Pakistan reaped harvest of blood post-9/11

[third eye]

please tell me which maderchod general came up with this idea. I only hear it from you or Najam Sethi.
this allegation is so ludicrous that whoever thinks in the army should be butt fcked until death.
otherwise whoever makes this allegation or believe that should be made to make love with with a donkey till death

Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, in a rare press briefing, said, “We want a strategic depth in Afghanistan but do not want to control it.”

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/editorial-strategic-death.46183/

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Ghq is blamed by anti army factions for partaking in afghan war for strategic depth. What strategic depth could come from war torn state back in 80s?

Its actually benazir who sometimes was blamed for bringing afghan talibs into gov in 90s to have a friendly next door gov to tap into central asian markets. Benazir and naseer ullah babbar are sometimes credited for that but that doesnot include army in it, they both were civvies. Plus these accusations on BB , i am not sure about their veracity.
Also its not same talibs who started attacking pakistan after american invasion. Not atleadt their lead tribal heads, As of bringing extemism in pakistan cause of afghan war then pakistans suffering cannot be solely blamed on zia ,a whole host of regimes led by usa who share the blame.

Plus after mushy, nawaz , zardaris mqm everyone used these terror groups here and there for their political mileages

for us the stretegic depth from Balochistan point of view is that roads on Mastung, Zhob and Quetta dont become the slauther house of ordinary Pakistanis and specific communities like Hazaras, Punjabis and laborers working along the roads or other projects.
our stretegic depth is that BLA and BRA dont get accomodation from hostile Afhan regimes and Indians cant run the Baloch Samachar camps along the borders.
our strategic depth is that Ajit Dewal and alike fail in their plans against Pakistan. India has setup hundreds of million dollars campaign to disrupt our economic and political stability from Afghan side so we will also use all options to foil their attempts and if it means getting close to Taliban then so be it.

Americans have no issue in dealing and working with ISIS, Indians have no issues in dealing with TTP, BLA. and best part.. even non-Pashton Afghans in the north dont have issues with Taliban (one of the reason why they are able to conduct operations there as well) then why are my elitist liberal jerks having back pain over it? are they the extension of American administration? our first priority and interest is with Pakistan and our policy worked fine and it had active participation and support of KSA and USA during the "democratic" ,"liberal" "open Minded" government of Benazir Bhutto who came up with supporting Talliban to bring stability in Afghanistan. so if someone wants to bitch about Pakistan then they shouldn't be hypocrite extend their criticism to those as well who you are pleasing.

as a sovergn state that belives in its self preservation it is natural that it will want safer borders and friendly at best or at least neutral / indifferent regime accross the other borders when it has to face a hostile enemy on the longest strech of border which has the history of strirring terrorism and insurgencies leading to the breakup of the country.

Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, in a rare press briefing, said, “We want a strategic depth in Afghanistan but do not want to control it.”

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/editorial-strategic-death.46183/

Namastay Sir
I will read up the entire thing first before making a comment but on the face of it it seems bogus
he was a man of very few words in literal sense.

this is news for me because you had to kick him to get words out of his mouth and this is astounding that he will use such a controversial and contradictory statement (as per the definition of the subject matter by the opinion makers).

Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, in a rare press briefing, said, “We want a strategic depth in Afghanistan but do not want to control it.”

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/editorial-strategic-death.46183/

after reading through it
I don't find the article authentic. no date , place or time is given. name of reporter, the occasion etc.
and it is contrived . a half arsed contradictory statement and then the entire article is written on its basis to strengthen the argument about Pakistan's "failed Afghan policy".

if you have seen him speaking, he chooses his words very carefully and makes people wait.
re so called strategic depth on west its no different to Indian strategic depth in the shape of Hasina's government in Bangladesh

but I understand that anyone who believes in "popular notion of strategic depth" will use such sources (authentic or false) to strengthen his/ her argument.

 

[Ocean]

for us the stretegic depth from Balochistan point of view is that roads on Mastung, Zhob and Quetta dont become the slauther house of ordinary Pakistanis and specific communities like Hazaras, Punjabis and laborers working along the roads or other projects.
our stretegic depth is that BLA and BRA dont get accomodation from hostile Afhan regimes and Indians cant run the Baloch Samachar camps along the borders.
our strategic depth is that Ajit Dewal and alike fail in their plans against Pakistan. India has setup hundreds of million dollars campaign to disrupt our economic and political stability from Afghan side so we will also use all options to foil their attempts and if it means getting close to Taliban then so be it.

Americans have no issue in dealing and working with ISIS, Indians have no issues in dealing with TTP, BLA. and best part.. even non-Pashton Afghans in the north dont have issues with Taliban (one of the reason why they are able to conduct operations there as well) then why are my elitist liberal jerks having back pain over it? are they the extension of American administration? our first priority and interest is with Pakistan and our policy worked fine and it had active participation and support of KSA and USA during the "democratic" ,"liberal" "open Minded" government of Benazir Bhutto who came up with supporting Talliban to bring stability in Afghanistan. so if someone wants to bitch about Pakistan then they shouldn't be hypocrite extend their criticism to those as well who you are pleasing.

as a sovergn state that belives in its self preservation it is natural that it will want safer borders and friendly at best or at least neutral / indifferent regime accross the other borders when it has to face a hostile enemy on the longest strech of border which has the history of strirring terrorism and insurgencies leading to the breakup of the country.


Namastay Sir
I will read up the entire thing first before making a comment but on the face of it it seems bogus
he was a man of very few words in literal sense.

this is news for me because you had to kick him to get words out of his mouth and this is astounding that he will use such a controversial and contradictory statement (as per the definition of the subject matter by the opinion makers).


after reading through it
I don't find the article authentic. no date , place or time is given. name of reporter, the occasion etc.
and it is contrived . a half arsed contradictory statement and then the entire article is written on its basis to strengthen the argument about Pakistan's "failed Afghan policy".

if you have seen him speaking, he chooses his words very carefully and makes people wait.
re so called strategic depth on west its no different to Indian strategic depth in the shape of Hasina's government in Bangladesh

but I understand that anyone who believes in "popular notion of strategic depth" will use such sources (authentic or false) to strengthen his/ her argument.

Dont trust an indians comment unless u read completely.
Scroll down in the same link and here are more words in next editorials from kiyani. And perhaps kiyanis first repsonse was to a question on strategic depth asked in a press conference.
Here is more of what he said

"Gen Kiyani said: "Strategic depth does not imply controlling Afghanistan," adding that "if Afghanistan is peaceful, stable and friendly we have our strategic depth because our western border is secure"
And in the same conference he was calling on USA for ratcheting up efforts to bring peace in Afghanistan.

Also this press conference was held in 2010 and it came during time when americans were blaming pakistan for not taking enough action against afghan talibans (just like they are losing their minds now) and indian media in its full frenzy was weaving afghanistan strategic depth false narrative.

 

[Solomon2]

...Terrorism has gone up and spread as a result of the post-9/11 situation in Afghanistan -

You're not allowing people to debate cause-and-effect so this sentence is merely a political position.

 

[Jungibaaz]

You're not allowing people to debate cause-and-effect so this sentence is merely a political position.

We'll allow it within forum rules, please enlighten us all. Instead of posting these political positions of yours, which I might add sound absurd with no further elaboration. Go ahead, we'll wait, this should be good.

 

[third eye]

I don't find the article authentic. no date , place or time is given. name of reporter, the occasion etc.
and it is contrived . a half arsed contradictory statement and then the entire article is written on its basis to strengthen the argument about Pakistan's "failed Afghan policy".

Well, I leave it to you, links to Pak national dailies exist in the article.

Namastay Sir

Appreciate your use of the salutation, reaching out to each other makes the world a better place.

Cheers & God Bless

 

[Solomon2]

We'll allow it within forum rules, please enlighten us all. Instead of posting these political positions of yours, which I might add sound absurd with no further elaboration. Go ahead, we'll wait, this should be good.

The discussion can continue once the relevant thread in the Military History section is restored.

 

[Jungibaaz]

The discussion can continue once the relevant thread in the Military History section is restored.

The discussion can continue right here, why even post your opinion if all you're going to do when challenged is talk about some thread?

I have no idea which thread you've been talking about all this time and what got it closed in the first place. I don't even know what year it was deleted leave alone it's title or location in index. I've checked the section you've mentioned back to late 2014 and couldn't find any thread of yours that has been deleted, and frankly I'd rather not continue searching.

I'd invite you to go ahead and explain the points made about terrorism in Pakistan in your last few posts, or stop wasting our time and yours posting absurd arguments you're not willing to backup here and now.

 

[Solomon2]

I have no idea which thread you've been talking about all this time and what got it closed in the first place. I don't even know what year it was deleted leave alone it's title or location in index. I've checked the section you've mentioned back to late 2014 and couldn't find any thread of yours that has been deleted, and frankly I'd rather not continue searching.

Thank you for making the effort but you really didn't have to go back that far, the thread is from 2017 and discusses a 2007 defeat of the Pakistani Army at the hands of terrorists and the subsequent impact of that defeat on Pakistan's politics and its war on terror.

(I may have posted it in "Pakistan History" instead of the "Military History" thread.)

 

[Jungibaaz]

Thank you for making the effort but you really didn't have to go back that far, the thread is from 2017 and discusses a 2007 defeat of the Pakistani Army at the hands of terrorists and the subsequent impact of that defeat on Pakistan's politics and its war on terror.

(I may have posted it in "Pakistan History" instead of the "Military History" thread.)

I found it and read it, is that all the fuss was about? Look, I understand you being bitter about the thread having been deleted, but how exactly does that one incident in 2007 cause you to post this:

Yes, and Pakistan witnessed an even greater number of "terrorism activities" since the Romans conquered Greece over 2,000 years ago!

My point? Coincidence and association do not necessarily imply cause-and-effect.

Also, there are other threads on the forum, regarding this very topic, you should also know that incident doesn't at all represent our war with them. It followed shortly after two major peace deals we had with the militants, one in 2005, and another just a year earlier in late 2006, we weren't at war with them back then. Since this single small event, we've driven them back from every inch of our soil and paid for it in blood.

But clearly you seem use on that one incident as a reason to deny the obvious that post-9/11 Pakistan saw more terrorist activity as a result of the war in Afghanistan.