I disagree with Imran Khan – taliban political movement has military and terrorist experience, and Pakisthani army was involved ( As evidenced in Kunduz, and using of irregulars elsewhere) with it.

This should be factored in by Obama.

Heroism is not when you succumb to A, sequentially then you succumb to B, followed by C. The Voice of that of that region is so thoroughly hijacked by the mercenaries, the talibans, other times as a junkyard of Pakisthan extremism, I would have enjoyed the drama of bravery, if had been devoid of raw imagery of violence spread across countries.

That machine like activity – Sufi Mohd, the good taliban lead 10,000 mercenaries to Afganisthan after 2001 – Where you carry a rifle and jump to threaten dark nights in Kashmir Valley or be it Swat Valley. Such cowardly madness shouldn’t be a national obsession, it shouldn’t be passed as a symbol of national superiority.

Imran Khan had received so much respect in his life, he had seen so much of world and wild adulation that you assumed as a fact, that he stood tall above a national cult of worshiping Ghazanavi. In the end, Benzir, the daughter of dynasty, gets far better marks that me, I can’t see Imran as the passionate pace man that delivered the “in-cutters”.

He seems addicted to machoism – he is fascinated by a false heroic sense of that area, a false sense of bravery of fighting the moguls and British.

I was surprised too about his glossing over the militancy of Taliban..How can we ever accept what they did to Afghanistan before Bush went in there? But he is right to the extent that the US has become a tainted messenger/reformer/problem solver for that region even as it tries to look for a different strategy and to refurbish its image. If it is not the US, who should take its place? Pakistan has to reform itself and turn its attention to good governing.

He seems addicted to machoism – he is fascinated by a false heroic sense of that area, a false sense of bravery of fighting the moguls and British.

This line of jingoist logic is the very problem with Pakisthan. Khan should instead have tried to dilute this virulent Pakisthani nationalism during hi years in politics, considering that he had exposure to the world, and he had no issues in picking girls from london pub.

I didn’t realize then, probably Imran Khan was a perfect symbol of this machoism, retrospectively it was a misplaced priority, to cover up the corrupt.

Imran had 3 pace men in his battery, it is easy to find Wasim Akram – more successful than Imran as a bowler – relapsing into a jovial movement. Waqar Yunus appeared less sophisticated, but it was easy to find an independent smile on his face. For daces, however Imran was like bounded. I don’t watch much of TV, but it was clear things were pulling Imran.

Some say he was very much into London night clubs, where he found the much junior Jemima, and it has been reported than Imran had a child from One Ms Sita White. Imran got everything he desired.

Could he have tried to dissociate the Pakisthani nationalism from terrorists who were slaughtering humans after teing them into trees ? I would have liked very much to see active role of Imran finding a way out of the criminal brand of Paki nationalism . He had his time, he had exposure to the world, he had platform of the world, and he was a Pakisthani politician. Imran Khan failed to dissociate the virulent revolutionary islam, though he has all the modern logic available to him.

In my opinion, he failed to rise beyond macho symbol of power of pace-bowling, he failed to rise above the macho terrorists taking on distant countries. During this he lost important fights. I would have taken the re-incarnated Benjir Bhutto any day over this megalomaniac.

I don’t think Obama will change the approach. Shoulda been Hillary.

Thank you Susan.