CIA Director Panetta to be defense secretary; Gen. David Petraeus to CIA

[53fd]

Rehman is at war with America in Kunar. He has a $3m bounty on his head. He lives in fear of PREDATOR and ground attack. Read this interview with Rehman and learn something-

At War With The Taliban: A Fighter And Financier-Asia Times Syed Saleem Shahzad May23, 2008

The innuendo is fine, but you have clearly failed to shut down the safe havens for Qari Zia Rehman in Afghanistan that he uses to infiltrate into Pakistan's Bajaur, Mohmand Agencies & lower Dir. It is results that matter, & the US has clearly failed in Kunar, Nuristan, Khost.

I doubt you understand what sanctuary means. Living under constant threat of attack isn't sanctuary. Haqqani owns Mir Ali. THAT's sanctuary. For ten years he hasn't faced any threat of capture or killing. None.

Likewise, Qari Zia Rehman owns Kunar & Nuristan, & uses them to launch attacks inside Pakistan's adjacent tribal areas.

That's more than has ever been attempted against Omar, Haqqani, Hekmatyar, Maulvi Nazir and Hafez Gul Bahadur. These men walk your lands completely undisturbed. Omar, Haqqani and Hekmatyar are afghan taliban. So much for sanctuary AND sovereignty.

There are just many mountains & rugged areas in North Waziristan as there are in Kunar for terrorists to get sanctuary in. Hekmatyar isn't Afghan Taliban, he's the pioneer of the Hizb-e-Gulbuddin group. Hafiz Gul Bahadur in all likelihood has been killed already, & before that had become opposed to Baitullah Mehsud & his terrorism against Pakistan. Maulvi Nazir actually fought against the Mehsud group in South Waziristan, & the Pakistani Army has its specific interest with Maulvi Nazir. Again, Mullah Omar, Haqqani are not a threat to Pakistan, so why should they go after him? Pakistan gave the US the coordinates of Baitullah Mehsud's location in North Waziristan twice, & the US refused twice; & on the third request from Pakistan complied & killed Baitullah Mehsud. So if the US is not interested in eliminating the threats Pakistan faces, Pakistan won't be catering US interests either.

Why have you failed to study this war before railing without fact? There are three U.S. battalions fighting in Nuristan and Kunar right now. There are two more in Khwost.

These are what you have deployed in Kandahar:

a) Task Force Kandahar
1/2 Stryker Cavalry
1/22 Royal Regiment

b) Task Force Lightning / 525th Battlefield Surveillance Brigade
4/2 Stryker Cavalry
1-38 Cavalry

c) Task Force Raider
1-22 Infantry
1-66 Armor

Instead of blaming Pakistan & the ISI for harboring terrorists, maybe you should look at what the CIA has been doing around the world:

CIA backs Islamic terrorists in Uzbekistan:

Intelligence officer claims CIA was complicit in torture in Uzbekistan - Herald Scotland

CIA backs Jundullah, against Iran & Pakistan:

Ex-CIA agent confirms U.S. ties with Jundullah - Geopolitical Monitor

CIA backs Muslim Brotherhood:

The CIA and The Muslim Brotherhood: How the CIA Set The Stage for September 11 (Martin A. Lee – Razor Magazine 2004) « ce399 | research archive (fascism)

CIA backed Kosovo Liberation Army & Al-Qaeda:

German Intelligence and the CIA supported Al Qaeda sponsored Terrorists in Yugoslavia:

Intelligence officer claims CIA was complicit in torture in Uzbekistan - Herald Scotland

CIA backs Jundullah against Iran:

Ex-CIA agent confirms U.S. ties with Jundullah - Geopolitical Monitor

CIA backs Muslim brotherhood:

The CIA and The Muslim Brotherhood: How the CIA Set The Stage for September 11 (Martin A. Lee – Razor Magazine 2004) « ce399 | research archive (fascism)

CIA backed Kosovo Liberation Army & Al-Qaeda:

German Intelligence and the CIA supported Al Qaeda sponsored Terrorists in Yugoslavia

NATO supporting Al-Qaeda in Libya:

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

Libya: the West and al-Qaeda on the same side - Telegraph

Among many other things. You clearly need to take off whatever goggles you're wearing & look at the truth. You have been using Islamic extremism throughout the world through your proxy Saudi Arabia to exert influence over the world since forever, & now it's biting you in the rear side.

 

[Capt.Popeye]

They will begin the withdrawal process this year. Initially it's going to be the support staff and engineers etc. Complete withdrawal will definitely take longer.
But this begs the question; how sincere is the US in Afghanistan's reconstruction?

Quote- Complete withdrawal will definitely take longer.
Do you really think that will happen?

Quote- But this begs the question; how sincere is the US in Afghanistan's reconstruction?
As sincere as anybody who has invested so much money in that country and created a stake both in the country and its 'natural resources'.

 

[S-2]

"The innuendo is fine..."

What innuendo? The bounty is real. So is the threat of attack. It's constant and pervasive. Rehman operates on a BATTLEFIELD. Haqqani and Omar hide behind the skirts of their mother in Pakistan.

"It is results that matter, & the US has clearly failed in Kunar, Nuristan, Khost."

Funny. If results were the only measure of effort then Pakistan has long confirmed its status as an enemy of ISAF and America.

"CIA backs Islamic terrorists in Uzbekistan:

Intelligence officer claims CIA was complicit in torture in Uzbekistan - Herald Scotland

CIA backs Jundullah, against Iran & Pakistan:

Ex-CIA agent confirms U.S. ties with Jundullah - Geopolitical Monitor

CIA backs Muslim Brotherhood:

The CIA and The Muslim Brotherhood: How the CIA Set The Stage for September 11 (Martin A. Lee – Razor Magazine 2004) « ce399 | research archive (fascism)

CIA backed Kosovo Liberation Army & Al-Qaeda:

German Intelligence and the CIA supported Al Qaeda sponsored Terrorists in Yugoslavia:

Intelligence officer claims CIA was complicit in torture in Uzbekistan - Herald Scotland

CIA backs Jundullah against Iran:

Ex-CIA agent confirms U.S. ties with Jundullah - Geopolitical Monitor

CIA backs Muslim brotherhood:

The CIA and The Muslim Brotherhood: How the CIA Set The Stage for September 11 (Martin A. Lee – Razor Magazine 2004) « ce399 | research archive (fascism)

CIA backed Kosovo Liberation Army & Al-Qaeda:

German Intelligence and the CIA supported Al Qaeda sponsored Terrorists in Yugoslavia

NATO supporting Al-Qaeda in Libya:

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links - Telegraph

Libya: the West and al-Qaeda on the same side - Telegraph"

Are you upset that we've possibly witnessed torture of interesting people inside Uzbekistan? I'm certain we've seen at least as much in your own jail cells.

So I take it you're disturbed we assisted Bosnian and Kosovoan muslims against the serbs? Still, couldn't you find something more substantive than Globalresearch.ca? I find it difficult to take seriously a website with a category for U.S./NATO War Agenda.

Jundallah? Let's qualify the comments made by Baer using his own words from your own article. We'll let the readers judge Baer's impression of matters-

“American intelligence has also had contact with Jundullah. But that contact, as Iran almost certainly knows, was confined to intelligence-gathering on the country,” Robert Baer, a former Middle East CIA field officer wrote on the Time.com, IRNA reported early on Saturday.

However, he noted that the US-Jundullah relationship “was never formalized, and contact was sporadic.”

The news comes amid US denial of any involvement in a recent terrorist attack in Sistan-Baluchestan province in southeastern Iran, which Jundullah claimed responsibility for.

“I’ve been told that the Bush Administration at one point considered Jundullah as a piece in a covert-action campaign against Iran, but the idea was quickly dropped because Jundullah was judged uncontrollable and too close to al-Qaeda. There was no way to be certain that Jundullah would not throw the bombs we paid for back at us,” said the former CIA agent who is a columnist in the weekly, and very probably an advisor in the Middle East."

Love the speculative ending. Only among mideast journalists do you see such high standards.

Did you know that Kayani is a RAW agent.

 

[DesiGuy]

they should have made me.........CIA is really messed up now.

 

[Ahmad Shah Abdali]

"...Somewhere inbetween, the priorities of both the agencies clash so badly..."
We'll do our best with the afghan army but they're a hopeless case in my view. Utterly unreliable to any ostensible master whom they serve.

Why do you think they are a hopless case? The only people to be blamed for the slow progress in the rebuilding of Afghan security forces is the Bush administration who simply forgot about Afghanistan, as soon as they lay their eyes on Iraq.Karzai had been warning the Americans Talibans were regrouping and asked for more support in terms of training and equipments to the fledgling ANA and ANP, the americans simply left Afghanistan at the mercy of CIA and the warlords thinking the Taliban were done.Only during Obama's administration real resources have been routed to ANA and ANP except in the case of Air support and Armour.It will ofcourse take time and money for them to be fully operational and effective.I honestly believe when ANA reaches the target of 250,000+ and ANP 160,000+ they would be able to keep Taliban in check, ONCE they can operate independently.

 

[RazorMC]

... Here's a question for you-how long should we be committed to Afghanistan's reconstruction...if at all? We owe the afghan people nothing. From their lands came misery to my fellow citizens.

Here's another question for you-how sincere is the Afghan government and people in taking responsibility for their own reconstruction?
...

That's my complaint with the American government. I look forward to our departure. I envision civil war following our departure and nothing but continuing misery for the Afghan and Pakistani peoples for decades yet to come.

The US does not have to stay too long IMHO.

True, the US has provided billions to Afghanistan, but the same US is also associated with Karzai and his incompetence.

My opinion; change your perceived role in Afghanistan from an expeditionary force to a nation that supports Afghanistan as a country. Take away any backing for Karzai.

Afterall you've spent billions and for what? So that one man's incompetence can take you down with him?

 

[RazorMC]

I feel the fault lies more with the Pakistanis and their desire to make Afhanistan a fiefdom for their 'strategic depth' against India. The US, though owes nothing to Afghanistan, would do the world a favour by ensuring a stable Afghanistan and helping them come out of Pakistani clutches.

Kindly take this to some other place where such things might be celebrated and spare the rest of us who want to have a proper discussion.

 

[RazorMC]

Pakistanis, foremost their generals, believe their future lies with the PRC, not America. Many, many Pakistanis view America in irreversible decline and hold us in contempt. Now some of that may be wishful thinking on their part and therein lies the risk. If wrong they risk alienating a powerful entity and potential ally but, on the whole, their course has been set for some time.

Actually, sane members of this forum will tell you that Pakistan wants excellent ties with the US and that there are no two opinions about it.
The growth in Sino-Pak relations has a long history and that the 90s simply strengthened it further. We found doors closed towards us in the defense field while China opened theirs. Yes, we produced nukes, but we had no choice there.

I will say again with complete honesty, Pak-US ties are of tremendous importance to Pakistan and we want this to grow further. It is just that our political leadership seems to so subservient to the US that it has raised sentiments against them and their perceived supporter.

 

[RazorMC]

Quote- Complete withdrawal will definitely take longer.
Do you really think that will happen?

Quote- But this begs the question; how sincere is the US in Afghanistan's reconstruction?
As sincere as anybody who has invested so much money in that country and created a stake both in the country and its 'natural resources'.

Troops will have to leave at some point with only a handful remaining for security of American structures etc.
Natural resources are anyone's to take since Karzai announced it to the world. Instead of letting Afghanis develop this industry themselves, he is going to make someone else's day.

 

[53fd]

"The innuendo is fine..."

Funny. If results were the only measure of effort then Pakistan has long confirmed its status as an enemy of ISAF and America.

You've confirmed that already by declaring the ISI as a terrorist organization. But the Pakistani Army isn't flustered or coerced easily, it is calm & takes calculated measures, & is professional enough to look after its country's interests, just like the CIA is. And it is just that thing which is annoying the CIA.

Are you upset that we've possibly witnessed torture of interesting people inside Uzbekistan? I'm certain we've seen at least as much in your own jail cells.

So I take it you're disturbed we assisted Bosnian and Kosovoan muslims against the serbs? Still, couldn't you find something more substantive than Globalresearch.ca? I find it difficult to take seriously a website with a category for U.S./NATO War Agenda.

Did you know that Kayani is a RAW agent.

As I've already said, the CIA has used Islamic extremism (via its proxy Saudi Arabia of course) through various Jihadi groups to overthrow independent governments, which is an extension of what the British did through Wahabism to overthrow the Ottoman Empire in the 20th century. So you shouldn't be lying through your teeth that the US is sincere in eradicating Islamic extremism because it isn't, unless it comes into conflict with its direct strategic interests of course. I'm not upset/disturbed/shi77ing myself over these 'developments' . Buckle up & face the situation like a man, not complaining about the big bad ISI & the poor, helpless Americans in Afghanistan. You're giving the ISI way too much credit.

The fact is that the CIA is even worse in 'these matters' than the ISI is, & the ISI will not be catering the US wishes as it has its own interests. The CIA has done pretty shady things to secure its country's interests, the ISI has that right as well (as does any other agency) to do things in the interest of the Pakistan, not America. What's wrong with that? It's America that has been extremely displeased & nerve wracked by the Pakistani establishment, not the vice versa. The US has been trying to fluster the ISI & the Pakistan Army on many occasion to coerce them into doing what they want, but the Pakistani establishment has remained calm & calculated, & it is professional enough to look after Pakistan's interests before America's. Don't expect that to change anytime soon. Which is why you want Petraeus to deal directly with the Pakistani establishment, as Panetta hasn't been "forceful" enough. Adios.

 

[President Camacho]

I think there's been a more balanced sharing of intelligence than you suggest.

How balanced? I can't figure out what kind of intelligence would the American troops carry in Afghanistan/Pakistan that would be of any good use to the ISI.

You refer to coercion-not presuasion. We lost that opportunity ages ago when Bush failed to make clear to Musharraf his seriousness. Without the threat that the trigger shall actually be pulled the bluff is easily called.

Well, you may call it coercion/persuasion/request/demand or anything. But this is how I see it - The PA did try to call the bluff on the US and the trigger got pulled too. That's the reason why the intensity of drones kept increasing every year way beyond the numbers anticipated by the Pakistani Administration/Army. The infamous words of Armitage were in response to this same brinkmanship sported by the Pakistani Army. And then came Hillary too. May or may not 'bomb to the stone age', but the bombing is going on for sure!

---

"...we can easily conclude that none (Pakistani Gens.) would want to engage it in a costly war and lose all those luxuries. Now, how wise it's of them to embark on such brinkmanship, we all can see."

S-2: "Pakistanis, foremost their generals, believe their future lies with the PRC, not America. Many, many Pakistanis view America in irreversible decline and hold us in contempt. Now some of that may be wishful thinking on their part and therein lies the risk. If wrong they risk alienating a powerful entity and potential ally but, on the whole, their course has been set for some time."

For your statement I marked in bold - the Generals (specifically) of the Pakistani Army believe that their future lies in their power and money, rather than in any specific country. And their power and money will stay intact only as long as they do not fight a war that they cannot win. The Pakistani Army's power comes from the confidence the Pakistani people have in it, and the Generals won't be too keen on shaking it down. That is the reason why I think it is not so wise of the Generals to engage in such fierce form of brinkmanship with the US.

---


"So I suppose, pushing the war farther inside Pakistan with the help of drones is what might happen when this brinkmanship breaks down."

S-2: "I don't agree. We'll not expand the war beyond FATAville."

I was referring to this news:

http://www.defence.pk/forums/pakistans-war/106131-america-pressing-pakistan-long-wish-list.html

Excerpt:

The US wish-list also includes permission for NATO forces’ ground operations in North Waziristan Agency (NWA), drone strikes in Balochistan, military operation in Southern Punjab and visible elimination of Haqqanis and Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT).

 

[S-2]

"I was referring to this news:

America pressing Pakistan on a long ‘wish list’"

I don't hold much credence for a report suggesting we've asked for authority to conduct NATO ground operations in N. Waziristan.

"How balanced? I can't figure out what kind of intelligence would the American troops carry in Afghanistan/Pakistan that would be of any good use to the ISI."

We may or may not generate battlefield intelligence from Afghanistan of use to the Pakistanis. I suspect we do from time to time based upon POW interrogations, etc. You ignore, however, the larger picture. American technical intelligence is purported to generally be very good and we've assets available to monitor events outside the immediate area of Afghanistan that may be of interest to the Pakistani government.

There's a lot of electronic traffic out there. Lot of digital hardwire traffic too. Financial transactions inside the gulf states and more. At the most superficial level it was suggested that America provided some technical assistance inside Karachi assisting the capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.

In short, I don't know how balanced either but I do know the range and portfolio available exceeds more than tactical intelligence generated from the afghan battlefield.

"That is the reason why I think it is not so wise of the Generals to engage in such fierce form of brinkmanship with the US."

We'll see. Kayani is adept at evaluating risk. So too senior American leaders. You simply don't advance through today's bureaucratic entanglements and minefields of any nation without a fair modicum of intelligence mixed with prudent risk assessment skills.

We read stuff here about "Kayani hates Petraeus", etc. Really? These men, with very rare exception, don't have time for such trivial sentiment. They're hard-working professionals and their plates are full of problems-large and small. "Hate" factors very low on their "to do" lists every morning.

Despite my or other feelings here-largely mutual antipathy towards each other's nations, these guys are engaged in the daily business of trying to find convergences that'll work amidst a ton of forces at play against their success.

 

[President Camacho]

I don't hold much credence for a report suggesting we've asked for authority to conduct NATO ground operations in N. Waziristan.

Well, it has happened in the past too. The US even sent choppers and one such action led to the blocking of the NATO supply lines for over 10 days. If we discount the news articles, what other source do we have to rely on? CIA doesn't publish a list of its activities. We can only infer the acts by the outcomes.

We may or may not generate battlefield intelligence from Afghanistan of use to the Pakistanis. I suspect we do from time to time based upon POW interrogations, etc. You ignore, however, the larger picture. American technical intelligence is purported to generally be very good and we've assets available to monitor events outside the immediate area of Afghanistan that may be of interest to the Pakistani government.

I don't remember who it was, perhaps Panetta himself who said that the CIA is blind in the area (Afgh-Pak). He made that statement after that double agent killed around 7 CIA operatives in Afghanistan. And it is only your presumption that some of the POW in Gitmo or elsewhere held by the US are the ones that would harm Pakistan (the ISI) as well. It may, or may not be the case. For the serious losses the CIA and the military have faced in Afghanistan, it seems more likely that intelligence set up is not functioning as well as it should. Hence the dependence on the ISI for intelligence gathering in that area.

There's a lot of electronic traffic out there. Lot of digital hardwire traffic too. Financial transactions inside the gulf states and more. At the most superficial level it was suggested that America provided some technical assistance inside Karachi assisting the capture of Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar.

When it comes to intelligence gathering in these areas, the electronic stuff and the gadgets play a secondary role. Unless you have the local men loyal to you beyond any doubts, you cannot go too far. And the local men would anytime be more loyal to the ISI than to the CIA. So once again the forced dependence on the ISI regarding intel.

In short, I don't know how balanced either but I do know the range and portfolio available exceeds more than tactical intelligence generated from the afghan battlefield.

We read stuff here about "Kayani hates Petraeus", etc. Really? These men, with very rare exception, don't have time for such trivial sentiment. They're hard-working professionals and their plates are full of problems-large and small. "Hate" factors very low on their "to do" lists every morning.

Despite my or other feelings here-largely mutual antipathy towards each other's nations, these guys are engaged in the daily business of trying to find convergences that'll work amidst a ton of forces at play against their success.

I never meant to say that Kayani would challenge Panetta to a wrestling match. Or anything on such personal level.

When Armitage minced those words to Musharraf, he had no personal grudge against the General. And I doubt Musharraf holds any against Armitage either. Statements of statesmen referring to 'bombing back to stone age', and 'blocking the supply routes' on a regular basis are the most visible forms of brinkmanship. And the brinkmanship got tested when the drone strikes increased at a defined pace, and the supply routes were blocked for 10 days. The bombings did not come down, but the supply routes certainly opened. That is why I call this brinkmanship of the Generals in Pakistan, a flawed strategy.

We all saw how this strategy backfired even in the case of Raymond Davis. The ISI raised the ante, and the US won in the end. The most honest window I got to look into Pakistan is this forum. And here itself I saw a sudden fall in the trust value that a lot of Pakistanis hold for Kayani and the Army and the ISI. Such mistrust will lead people to frequently question the acts of the Army, and such frequent questioning will lead to erosion of power the Generals hold.

Anyway, just got the news Bin Laden died in an attack, let's see how it shapes the relationship between Pakistan and the US.