ISI have ties with Taliban, Haqqani network: McCain

[Respect4Respect01]

Well ISI is only works for interest of Pakistan like any other intelligence agency, Like CIA.

Even Raymond Davis had links with these kind of ppl.

 

[Last Hope]

Well the same ISI are kicking there with Air Support, choppers, Air borne troops and heavy artillery fire today. Link

 

[TaimiKhan]

dear sir, then care to explain why the no. of drones attack inside pakistan is so high ??

why NATO rants that pakistan is not doing enough ??

why all the big leaders of AL qaeda and Taliban are found in Pakistan ??

why u found the hand of a insider in PNS mehran attacks ??

why so many terrorists attack is happening in pakistan when all the terrorists reside in Afganistan??

don't forget the golden hey days of friendship b/w pakistan and taliban ... the strategic assests are bursting ur bubbles

1. Simple reason, the higher the number of targets, the higher the drone strikes. Plus the prime objective is to take out AQ & the foreign militants, which are mostly located on this side as they can't mix up with the locals on the Afghan side. Thus they have come on this side, but they are being hunted down with the help of the ISI, plus in some instances CIA using its own resource, which by the way mostly results in civilians targets.

2. NATO has the power, thus it rants. Their media is on their side, they have influence. But if you are truly looking for knowledge, why don't you do some Googling and see what is happening on the ground. Who has more troops, who has lost more troops, who has more border check posts compared to each other. Why don't you Google about the presentation given by Kiyani to the NATO high ups right in Brussels HQ of NATO. Kindly do it, and hopefully if you look at it as a neutral member, you may see who is doing more. But if you looked at it as an Indian, well i guess i don't have to say what will be the outcome of your analysis.

3. Plz read history, these AQ men are the same ones who came in the 80s to this country to fight someone. The spent years and had local support of intel agencies as well as ordinary people who had gone there to fight the soviets. The got married here, started to live, had friends who shared the same objectives & views with them. So that is why they had chosen Pakistan as they had support from the people. Same case for the Taliban, all these men have lived years inside Pakistan and in Afghanistan. Even current Afghan president spent years in Pakistan, i believe his dad also got killed here. We have no visa system, anyone can cross over and back without needing any passports or visas. Its an open border.

4. If someone has sympathy with AQ/Taliban based on their views, be in military or outside of it, then you need to see the reasons for that. Do think and see why majority of the Muslims hate the US. I myself hate the US, but not its people, rather its policies and the ones who carry those policies. To Muslims around the world, majority of the ills happening to the Muslims is directly attributed to the policies of the US. Thus, people serving the military are human beings and Muslims, their minds also can get influenced if the religion card is played. They are also seeing what the US is doing, supporting Israel who got created with the expulsion of Muslims from their land/homes, what Israel is doing with Muslims with the active support of US, support of dictators ruling Muslim countries, launching wars on Muslim countries.

5. The people in Afghanistan are fighting the occupiers, they are not in Pakistan. In Pakistan you have your own groups which have their own agenda and are terrorizing the people in the name of the religion. Sectarian violence and other objectives behind it. As said, they have different objectives/agendas and using religion to their like. Some militants cross the border and live there, while some cross the border and live here. The ones who are being hunted down in Afghanistan get support on this side of the border and those who are being hunted down on this side of the border, get support on the Afghan side.

6. And yeah, we are still having friendly relations with the Taliban, that is why US/NATO are crying / whining to attack them. The so called taliban which are attacking Pakistan are not those Taliban which we used to have as friends, they are someone else. And not all strategic assets are burst, many of them are still being kept as strategic assets, just wait for a while.

 

[SQ8]

To add to the above..
If such ties exist.. are they not beneficial to bringing an amicable solution to the conflict??
One that avoids bloodshed..
If such ties prevent a backlash on the Pakistani populace by the Afghan Taliban or hold the key to a solution in Afghanistan.. they are the best possible card Pakistan holds.

 

[T-Faz]

ISI has been accused of what CIA itself continues to do when they want to secure their interests.

Many should know that Sarajuddin Haqqani, the leader of the Haqqani Network was an American favorite during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, he was described as "goodness personified" by Charlie Wilson. During those days, the Americans armed and supported these groups to the highest level, Haqqani was even invited to the White House where he met the President for his "services" to the state.

Now America shot itself in the foot when they absconded the region, leaving all these frankensteins behind and never have they apologized for it. Today, once again they are negotiating with the Taliban, the same Taliban they were resolute in defeating. Their double talk and double standards do not make much sense.

A real friend would never destroy you by pursuing its own interests while turning a blind eye to future implications of their policies. If ISI cuts all relations with these groups tomorrow, the Americans will remain in contact with them as its in their interest but its not ok if someone else does the same.

To correct the mistakes made, they have to start by looking into the policies that were initiated from the 80's, not what they have been doing now.

 

[Rafi]

Contrary to what the US is saying officially, privately it is convinced that it will have to to do a deal with the Taliban and the tribes in the South. IMHO - it is too late, they should have done this in 2002 when the Taliban was it's weakest, as it is ISAF has virtually admitted defeat, by announcing withdrawal in a handful of years.

Like MU said, you may have the time, but we hold the watches.

 

[DV RULES]

1. Simple reason, the higher the number of targets, the higher the drone strikes. Plus the prime objective is to take out AQ & the foreign militants, which are mostly located on this side as they can't mix up with the locals on the Afghan side. Thus they have come on this side, but they are being hunted down with the help of the ISI, plus in some instances CIA using its own resource, which by the way mostly results in civilians targets.

2. NATO has the power, thus it rants. Their media is on their side, they have influence. But if you are truly looking for knowledge, why don't you do some Googling and see what is happening on the ground. Who has more troops, who has lost more troops, who has more border check posts compared to each other. Why don't you Google about the presentation given by Kiyani to the NATO high ups right in Brussels HQ of NATO. Kindly do it, and hopefully if you look at it as a neutral member, you may see who is doing more. But if you looked at it as an Indian, well i guess i don't have to say what will be the outcome of your analysis.

3. Plz read history, these AQ men are the same ones who came in the 80s to this country to fight someone. The spent years and had local support of intel agencies as well as ordinary people who had gone there to fight the soviets. The got married here, started to live, had friends who shared the same objectives & views with them. So that is why they had chosen Pakistan as they had support from the people. Same case for the Taliban, all these men have lived years inside Pakistan and in Afghanistan. Even current Afghan president spent years in Pakistan, i believe his dad also got killed here. We have no visa system, anyone can cross over and back without needing any passports or visas. Its an open border.

4. If someone has sympathy with AQ/Taliban based on their views, be in military or outside of it, then you need to see the reasons for that. Do think and see why majority of the Muslims hate the US. I myself hate the US, but not its people, rather its policies and the ones who carry those policies. To Muslims around the world, majority of the ills happening to the Muslims is directly attributed to the policies of the US. Thus, people serving the military are human beings and Muslims, their minds also can get influenced if the religion card is played. They are also seeing what the US is doing, supporting Israel who got created with the expulsion of Muslims from their land/homes, what Israel is doing with Muslims with the active support of US, support of dictators ruling Muslim countries, launching wars on Muslim countries.

5. The people in Afghanistan are fighting the occupiers, they are not in Pakistan. In Pakistan you have your own groups which have their own agenda and are terrorizing the people in the name of the religion. Sectarian violence and other objectives behind it. As said, they have different objectives/agendas and using religion to their like. Some militants cross the border and live there, while some cross the border and live here. The ones who are being hunted down in Afghanistan get support on this side of the border and those who are being hunted down on this side of the border, get support on the Afghan side.

6. And yeah, we are still having friendly relations with the Taliban, that is why US/NATO are crying / whining to attack them. The so called taliban which are attacking Pakistan are not those Taliban which we used to have as friends, they are someone else. And not all strategic assets are burst, many of them are still being kept as strategic assets, just wait for a while.

Well said:

Bold Red part: This is what they didn't want to understand but adopt "blame and keep themselves away" policy.
They don't want to consider TTP at all when it operates under their nose.

 

[DV RULES]

ISI has been accused of what CIA itself continues to do when they want to secure their interests.

Many should know that Sarajuddin Haqqani, the leader of the Haqqani Network was an American favorite during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, he was described as "goodness personified" by Charlie Wilson. During those days, the Americans armed and supported these groups to the highest level, Haqqani was even invited to the White House where he met the President for his "services" to the state.

Now America shot itself in the foot when they absconded the region, leaving all these frankensteins behind and never have they apologized for it. Today, once again they are negotiating with the Taliban, the same Taliban they were resolute in defeating. Their double talk and double standards do not make much sense.

A real friend would never destroy you by pursuing its own interests while turning a blind eye to future implications of their policies. If ISI cuts all relations with these groups tomorrow, the Americans will remain in contact with them as its in their interest but its not ok if someone else does the same.

To correct the mistakes made, they have to start by looking into the policies that were initiated from the 80's, not what they have been doing now.

Bold part: Seems like it is not bothering them having hypocrisy in this issue. They don't want to realize that Pakistan has its own regional interests and for the sake of US interests, ISI will not make enemies of Pakistan in the region knowing ground realities.

 

[XYON]

This one is for you John McCain, most of the users here may be too young to remember this iconic song but it serves the purpose well!

Seems like the US still has not learned from its short history of war! This song could very well have an Afghan Theme without changing anything!

My favorite part of the lyrics is when an American Vet says, ''Wasn't Very Sure What Was Going On''. How true even today!

 

[Tshering22]

McCaine is really breathing down your necks, isn't he? And that too being the leader of opposition. If this dude was the US president, it would have been pandemonium out there.

 

[XYON]

McCaine is really breathing down your necks, isn't he? And that too being the leader of opposition. If this dude was the US president, it would have been pandemonium out there.

First of all its McCain and not McCaine!

Second, we have a good cop too on our side, his name is Senator John Kerry!

So we are pretty familiar with this good cop, bad cop routine by the USA. And the dude who is the US President now, has lived in Pakistan as a child so he is also not a problem.

The only lacking on our side are the idiot politicians who have sold their ball-less souls to the US Administration by bending over backwards! The pandemonium would essentially be for the USA if one day we decide to stop all NAT supplies crossing through our territory! Pakistan has a history of dealing with super powers (former USSR and now USA) in this region & still coming out strong. Unlike India, where the best thing the world looks for is SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE reality!

 

[Juice]

lolll.
You are in Afghanistan with primary objective to block any future attack on America from Afghanistan (dismantle of Aq)
secondary objectives women rights ,liberty,freedom and democracy for Afghans.

so my question is what is wrong if we both work on that thing.mean you people leave Afghanistan and we make sure that there will be no attack on American soil from Afghanistan and our tribal areas..actually what is wrong in possibility where we look after your interests in Afghanistan.and you people give us free hands in this region.Definitely very close cooperation is needed for this.
this will not be the new thing.once we were great allies and your spy planes flew from our soil.
but this is one side of story.
your actual purpose in Afghanistan and original purpose of this wot is 2-3 bases in Afghanistan in order to keep check on iran,china.
resources of central asian states and Afghanistan.
very weak Pakistan so that you can execute plan of greater Israel or new middle east.

new middle east or greater Israel is needed so that your Jesus will come second.and you are making preparation of his arrival under the cover of wot.
your opinion on both side of story.

I agree that we should both work towards this goal. And I have also stated that Pakistan would be foolish not to keep options, specialy in light of our abandonment of the region last time we came to play. But Pakistan should find a third way, the Taliban proved to be unpopular (they have a little now...but that's because they aren't in power, and no-one likes to be occupied) As far as bases, that was not in the motivation to attack, it was all about 9/11. (if it was for bases, we would have worked on this the first time we wee there) I am not denying that no that we ARE there, the military wouldn't consider these as a bonus though...

 

[Juice]

Contrary to what the US is saying officially, privately it is convinced that it will have to to do a deal with the Taliban and the tribes in the South. IMHO - it is too late, they should have done this in 2002 when the Taliban was it's weakest, as it is ISAF has virtually admitted defeat, by announcing withdrawal in a handful of years.

Like MU said, you may have the time, but we hold the watches.

You are right that we should have dealt with them then, but hindsight is 20/20. However, it was always said that a political end would be needed. Almost all wars end this way. Even WW2 (the Japanese got to keep the Emperor)