Mullah Omar ready to end al-Qaida ties

[waraich66]

and how about the taliban killing civilians 3-4 more times than ISAF? How about their mass killing of the civilians in the past? how about their destruction of cities and villages in the Past? They are surely fighting the americans, but they are not serving Afghanistan's interests, they are serving somebody else's interest.

You know well majority of killing of civilian is due to IED by accident not intentionally.

Those who supported ISAF forces could be next target of Talaban after ISAF exit.

I hope they will not repeat their past mistakes and restore peace in Afghanistan .

But can you tell us Talaban are fighting for whom ?

 

[Ahmad]

You know well majority of killing of civilian is due to IED by accident not intentionally.

Those who supported ISAF forces could be next target of Talaban after ISAF exit.

I hope they will not repeat their past mistakes and restore peace in Afghanistan .

But can you tell us Talaban are fighting for whom ?

for pakistan's interests and maybe saudis. And you know, majority and all of the killing by the taliban are due to their suicide bombing and their other attacks. IED or whatever you call it causes damage to the alied forces, only some of those attakcs have killed the civilians i can provide you the link if you want to see exactly who cased what. do you want me to remind you of the school attack which killed dozens of school children. they had gathered to wellcome some officials opening a factory in the area. this was a single atrocity by the taliban out of many, and by the way, they captured an afghan journalist along with an italian one, they freed the italian but BEHEADED the afghan muslim journalist - journalist's name was Ajmal Naqshbandi.

 

[S-2]

First, thanks for attempting to substantiate your data by more than simple assertion. It helps immensely.

"The majority, approximately 85% subscribe to the Sunni Hanafi School for interpreting the Quran and Hadith."

Forgive me for not yet reading your document but I promise I shall.

If we accept the C.I.A. World Factbook's estimate of 28,395,716 afghans, that 15% remainder would represent approx. 4.2m afghans that don't subscribe to such. Since we know that 9% of the population is hazara, we can assume that they are virtually all shia, no?

That would mean no less than 2.8 million but the C.I.A. factbook suggest that 19% of the afghan population are shia. No doubt portions of the turkomen, tajik, and uzbek communities as well as some other tribes near the Iranian border? That would constitute nearly 5.6m of all afghans whom are non-sunni. The difference between your data and their's is about 5% of the total population or 1.4m afghans.

None of this speaks to your original assertion, however. Remember, that you contend that 99.9% of the TALIBAN ascribe to a Hanafi interpretation. You could well be correct, especially among the rank and file. My concern would be among their leadership, however and that will naturally prove far more difficult to ascertain without asking them.

Allow me to read your document and consider this some more. We know that wahabbist/salafist donors play a significant funding role in this war. To what extent they've been able to promote their religious vision among the afghan taliban leadership seems important.

Again, I appreciate your efforts.

Thanks.

 

[jarnee]

Trusting Mullah Omar to make peace? You gotta be kidding me. Once this guy gets the money to "make peace", he will channel all of it to his "jihadi" warriors.

A leopard never changes its spots.

Bik gaya bhai bik gaya! , He has found his Jannat here only, after sending many of his people to the Jannat in other world.

 

[S-2]

"You know well majority of killing of civilian is due to IED by accident not intentionally."

Here is the data and the U.N. commentary about afghan civilians. You've seen it before-

U.N.A.M.A. Calls For Safety First As Civilian Casualties Rise By 14%

"In its latest report, the UN Mission recorded 2,412 civilian casualties during 2009, which represents an increase of 14 per cent from 2008, when 2,118 civilian deaths were recorded.

Norah Niland, UNAMA’s Chief Human Rights Officer, indicated:

'Civilian deaths caused by the armed opposition increased by 41 per cent between 2008 and 2009 from 1,160 to 1,630.'

Ms Niland specified:

'Suicide attacks and improvised explosive devices caused more civilian casualties than any other tactic killing 1,054 civilians last year. Civilians are also being deliberately assassinated, abducted and executed if they are perceived as being associated with the Government or the international community.'

The report points at anti-Government elements as being responsible for the largest proportion of civilian deaths, killing three times as many civilians as pro-Government forces.

Ms Niland is adamant:

'It is vital that determined efforts are now made by the insurgency to put into effect the Taliban Code of Conduct that calls on them to protect the lives of civilians.'

The findings of UNAMA’s human rights team also indicate that 2009 saw a reduction of 28 per cent compared with 2008 in the number of civilian casualties caused by pro-Government forces."

Consider your comment in light of the nature of these attacks. We don't know what percentage of afghans died from IED versus suicide bombings but we do know that 1,054 of 1630 killed by the taliban died from those two methods.

First, that means that 576 died from other methods, to include targeted assassination as well as by abduction and execution. Secondly, we know that suicide bombings require that a bomber close on his target. Why would you suggest that in every instance that target would be a military target? It doesn't seem so in Pakistan. In fact, in Pakistan, the majority of suicide attacks are directed at civilians but you'd claim differently in Afghanistan? That seems odd.

Finally, WRT IEDs, they are detonated one of two ways-either command detonation or pressure-plate rigging. How responsible is it for the taliban to plant pressure-detonated IEDs on trails that are as likely to be used by civilians as the military? Equally, how responsible is it for the taliban to command-detonate an IED against a military target when civilians are within lethal range of such?

What governs such decisions for the taliban? We KNOW that Gen. McChrystal has implemented severe guidance on the use of kinetic means of attack where risk applies to civilians. It isn't perfect but a 28% reduction in those killed by ISAF's hand indicates that the message is getting through.

Some thoughts to consider...

Thanks.

 

[waraich66]

for pakistan's interests and maybe saudis. And you know, majority and all of the killing by the taliban are due to their suicide bombing and their other attacks. IED or whatever you call it causes damage to the alied forces, only some of those attakcs have killed the civilians i can provide you the link if you want to see exactly who cased what. do you want me to remind you of the school attack which killed dozens of school children. they had gathered to wellcome some officials opening a factory in the area. this was a single atrocity by the taliban out of many, and by the way, they captured an afghan journalist along with an italian one, they freed the italian but BEHEADED the afghan muslim journalist - journalist's name was Ajmal Naqshbandi.

What is intrest of Pakistan or Saudia in Afghanistan?

Both are US allies supporting US against Talaban , are you joking?

You are proving the common understanding about Afghanistan country of nations (Ujbik,Tajik,Pushtoon ) always fighting with each other .That is reason Scathians ,Alexander,Mogul never wanted to rule Afghanistan.

 

[Ahmad]

What is intrest of Pakistan or Saudia in Afghanistan?

Proxy war and keeping afghanistan under their control and influence.

Both are US allies supporting US against Talaban , are you joking?

Pakistan was made to turn against the taliban after 9/11, pakistan's activitiies have always been seen as suspesious.

You are proving the common understanding about Afghanistan country of nations (Ujbik,Tajik,Pushtoon ) always fighting with each other .That is reason Scathians ,Alexander,Mogul never wanted to rule Afghanistan.

There is surely ethnic problems in Afghanistan, the same in Pakistan. Pakistan have played a prominent role to escalate ethnic tensions in order to achieve what it wants.

 

[waraich66]

What is intrest of Pakistan or Saudia in Afghanistan?

Proxy war and keeping afghanistan under their control and influence.

Both are US allies supporting US against Talaban , are you joking?

Pakistan was made to turn against the taliban after 9/11, pakistan's activitiies have always been seen as suspesious.

You are proving the common understanding about Afghanistan country of nations (Ujbik,Tajik,Pushtoon ) always fighting with each other .That is reason Scathians ,Alexander,Mogul never wanted to rule Afghanistan.

There is surely ethnic problems in Afghanistan, the same in Pakistan. Pakistan have played a prominent role to escalate ethnic tensions in order to achieve what it wants.

You dont have idea about internal economical condition of Pakistan serviving on IMF and World Bank aids and grants , how can they plan to interfer and control Afghanistan .

I think both countries should be merged into each other including Kashmir .Dont worry all your complains will be addressed in Pak-Afghan new US strategy

"Afghanistan and Pakistan have, in many ways, merged into a single problem set, and the way forward in Afghanistan is incomplete without a strategy that includes and assists Pakistan," and also takes into account Pakistan's troubled relationship with rival India, Petraeus said.

http://www.newsmax.com/International/patraeus-afghanistan/2009/01/08/id/327555