You say: “Suicide bombs are a reaction of the collateral damage caused by drone attacks.” You still do not have concrete figures regarding collateral damage from drone attacks, yet you continue to emphasise that suicide attacks are a result of them. If this logic holds true than a heavy number of suicide bombers should emerge from the Hazara community of Quetta to bomb out the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi for the number of innocents butchered within this community by the Lashkar. A few should also be expected from the Peshawar-based Christian community in the days to come. In fact, suicide bombers, as we all know, are a weapon produced in specialised training camps operating in North Waziristan. They will continue to be pumped into our communities as long as we do not take out the training camps and their trainers. The recruits come from the madrassas in the vicinity, and are often sold out by parents into these training camps in exchange for money. Suicide bombers are usually young children as they are easy to be moulded into becoming one. The whole world knows it, barring you, Mr Imran Khan. You say: “Once the drone attacks are stopped, the people of FATA will revolt against the Taliban and beat them into oblivion.” There is no way you can justify that the tribals, especially those that are under Taliban rule, will ever have the capacity to beat and expel the highly trained and fully equipped Taliban hordes on their own. This is an utterly preposterous suggestion. You say: “Pakistan opted to jump into the Afghan war after 2001 and imported the war onto our soil.” Absolutely false, as Pakistan was a part of the Afghan quagmire since the 1970s. Prior to 9/11, Pakistan was knee deep into anything that was Afghan or Afghanistan. There was no way for Pakistan to keep out of trouble after 9/11, as it was not an option that was offered by the world community to us. We all remember the history of those days and political fooling on this issue and deliberate twisting of facts should end. You say: “Talks with the Taliban today will be the first talks of their kind as they will be initiated by a political government.” I distinctly remember that talks with the Taliban in Malakand were initiated by the ANP and supported by parliament and the army, but were to no avail. Did we not have an elected government then too? You say: “If NATO supplies are blocked it will put pressure on the US to stop drone attacks while we should not worry about the financial consequences of such a move.” I could only consider blocking NATO supplies if NATO attacks our troops, not for attacking one of the most wanted international terrorists, residing on a piece of land that at present does not belong to Pakistan. What message do we want to convey to the international community: that we are a rogue terrorist state that is willing to compromise its strategic interests with the global community at the fall of a mass murderer? How easy would it be for the international community to label Pakistan as a terrorist state using this argument and forcing the entire country into turmoil? We are the middle class of this country, and we do not have many avenues and options when it comes to making a living for our families and our future. We depend on this economy, which for us is precious enough in order not to let it get destroyed due to the bravado you suggest we should show to the world for killing an international terrorist. You say: “Talks are a means to bring peace without bloodshed and all All Parties Conference parties support this suggestion.” Sounds very pleasing to the ears, but even you are pragmatic enough to know that talks would not achieve anything except for opening up options to launch a decisive military campaign in FATA. Anything else that is going on is politics. Not only from your end but also from the rest of the political junta, which finds itself paralysed due to the noise you are creating on this issue in connivance with the Jamaat-e-Islami and some media militants. But still, if you firmly believe in whatever you are saying about the talks being the ultimate solution and source of ever-lasting peace in the present scenario, then I would have serious doubts about your judgement. And finally, an absurd but the most fashionable political statement of this day and age: “Drones are a violation of our country’s sovereignty.” Drones are being fired over a land that is frankly not under the rule of the Pakistani state. There is no question of the violation of sovereignty where sovereignty does not exist. At least this is what we tell the world when it demands the capture of the most wanted terrorists living in FATA. Thus to actually stop drone attacks, we will have to establish our sovereignty in those areas first before claiming violation and this can only be achieved through a military operation. Stopping here does not mean that there are no further additions to the above. I can go on writing on your misconceptions on the terrorism and talks issue but I believe that the above-given arguments should be enough to question the rightfulness of your opinion at the moment. Mr Imran Khan, I would suggest that you start finding an opening to escape this ditch that you have dug for yourself before the whole nation falls into it. (Concluded) The writer is a businessman and a social activist based in Lahore. He can be reached at mujahidkmir@gmail.com and on twitter @Mujahidkmir