Dragon's Teeth

[S-2]

"The failures pile up in Afghanistan yet the donkeys in the US continue to scapegoat Pakistan."

There's no scapegoating involved. You make proxy war on Afghanistan and your own defense minister has made that clear in his admission of destroying what wasn't supposedly existing in Quetta.

We didn't believe you about Quetta and here's the proof. BTW, we'll not be believing that your defense minister has destroyed the Quetta shura either. Fat chance.

Or how about you and your "inaction" for proof? "Inaction" against what, may I ask?

We know "what", don't we?

Thanks.

 

[DESERT FIGHTER]

S-2 who gives a ...... about what usa wants.Even if we kill all pakistanis it wont br enough for MORONS sitting in washshitington

 

[S-2]

"S-2 who gives a ...... about what usa wants."

What about every other nation trying to help Afghanistan? Or the NGOs that are there? Or the same U.N. that Pakistan allows to care for its own IDPs?

You've a very selfish attitude when you try to equivocate all that's done against Afghanistan as only causing Americans pain and suffering.

"Even if we kill all pakistanis it wont br enough for MORONS sitting in washshitington"

Your description of Washington is poorly spelled and indicates who's the moron here. Please improve your discourse or expect to find yourself on my "ignore" list.

Thanks.

 

[paritosh]

s2...Leave saddam Lets talk about Afghanistan and the great Lost War and the sweet defeat of US forces..

Ah so funny see my point as i mentioned Reason-Mythakistan
You can write a book i stand correct you can bring in 300,000 forces. u;ve lost the War no need to explain and justify i won't be taking it from you for all you can write a book here. In the end i stand correct:
"Iraq wmd>No where
AQ eliminated>Non
Taliban eliminated>Non
Progress in Afghanistan>Worsen situation
8 years progress>0 ZERO%
Status: coalition-us Lost War-Defeated
Reason-Myth: Pakistan"

I don't understand why people don't notice that in case of afghanistan...there is no definitive victory...not in conventional terms...their minuscule standing army was of no significance after their decade long civil skirmishes...
the Americans have played by the rules...they have acknowledged the rules of engagement.People might point to human rights violations but that happens in almost all war zones...
The Coalition is not losing...winning or losing in Afghanistan is not much dependent on who is firing more bullets...the taliban wins support and gets the ordinary people to wield weapons against the coalition...the coalition if plays by the rules of conventional engagements would have no problem dealing with wave after wave of these bedraggled Kalashnikov sporting frenzied mujahideens...with their technology and training....
they however want to be remembered as saviors than ravagers.
My country is making it's contribution and playing smart as well...we want the Afghans to be friendly...
the loss of influence is the biggest loss Pakistan has suffered when the Taliban was ousted...the oppressive talibani regime was doing you more good than it was to the everyday Afghans...

 

[Luftwaffe]

gambit your blood sugar don't blame me or Pakistan, was responsible for your/americans blood sugar. I made my point clear Progress Afghanistan -0% success keep trying till 2011.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"It would appear that only God has any evidence..."

You've offered your own words- "inaction" as rationalization. Quit waffling and back-pedaling.

What baffling and backpedaling? Do you have this evidence of Pakistani support for insurgents, because under your logic the current terrorism in Bajaur being aided and abetted by Afghan insurgents in the North Eastern Afghan provinces out of which the US has withdrawn is 'evidence the US is supporting terrorism in Pakistan'.

You can't have it both ways S-2 - if Pakistani 'constraints' in not acting in NW can be taken as evidence of 'support for terrorism', then the same applies to the US/NATO in ceding entire provinces to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Your defense minister has offered the "destruction" of the quetta shura as proof.

"Security forces have taken on the 'Quetta Shura', damaged it to such an extent that it no longer pose any threat to the country," The Daily Times quoted Mikhtar, as saying.

Do you deny this quote? How could the Quetta shura not exist one day and be "damaged" by security forces the next?

Misspoke on a TV show is all I can get out of that, since I am unaware of how a major military operation in a major city could go unreported. Notice also how he was referring to 'no longer pose any threat to the country' - the alleged 'Quetta Shura' has no so far posed a direct threat to Pakistan, so what threat was eliminated? He was likely referring to the TTP and the military operations in SW.

David Rohde of the NYT offers a son of Haqqani personally driving him about N. Waziristan as proof.

They're there. You know it and so do we.

They are 'there' just as Qari Ziaur Rehman and now possibly Faqir Mohammed and Mullah FM are in the North Eastern Afghan provinces that the US withdrew from.

"we have 'constraints' too you know."

Not an issue if sanctuary wasn't an issue. Pleading constraints is the same as admitting sanctuary.

You have eight years of willful sanctuary. You're protecting a resource and will do so until America leaves Afghanistan.

"Bray" on that.

Oh, but then why isn't the 'sanctuary' provided by the US in ceding the North Eastern Afghan provinces to the Taliban an issue? Double standards eh.

Please remove the afghan taliban sanctuaries on your land and try to control your crude language if you can.

We will, when our constraints are alleviated to an extent deemed acceptable by our military planners.

In the mean time, please assert control over the North Eastern Afghan provinces the US/NATO has ceded to the Taliban that are now being used to support and commit terrorism in FATA.

Till the US/NATO acts to eliminate the sanctuary allowed by them in the North Eastern provinces, talk by Americans of 'sanctuary' in Pakistan is hypocritical and deserves crude language.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"The failures pile up in Afghanistan yet the donkeys in the US continue to scapegoat Pakistan."

There's no scapegoating involved. You make proxy war on Afghanistan and your own defense minister has made that clear in his admission of destroying what wasn't supposedly existing in Quetta.

We didn't believe you about Quetta and here's the proof. BTW, we'll not be believing that your defense minister has destroyed the Quetta shura either. Fat chance.

Or how about you and your "inaction" for proof? "Inaction" against what, may I ask?

We know "what", don't we?

Thanks.

We make no proxy war. We do however have to deal with multiple threats on multiple fronts, especially that of a belligerent and hostile neighbor with a military at least twice our size. That dynamic alone limits the amount of resources that can be poured in to combat the Taliban insurgency, and the resources that are poured in must go, first and foremost, towards neutralizing the entities that pose a danger to Pakistan.

Had we limitless resources your argument might have some validity, as it is it does not.

As I explained in my earlier post, the defence minister made his comments once in a TV talk show, and likely misspoke and was in fact referring to the TTP. The official position of the GoP remains the same - there is no Quetta Shura and there is no evidence of a Quetta Shura.

And don't complain about Pakistani inaction when your military is running away and ceding entire provinces to the Taliban in Afghanistan from where they are now waging war on both Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Let me know when the US/NATO/ANA establish control over those provinces before complaining about 'sanctuary in NW'.

The US/NATO failure in Afghanistan is because of US/NATO - no one else.

You under-resourced this mission and the resources that were put in were managed abysmally, and to explain this failure in both policy and implementation of policy your nation and its talking heads have chosen to scapegoat Pakistan.

'Braying donkeys' as a descriptive term for those in the US government, military, intelligence and media pushing the above sentiment to explain away US failures is too kind a term.

 

[pak-yes]

The US and NATO don't even control a portion of Afghanistan and complain that we don't do enough.My Advice to Americans first try to get control of Area outside Kabul then say anything to us.

 

[Moorkh]

We make no proxy war. We do however have to deal with multiple threats on multiple fronts, especially that of a belligerent and hostile neighbor with a military at least twice our size. That dynamic alone limits the amount of resources that can be poured in to combat the Taliban insurgency, and the resources that are poured in must go, first and foremost, towards neutralizing the entities that pose a danger to Pakistan.

Had we limitless resources your argument might have some validity, as it is it does not.

if you dont have the resources, let some one who has the resources do it for you.

your argument that you dont have the resources to destroy the taliban sanctuaries presumes that you want to destroy them too.

so if you also want them destroyed let the americans do the dirty job.

 

[arya-hind]

The US and NATO don't even control a portion of Afghanistan and complain that we don't do enough.My Advice to Americans first try to get control of Area outside Kabul then say anything to us.

pls see what he is saying

 

[TaimiKhan]

if you dont have the resources, let some one who has the resources do it for you.

your argument that you dont have the resources to destroy the taliban sanctuaries presumes that you want to destroy them too.

so if you also want them destroyed let the americans do the dirty job.

A little common sense information regarding the realities on the ground would be a good thing before you have to say the bold part.

If Americans are that much good enough, then ask them to atleast destroy the sanctuaries inside Afghanistan, rather then emptying their bases and posts around giving one whole province to the Taliban, right across the Bajaur-Mohmand Agency, right at that time when PA had pushed the militants across that border, instead of US forces do their part, they emptied the province, left wide open the border and Taliban are having a field day, having found a safe heaven there and after regrouping for last few months, they are back in Pakistan and violence in Bajaur-Mohmand Agency is on the rise.

So instead of going after the American tale as usual, would be better you guys have a study of the things on the ground and then make statements.

But yeah if you guys like to do Pakistan bashing, that is then different.

 

[TaimiKhan]

pls see what he is saying

IEqWP2d6frs[/media] - USA military has evidence of Pakistani ISI supporting Taliban & Al Qaeda

That is the perfect example of double standards or hypocrisy at its best.

When American General say we have proof of ISI involvement, you and all world agrees, even if you haven't seen the proof.

But when our General says about Indian or American involvement, then it becomes a joke.

Ironic.

 

[karan.1970]

That is the perfect example of double standards or hypocrisy at its best.

When American General say we have proof of ISI involvement, you and all world agrees, even if you haven't seen the proof.

But when our General says about Indian or American involvement, then it becomes a joke.

Ironic.

So India and pakistan anyway almost continuously trade allegations and counter allegations and these allegations have very little credibility for each other.

However, US is a publically proclaimed major ally of Pakistan and is also a major aid doner with a huge inside track into Pakistan's political and military establishment. If that ally makes a statement like this, then it automatically carries a lot of weight and credibility. Its like tomorrow if Russia makes an adverse comment about India's involvement in Pakistan, almost the entire world will take it on face value.. Won't it. ? I think US needs to be internally sure of its stand. I agree that they can't call you their front line ally against terrorism and then make statements like these..

cheers...

 

[TaimiKhan]

So India and pakistan anyway almost continuously trade allegations and counter allegations and these allegations have very little credibility for each other.

However, US is a publically proclaimed major ally of Pakistan and is also a major aid doner with a huge inside track into Pakistan's political and military establishment. If that ally makes a statement like this, then it automatically carries a lot of weight and credibility. Its like tomorrow if Russia makes an adverse comment about India's involvement in Pakistan, almost the entire world will take it on face value.. Won't it. ? I think US needs to be internally sure of its stand. I agree that they can't call you their front line ally against terrorism and then make statements like these..

cheers...

Yet another one, anyway.

If US has made allegations about its so called ally, then kindly check up, Pakistan has made the same allegations too.

Recently CIA chief came to Pakistan, with other proofs of some other nations interfering in Pakistan by using Afghanistan, ISI gave proofs of even CIA involvement also.

So if you have one side of the story and hell bent believing on it, do check up the other side of the story too.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

pls see what he is saying

IEqWP2d6frs[/media] - USA military has evidence of Pakistani ISI supporting Taliban & Al Qaeda

Where exactly does Petraeus say what?

And where is the evidence to back up his assertions? You know, the same evidence some of you ask Pakistan to 'make public'? Similarly, where is the Indian evidence implicating Pakistani institutions in Mumbai?