What's new

"Pakistan Aided Taliban, Played On Both Sides In Afghanistan": US Senator

Dalit

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 16, 2012
12,813
-17
23,138
Country
Pakistan
Location
Netherlands
Everyone in US knows that Pak helped Taliban for its own strategic purpose. Once US is completely out of Afghanistan, it will be free to take full revenge in terms of sanctions, no IMF loans, FATF etc etc
We are waiting for the US to do all that. Pakistan also has means to totally cut off US effectiveness in Afghanistan. Once we get China into Afghanistan and CAS we will see how the US responds.
what 'doom'? They screwed the Al Quaeda, killed Osama, never seen a terror attack of same scale in 20 years and plunged the country of Afghanistan into a 20 year crisis as revenge.
LOL So you are telling us the Americans spent trillion+ dollars and lost thousands of lives just to achieve the successes in your little list.

Why is it that your daddy still feels empty and on the losing side despite achieving the successes that you have listed?
 
Last edited:

Dalit

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 16, 2012
12,813
-17
23,138
Country
Pakistan
Location
Netherlands
Exactly knowing well Pakistan is almost at war with India some think tanks suggested to US establishment to bring India into Afghanistan to put pressure on Pakistan. What you sow what you reap.
When our FC boys were butchered by Taliban on the borders regularly and we begged for drones or attack helicopters and on the convivence of India were refused that facility, like our soldiers blood was cheaper. When India unleashed with the US nod bombing spree on our cities that was the highest level deception by US to us. We have lost 70,000 lives while US only lost 2400 who suffer the most you don't have to be mathematician. Senator losing is always painful we have buried our loved ones now you should bury your pride.
We did the right thing. I love it when US senators weep. It gives me tremendous satisfaction knowing that the backstabbing Americans didn't have their way. Their little poodle India is now crying in anguish as papa leaves Afghanistan.
 

Meengla

SENIOR MEMBER
Aug 1, 2009
4,592
17
6,634
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
[I hope not off topic]. A sort of related idea is puzzling me. Why have the Republican US Presidents not been as openly hostile to Pakistan as the Democrats been? Nixon was decisively pro-Pakistan and almost hated Indians. Carter offered 'peanuts' to Zia after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and ultimately it was his advisor Zbig who hated the Soviets who made the difference. Bush Senior--I don't know much but I thought he really appreciated the Pakistan under Benazir, Pressler Amendment notwithstanding. Reagan--same as Bush Senior. Bill Clinton slapped Pakistan on the face by embracing India in 2000 and lecturing Pakistan in his brief visit to Pakistan. Bush Jr. gave Pakistan some weapons and was generally fine with Pakistan. Obama was Clinton on steroids and constantly wanted 'Do More', essentially asking Pakistan to give up its strategic security to fortify India against China. Trump, despite some early verbal assaults on Pakistan, eventually decided to basically hand-over Afghanistan to Pakistan and slapped India on the face--a position no other American President was willing to take. As for Biden--I expect a rough ride for Pakistan once Americans leave Afghanistan.

I know that these US Presidents ultimately were trying to act per America's own strategic interests. But personalities DO matter in American Presidency! Had it not been then an Obama's rapprochement with Iran would not be so quickly reversed by a Trump! Years of hard work by so many people went down the drain!
 

Dalit

ELITE MEMBER
Mar 16, 2012
12,813
-17
23,138
Country
Pakistan
Location
Netherlands
That's 38 billion and counting....
Your papa spent more than a trillion for you. It even sacrificed its soldiers for you. What did you do other than lean back and spread terrorism in Pakistan? Still Trump scolded you and now Biden is leaving you high and dry.
[I hope not off topic]. A sort of related idea is puzzling me. Why have the Republican US Presidents not been as openly hostile to Pakistan as the Democrats been? Nixon was decisively pro-Pakistan and almost hated Indians. Carter offered 'peanuts' to Zia after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and ultimately it was his advisor Zbig who hated the Soviets who made the difference. Bush Senior--I don't know much but I thought he really appreciated the Pakistan under Benazir, Pressler Amendment notwithstanding. Reagan--same as Bush Senior. Bill Clinton slapped Pakistan on the face by embracing India in 2000 and lecturing Pakistan in his brief visit to Pakistan. Bush Jr. gave Pakistan some weapons and was generally fine with Pakistan. Obama was Clinton on steroids and constantly wanted 'Do More', essentially asking Pakistan to give up its strategic security to fortify India against China. Trump, despite some early verbal assaults on Pakistan, eventually decided to basically hand-over Afghanistan to Pakistan and slapped India on the face--a position no other American President was willing to take. As for Biden--I expect a rough ride for Pakistan once Americans leave Afghanistan.

I know that these US Presidents ultimately were trying to act per America's own strategic interests. But personalities DO matter in American Presidency! Had it not been then an Obama's rapprochement with Iran would not be so quickly reversed by a Trump! Years of hard work by so many people went down the drain!
It is safe to say that Republicans have been more transparent with Pakistan. The Democrats are backstabbers. No wonder a vast section of the American public even despises Demoncrats. The Democrats even lie to their own voters and the American people in general.

The Democrats are generally hand and glove with their deep state institutions. During the Obama days the deep state was literally sitting inside the Oval office.
 
Last edited:

FuturePAF

SENIOR MEMBER
Dec 17, 2014
4,061
19
5,010
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
[I hope not off topic]. A sort of related idea is puzzling me. Why have the Republican US Presidents not been as openly hostile to Pakistan as the Democrats been? Nixon was decisively pro-Pakistan and almost hated Indians. Carter offered 'peanuts' to Zia after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 and ultimately it was his advisor Zbig who hated the Soviets who made the difference. Bush Senior--I don't know much but I thought he really appreciated the Pakistan under Benazir, Pressler Amendment notwithstanding. Reagan--same as Bush Senior. Bill Clinton slapped Pakistan on the face by embracing India in 2000 and lecturing Pakistan in his brief visit to Pakistan. Bush Jr. gave Pakistan some weapons and was generally fine with Pakistan. Obama was Clinton on steroids and constantly wanted 'Do More', essentially asking Pakistan to give up its strategic security to fortify India against China. Trump, despite some early verbal assaults on Pakistan, eventually decided to basically hand-over Afghanistan to Pakistan and slapped India on the face--a position no other American President was willing to take. As for Biden--I expect a rough ride for Pakistan once Americans leave Afghanistan.

I know that these US Presidents ultimately were trying to act per America's own strategic interests. But personalities DO matter in American Presidency! Had it not been then an Obama's rapprochement with Iran would not be so quickly reversed by a Trump! Years of hard work by so many people went down the drain!
perhaps, the Republican establishment takes the world as it is, especially on behalf of big business. while the democrats try to push American culture globally. The democrats want to remake the world in their own image. The presidents are cherries on top of their parties respective cake.
What a terrible rant, it's Pakistan's fault, wait we are also at fault, the Afghan government is stupid, it's too late now, what about the future, wait what was the topic again?

Senator Reed just go visit Dunkin Donuts, have a one and a coffee and forget about this. We've all moved on now.
He doesn’t get what Reagan understood nearly four decades ago, and stated in his 1982 speech to the British parliament.

“Regimes planted by Bayonets do not take root”

How many eligible Afghan voters (9.6 million) actually turned out to vote the last time around. Less than 17% (1.6 million) and the two main candidates held dueling inaugurations, making a mockery of the democratic process even further. The Afghan people in a sense became apathic to the regime in Kabul (hedging to neither accept or reject it) because it was not truly one of their own making but one imposed.
 
Last edited:

CrazyZ

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 3, 2019
3,260
2
4,109
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
Washington:
Pakistan has played on both sides of the field in Afghanistan, contributing to the Taliban's success, a senior US senator has reminded his colleagues, a day after Washington announced plans to withdraw all troops from the war-torn Asian country by September 11.

Chairman of Senate Armed Services Committee, Senator Jack Reed, on the Senate floor Thursday afternoon, said "a crucial factor contributing immensely to the Taliban's success" has been the inability of the US to "eliminate the sanctuary the Taliban was granted in Pakistan."

Referring to a recent study, Reed said the Taliban sanctuary in Pakistan and state support from organisations, like Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), have been essential to their war effort and the US'' failure to undermine this safe haven may be Washington's most significant mistake of the war.

"As the (congressionally mandated) Afghan Study Group noted, these sanctuaries are essential to the viability of the insurgency. Additionally, Pakistan's ISI aided and abetted the Taliban while opportunistically cooperating with the United States," Reed said.

A Brookings scholar, Reed said as per the assessment in 2018, Pakistan provided direct military and intelligence aid resulting in the deaths of US soldiers, Afghan security personnel and civilians, plus significant destabilisation of Afghanistan.

"This support of the Taliban runs counter to Pakistani cooperation with the United States, including as they have, allowing the use of airspace and other infrastructure for which the United States provided significant funding," he said.

"As the Afghan Study Group noted, Pakistan has played both sides of the field. These dynamics further play out against the complex environment in Pakistan which has implications for the national security of the United States, its allies and partners," he said, adding that Pakistan is simultaneously fragile and armed with nuclear weapons, making its vulnerability particularly dangerous.

"To add to this toxic mix, Pakistan is in a long-standing battle with its neighbour India which is also armed with nuclear weapons," Reed said.

The Senator said Pakistan and India have long been involved in a battle of power in South Asia.

"While bogged down politically and militarily in daily crises in Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States, over multiple administrations, has been unable to focus the necessary attention on Pakistan. Therefore, these problems have only gotten worse," he said.

The senator said another factor behind the troop pullout from Afghanistan was shaped by the US and its coalition partners inability to develop an Afghan government that could gain the confidence of the people, especially beyond the cities, and provide basic services including security, education, health care, and justice.

During a televised address to the nation on Wednesday, President Biden said that keeping thousands of troops grounded and concentrated in just one country at a cost of billions each year made "little sense" to him.

He said all US troops would be withdrawn from the strife-torn country by September 11 to end America's longest war that has cost trillions of dollars and the lives of over 2,400 American soldiers.

The US and the Taliban signed a landmark deal in Doha on February 29, 2020 to bring lasting peace in war-torn Afghanistan and allow US troops to return home from America's longest war.

Under the US-Taliban pact signed in Doha, Qatar, the US agreed to withdraw all its soldiers from Afghanistan in 14 months.






OFFICIAL source : https://www.reed.senate.gov/news/re...ision-to-withdraw-all-forces-from-afghanistan
None of think tankers ever argued for USA to limit its goals in Afghanistan to an anti-Al Qaeda mission only. Funny how the think tankers are now saying we knew every thing.....after the fact :lol: . My sibling does that...it drives me nuts.

The USA was caught in the middle of a regional conflict, Kabul& India vs Pakistan......that had nothing to do with its own objectives. If Pakistan played both sides......so too did the USA. Pakistan did what all the other actors did. USA at the end was tilted to a corrupt inept Kabul regime, and India....that was only willing to fight to last American. Result was a partial defeat and a moving of the goal posts. This senator does not know what he his talking about, He is factional lobbyists....groups that have ruined USA foreign policy thinking, IMO.
 
Last edited:

KaiserX

FULL MEMBER
Apr 6, 2019
1,220
-2
2,023
Country
United States
Location
United States
Why complain after you already lost and are leaving? only makes matter worse if you ask me...
 
Aug 19, 2017
3,135
-7
3,151
Country
India
Location
Germany
Well yes if your aim is to maintain a stalemate or the status quo. If you want to secure enduring peace for Pakistan in the region. You have to lay the Iranian Balochistan and the ambitions Iranians associate with that Balochistan and The Pashtunistan problems to rest.

We can go about doing that by negotiating some quid pro quo with the Iranians. And on the Western border we should negotiate for the Wakhan Corridor and to militarily carve a sliver of land to become a buffer between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

When our Western flank is secure. Then we can truly be a nightmare for India.

It can become easier for Pakistan to do so when this new world order of conflict through diplomacy only breaks. It is already starting as conquest and annexation comes back into fashion. Examples include Azerbaijan Karabağ, Russia Crimea, Turkey Afrin, China Taiwan etc etc.

In the meantime we should improve our economy.

Thanks to Allah pak the boys have played very well. Reminds me of Inzimam ul Haq hahaha 😆

Pakistan accepts the legalizy of the Durand Line ....Pakistan won't conquer more land to the West..and also Taliban will start fighting Pakistan then
if we were playing in US hands where we stand today ? US - NATO going back now . but afghans are here on our borders .

Isn't a strong independent Afghanistan an ally of Pakistan?
 

Ghost Hobbit

FULL MEMBER
Aug 27, 2020
1,261
-33
788
Country
India
Location
India
You seem to have a habit of trolling and acting up.
If I catch you making stupid posts like this one more time, I'll ban you. You offer nothing in the way of discussion and sound like a low quality bot.
why would the extremely logical post that the US is imposing financial sanctions as a punitive measure and therefore have not 'run away with tail behind legs' be considered 'trolling'? It's pretty much the top 3 most relevant points to note.

Post 9/11 they...
1) Took apart the organization that launched terror attacks on them
2) Went after support networks
3) Launched punitive sanctions on people they considered 'hand in glove'

The above three are actions done with deliberate intent to retaliate and have had a massive effect. Can you call this trolling?
 

CrazyZ

SENIOR MEMBER
Mar 3, 2019
3,260
2
4,109
Country
Pakistan
Location
United States
why would the extremely logical post that the US is imposing financial sanctions as a punitive measure and therefore have not 'run away with tail behind legs' be considered 'trolling'? It's pretty much the top 3 most relevant points to note.

Post 9/11 they...
1) Took apart the organization that launched terror attacks on them
2) Went after support networks
3) Launched punitive sanctions on people they considered 'hand in glove'

The above three are actions done with deliberate intent to retaliate and have had a massive effect. Can you call this trolling?
Don't believe the fake news. 9/11 attacks were not planned in Afghanistan....they were planned in Munich by the Atta cell. Read the 9/11 commission report. Afghanistan was a convenient place to drop bombs.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)


Top Bottom