35,000 deaths, $68 Billion losses of Pakistan after 9/11 attacks

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The geographical situation was the same when Pakistan decided to use militants to fight Soviets in Afghanistan at USA's behest. As they say you cant chose your neighbors. This very geographical position allowed Pakistan to milk USA for funds and technology during the cold war as a front against the soviets.. Gotta take bad with the good mate..

The 'geographical situation' at that time, with Cold War geo-politics and India's alignment with the Soviets and Afghanistan's traditional hostility towards Pakistan and claims on Pakistani territory, meant that Pakistan did in fact face a military threat from a Soviet Union military in Afghanistan.

Given the Cold War dynamics, Pakistan's participation in the war against the Soviets was not just for the sake of being a 'US proxy' but largely from the perception of facing an existential threat from a Soviet dominated Afghanistan.

---------- Post added at 09:53 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:51 AM ----------

Answer me for Pakistan, AM.

For a second don't bring anyone else into the discussion.

Just for a second.

Why did you, the Pakistanis, venture into Afghanistan piggy riding the Americans in the 80's?

Why did YOU do it?

I wanna hear YOUR REASON of doing it.

America, Russians etc., all had their reasons. What was yours?

Read last post. Or read some history, outside of distorted Indian historical narratives meant to poison the minds of Indians with anti-Pakistan prejudice.

 

[Jango]

Read my previous posts to know what the world thinks of you and your Afghan adventures.

The 7 billion had no say in your Afghan adventures and the consequences thereof.

Why then should the 7 billion pay up?

What Afghan adventures did we do? Was the US not a part of it? They did not wanted the USSR to have a presence in Afghanistan, and we did not wanted to have them next to us, the Yanks did not want a direct war, we did not have the military might. So, the Taliban was created to make a rogue face.

It was equally the fault of US as well.

 

[Avatar]

The US had not learned the lessons of military occupation and nation building in nations with large hostile populations, that it has now from its forays into Afghanistan and Iraq.

I support Musharraf's decision to join with the US at the time, since the hysteria and anger in the US would have been very easily manipulated into supporting military action against a 'Taliban-AQ supporting Military Dictatorship of Pakistan', with support from India.

Pakistan did caution against both invasion and war, and tried to convince the Taliban to accede to US demands (and the Taliban did indicated they were amenable to OBL and Co. being tried in a mutually agreed neutral country) but there was no one interested in listening or giving negotiations time to succeed.

So the choice at the time was one between the lesser of two evils - join the US in waging a war we believed was flawed, or become one of the targets of that war.

The fact that OBL was found to be living for so long & comfortably, so close to a Pakistani military base kills the essence of your story. Pakistan simply had no other choice. Musharraf nodded in agreement, but there was no motivation to win.

 

[ashokdeiva]

The US had not learned the lessons of military occupation and nation building in nations with large hostile populations, that it has now from its forays into Afghanistan and Iraq.

I support Musharraf's decision to join with the US at the time, since the hysteria and anger in the US would have been very easily manipulated into supporting military action against a 'Taliban-AQ supporting Military Dictatorship of Pakistan', with support from India.

Pakistan did caution against both invasion and war, and tried to convince the Taliban to accede to US demands (and the Taliban did indicated they were amenable to OBL and Co. being tried in a mutually agreed neutral country) but there was no one interested in listening or giving negotiations time to succeed.

So the choice at the time was one between the lesser of two evils - join the US in waging a war we believed was flawed, or become one of the targets of that war.

Lets not forget facts here, some of the Taliban ranks were occupied by the Pakistani Regular Army soldiers sent to support the Talibs in capturning Kabul. It was a complicated senario for Pakisani Policy makers to come to a conclusion when US was on to avenge the 9/11 attack.
They had no choice as it was hard to call back its soldires and come out clean that there were no regular Pakistani forces involved with the Talibs and the Pakistani High command decided to eliminate the evidance by killing its own men in the Taliban by joining hands with the US.
The result of this, is that now most of the men in uniform perticularly the ISI despice the US and to some extent its own high command for supporting the US.

 

[Jango]

The fact that OBL was found to be living for so long & comfortably, so close to a Pakistani military base kills the essence of your story. Pakistan simply had no other choice. Musharraf nodded in agreement, but there was no motivation to win.

It was not a effing military base dumbo. Did TOI or Bharat Rakshak feed that to you?

---------- Post added at 05:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:55 PM ----------

The fact that OBL was found to be living for so long & comfortably, so close to a Pakistani military base kills the essence of your story. Pakistan simply had no other choice. Musharraf nodded in agreement, but there was no motivation to win.

It was not a effing military base dumbo. Did TOI or Bharat Rakshak feed that to you?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan may not have germinated the Taliban, but it surely the cohesive force that captured Kabul in 1996 was a result of Pakistani military support and SA money.. Taliban would have lost and diffused back into insignificance had they not won the battle of Kabul, which turned their way after a series of defeats only after Pakistan started its support to the movement.. So while it may be distasteful to you, the version of history that does not correspond to yours does not automatically become cheap point scoring..

At the time Pakistan started supporting the Taliban, they were an ascendant force already, and had garnered significant local support.

And while they may not have risen as rapidly as they did without Pakistani, Saudi and US support, they would have risen, and Afghanistan would have continued to remain chaotic and lawless, and AQ would have still found plenty of space to exist, given that OBL and CO. had plenty of funds to 'buy off' warlords and protection.

---------- Post added at 09:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:58 AM ----------

The fact that OBL was found to be living for so long & comfortably, so close to a Pakistani military base kills the essence of your story. Pakistan simply had no other choice. Musharraf nodded in agreement, but there was no motivation to win.

Either point out what 'military base' OBL was living next to, our you are a liar, or uninformed ranter.

 

[Avatar]

At the time Pakistan started supporting the Taliban, they were an ascendant force already, and had garnered significant local support.

And while they may not have risen as rapidly as they did without Pakistani, Saudi and US support, they would have risen, and Afghanistan would have continued to remain chaotic and lawless, and AQ would have still found plenty of space to exist, given that OBL and CO. had plenty of funds to 'buy off' warlords and protection.


---------- Post added at 09:59 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:58 AM ----------



Either point out what 'military base' OBL was living next to, our you are a liar, or uninformed ranter.

My bad. I'm uninformed but clearly not ranting. Isn't Abbottabad a Pakistani military town ? The kind of place where OBL was least likely to be hiding (for years), if at all in Pakistan.. in a secured structure that was clearly suspicious ?

Not going too far away from the topic, here's an interesting read: http://news.rediff.com/slide-show/2...es-pakistan-taliban-for-times-square-plot.htm

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said some people in the Pakistani government are aware of the whereabouts of elusive Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and Afghan Taliban chief Mullah Omar.

The Obama Administration, meanwhile, for the first time accused Taliban of being behind the botched Times Square bombing plot.

"Some Pakistani officials were more informed about the Al Qaeda and the Taliban than they let on," Clinton told CBS in an interview.

"I'm not saying that they're at the highest levels but I believe that somewhere in this government are people who know where Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda is, where Mullah Omar and the leadership of the Afghan Taliban is, and we expect more cooperation to help us bring to justice, capture or kill, those who attacked us on 9/11," she said.

Clinton had over the weekend warned Pakistan that it would face "very severe consequences" if any terror plot like the failed Times Square bombing was traced to that country.

"We've made it very clear that if, heaven forbid, an attack like this that we can trace back to Pakistan were to have been successful, there would be very severe consequences," she had said.

Asked if US was not getting sufficient cooperation from Islamabad in anti-terror drive, the US top diplomat acknowledged there was a "sea change" in cooperation by Pakistani authorities, but added "we want more".

With agency inputs

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

My bad. I'm uninformed but clearly not ranting. Isn't Abbottabad a Pakistani military town ? The kind of place where OBL was least likely to be hiding (for years), if at all in Pakistan.. in a secured structure that was clearly suspicious ?

Abbottabad has a military academy, not a garrison or military base, and the town is pretty large now given the Urban growth in most of Pakistan.

Yes the town was an unlikely place for OBL to hide, but that is probably why he chose it, and why his hideout was undefended, so as to not attract attention.

 

[KALKI]

Off topic - as have been other posts that were deleted - stick to Afghanistan

The problem is, Am, that you want to view things in isolation.

However, it's not so simple.

All these things have their source in your decision to jump into the Afghan war in the 80's.

Sadly, you do not wish to give the discussion a chance to dwell on that.

I do not think any discussion which views things in isolation can be fruitful.

I rest my case.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Lets not forget facts here, some of the Taliban ranks were occupied by the Pakistani Regular Army soldiers sent to support the Talibs in capturning Kabul. It was a complicated senario for Pakisani Policy makers to come to a conclusion when US was on to avenge the 9/11 attack.
They had no choice as it was hard to call back its soldires and come out clean that there were no regular Pakistani forces involved with the Talibs and the Pakistani High command decided to eliminate the evidance by killing its own men in the Taliban by joining hands with the US.
The result of this, is that now most of the men in uniform perticularly the ISI despice the US and to some extent its own high command for supporting the US.

I doubt the US was not aware of the presence of Pakistani regulars in support roles within the Taliban, and the so called 'air lift of evil', carried out with full US knowledge and approval, was likely an evacuation of any Pakistani military and government advisers in Afghanistan that were unable to get out before the US invasion.

I don't see any reason for Pakistan to have its soldiers killed for the sake of 'hiding' something that any intelligence agency worth its salt would know about.

 

[PlanetWarrior]

See the problem is always that it is somebody else's fault. The USA. Russia. CIA. R&AW. Mossad. Israel. Introspect and isolate yourselves. Look within and there you will find the heart of the problem. Your insecurities make you seek alliances and ummahs. When the crap hits the ceiling, your alliances and ummahs desert you. Pakistan is fragmenting and the sad fact is that if Pakistanis do not stand up and tell their head honchos to start concentrating on Pakistan and to leave the rest of the world to sort out its own mess, then the cancer maybe irreversible

 

[Dharmachakra]

Woov this is going gaga over here.
We had a saying that best describes the paks current situation," Milking money from a dead horse".

Its just trying to milk few more bucks with a bare statement in US daily news paper.

I would say, any brainer with a clear idea of the Afghan-pak mess will know who nurtured whom and who is taking the bite of the same venemous snake that he ones nurtured.

USSR fallout or not, the main culprit behind the scenes was TERRORISM. And it gains significance because a state itself( Read PAkistan)sponsered it for various reasons. When your nation supports it in the begining and in the half it declares them good bad and ugly just because some of them are calling shots on yourself is nothing but just making a joker out of yourself.

The same talibans, AQ,Mujahidheens were good when they were receiving funds from both US and PAk and achieving thier objectives.And Then turned bad for US after USSR fallout and still good for pak when Kashmir came into picture. And few are still good for you and getting your state support while failing miserably in achieving the KASHMIR objective.

And when a sect of those good turns bad and kills your own people on a day to day basis (due to a miscalculation of your strategists)you run and call for the world support?

I need to create a new word in the dictionary to call this kind of attitude.

Lets sum it up. A snake is a snake whether you feed it milk or not, it will still bite anyone when gets pissed off.So are the talibans or any other terror organisations.
No wonder why a terrorist like Hafiz Saeed gets so much support in pakistan and performs ralies against india and calls for the attacks on India so publicly.
LEts just take it for granted, that pakistans constitution itself supports terrorism in many ways. Aamen.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

The problem is, Am, that you want to view things in isolation.

However, it's not so simple.

All these things have their source in your decision to jump into the Afghan war in the 80's.

Sadly, you do not wish to give the discussion a chance to dwell on that.

I do not think any discussion which views things in isolation can be fruitful.

I rest my case.

And I have no problem addressing the decision to enter the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and I posted my arguments regarding the reasons behind Pakistan's decision to join the war, but the rest of the issues you keep dragging in such as KHalistan and whatnot have nothing to do with that decision to fight the Soviets or its repercussions down the road.

---------- Post added at 10:27 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 AM ----------

See the problem is always that it is somebody else's fault. The USA. Russia. CIA. R&AW. Mossad. Israel. Introspect and isolate yourselves. Look within and there you will find the heart of the problem. Your insecurities make you seek alliances and ummahs. When the crap hits the ceiling, your alliances and ummahs desert you. Pakistan is fragmenting and the sad fact is that if Pakistanis do not stand up and tell their head honchos to start concentrating on Pakistan and to leave the rest of the world to sort out its own mess, then the cancer maybe irreversible

The problem is that it is in fact the fault of several players and the result of several events in history, and not just Pakistan's fault, though Pakistan also shares blame.

Ignoring the responsibility Western and other powers have in the events that occurred is just as dishonest as trying to argue that Pakistan had no responsibility.

 

[KALKI]

And I have no problem addressing the decision to enter the war against the Soviets in Afghanistan, and I posted my arguments regarding the reasons behind Pakistan's decision to join the war, but the rest of the issues you keep dragging in such as KHalistan and whatnot have nothing to do with that decision to fight the Soviets or its repercussions down the road.

You clearly missed the woods for the trees. I listed Khalistan and Kashmir Jihad as 'potential profits' i.e. profits for you which could have occured and which you wanted to occur but which somehow did not occur.

By 'you' I mean your Generals and strategic planners.

Anyways, now that I suppose you have already read my post. I hope you'd save me the labour of typing it all again just answer my simple question.

Why are you willing to take the profits for the proceeds of the Afghan war of 80's but the not the losses?

and if you do, why then does the head of your state expect the other 7 billion denizens of the world to be grateful to you?

The 7 billion had no share in your profits or potential profits.

Why should they have a share in your losses?

 

[foxbat]

The 'geographical situation' at that time, with Cold War geo-politics and India's alignment with the Soviets and Afghanistan's traditional hostility towards Pakistan and claims on Pakistani territory, meant that Pakistan did in fact face a military threat from a Soviet Union military in Afghanistan.

Given the Cold War dynamics, Pakistan's participation in the war against the Soviets was not just for the sake of being a 'US proxy' but largely from the perception of facing an existential threat from a Soviet dominated Afghanistan.

Wont disagree there.. But then those alignments and geographical situation worked towards your benefit then.. now its the time to pay for those benefits.. As I said, gotta take bad with the good..