan are owned by Arabs and Asians. White man is not the only source of capital any more. Which world do you live in?
I guess you have taken a leave from good judgment.

"HP sahib wants more of the same maybe so that Sindh can be liberated when Pakistan is destroyed"
This does not even deserve a response.
However, following your pathetic knowledge of economics and insistence of implementing socialism through the force of State would result in faster destruction of the country.

Maj writes "I am glad that you now share my admiration for Korea. You failed to mention of course that industrialisation in Korea was carried out by private entrepreneurs, not by idiot bureaucrats that is characterised as socialism."

Salam and greetings of peace Majumdar sahib. How are you doing today? Haal Chaal? Raazi Baazi? Baal Bacha?

Where did you read in my piece that I have "admiration" for Korea? I was just rebutting HP sahib's manufactured numbers and points regarding Pakistan being able to do nothing without foreign investment of the "blood sucking" type. He himself has admitted that the white man has no love lost for Pakistan or care for its people many a time. For Pakistan to be "Korea" it need occupation by US troops and breakup into two. I don't think that is a good option or example to follow. Regarding external investment, I think the loans that structurally adjust Pakistan and the sale of assets to the "not so high" western bidder have only impoverished the country and kept it on the wrong path. HP sahib wants more of the same maybe so that Sindh can be liberated when Pakistan is destroyed. Thank you kindly

TNI Masadi

Masadi sahib,

through land reform and properly regulated and protected industry, like Korea.

I am glad that you now share my admiration for Korea. You failed to mention of course that industrialisation in Korea was carried out by private entrepreneurs, not by idiot bureaucrats that is characterised as socialism.

HP sain,

Your conclusion that land reform ruined Bihar and UP is completely untrue, for the simple reason that land reform (and other social changes) completely bypassed these states. The most prosperous region in this whole belt is Western UP, where much of the land has historically been owned by medium sized peasantry (Jats, Gujjars, Tyagis etc.), not landlords.

Regards