Taliban easing peace talks’ conditions

[Armstrong]

@Sashan : Right...that many 'secrets' to an article in Telegraph is the epitome of credibility !

Try this instead : Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over | World news | guardian.co.uk

Supported by whom & supported in what way ? The same ANA that is allegedly skewed in favor of the Non-Pashtuns, is composed of the remnants of the Northern Alliance & has a tendency of blowing the brains out of their NATO/ISAF instructors every now & then or the same Afghan institutions that are so riddled with corruption that they make Zardari look like Jesus Christ ! Yeah good luck betting on them ! Even now when the Taliban run with near impunity throughout the country, no one, least of all the Americans themselves think that the ANA would be able to wrest control of most of Afghanistan from the Taliban !

Read a candid take on the Afghan War by a US Soldier himself instead of articles riddled with talk of 'unnamed intelligence sources' & 'secret reports' : Truth, lies and Afghanistan - February 2012 - Armed Forces Journal - Military Strategy, Global Defense Strategy

Yes we do know the answer to why Pakistan would support the Taliban & had your military planners any sense before going Vietnam style on them...they'd pause & consider our narrative instead of blabbering about how we support 'barbarians' ! But no...cultural sensitivities & local narratives aren't something that Uncle Sam considers...you bomb the sh*t out of problems instead.

Why should I leave out Iraq & all other instances of US hypocrisy & world policing when Afghanistan..nay the Al Qaeeda itself didn't just manifest out of thin air but was instead a reaction to your actions ! Afghanistan, Pakistan & the whole godforsaken War On Terror doesn't exist in a bubble...had the US planners thought about these things the United States probably would have taken a much better approach to this situation ! Instead you declare anyone a terrorist or a supporter of terrorism who doesn't agree with your views, plant WMDs on them that are never found or accuse them of targeting civilians whilst you never indulge in any of that...right ? And then have the temerity of crying 'victim' when the worst elements of that disgruntled society (Read Al Qaeeda & Others) strikes back in the most gruesome ways imaginable !

You want a more constructive & wholesome view on where & why you're wrong - Read up or Listen to the man who hunted OBL for so many years as part of the CIA - Michael Scheuer ! Just go through some of his interviews & talks posted on Youtube ! Hes the guy who was there in the midst of things & was the guy who headed the team who hunted OBL after the above bombings (Pre 9/11).

 

[KingMamba]

@Sashan is mistaken in many points. Did we want to get OBL?? The answer is yes but that was not the main motivating factor that led to the invasions on Afghanistan and then subsequently Iraq. Before 9/11 US government was actually negotiating with the Taliban on pipeline projects and the it was the US who actually protected the Taliban from Iran after the slaughter of Iranian diplomats. It was only after the Taliban started playing hardball and also the fact that they were kicking up a HR sht storm with their treatment of citizens that the US backed away from the Taliban. 9/11 just triggered a pretext for the invasion and BTW the Taliban did not know OBL was going to do something so stupid. In fact Mullah Omar did not even like OBL or his organization and it was actually Ahmad Shah Massoud who invited OBL into Afghanistan. After the Taliban took over the province OBL was living in than OBL switched allegiances and he was also the one who had Massoud assassinated in order to show his worth. If we really wanted we could have captured OBL long ago but we got sidetracked with trying to secure Iraqi pipelines first, which was a huge failure in itself and now Iraq has become a Iranian proxy. Military's do not build nations and it is not our responsibility to remain in Afghanistan any longer, but we will stay because it is in geopolitical interest to secure any and all future pipelines that will pass through Afghan land. Sure the Chinese and India can have a couple of mining rights but as long as we got troops on the ground we will have the final say. Besides we need that Chinese and Indian investments for now anyway because we do not want to front the whole bill in rebuilding Afghanistan but we will always hold the best cards as long as we maintain a military presence in Afghanistan.

 

[KingMamba]

@Sashan : Right...that many 'secrets' to an article in Telegraph is the epitome of credibility !

Try this instead : Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over | World news | guardian.co.uk

Supported by whom & supported in what way ? The same ANA that is allegedly skewed in favor of the Non-Pashtuns, is composed of the remnants of the Northern Alliance & has a tendency of blowing the brains out of their NATO/ISAF instructors every now & then or the same Afghan institutions that are so riddled with corruption that they make Zardari look like Jesus Christ ! Yeah good luck betting on them ! Even now when the Taliban run with near impunity throughout the country, no one, least of all the Americans themselves think that the ANA would be able to wrest control of most of Afghanistan from the Taliban !

Read a candid take on the Afghan War by a US Soldier himself instead of articles riddled with talk of 'unnamed intelligence sources' & 'secret reports' : Truth, lies and Afghanistan - February 2012 - Armed Forces Journal - Military Strategy, Global Defense Strategy

Yes we do know the answer to why Pakistan would support the Taliban & had your military planners any sense before going Vietnam style on them...they'd pause & consider our narrative instead of blabbering about how we support 'barbarians' ! But no...cultural sensitivities & local narratives aren't something that Uncle Sam considers...you bomb the sh*t out of problems instead.

Why should I leave out Iraq & all other instances of US hypocrisy & world policing when Afghanistan..nay the Al Qaeeda itself didn't just manifest out of thin air but was instead a reaction to your actions ! Afghanistan, Pakistan & the whole godforsaken War On Terror doesn't exist in a bubble...had the US planners thought about these things the United States probably would have taken a much better approach to this situation ! Instead you declare anyone a terrorist or a supporter of terrorism who doesn't agree with your views, plant WMDs on them that are never found or accuse them of targeting civilians whilst you never indulge in any of that...right ? And then have the temerity of crying 'victim' when the worst elements of that disgruntled society (Read Al Qaeeda & Others) strikes back in the most gruesome ways imaginable !

You want a more constructive & wholesome view on where & why you're wrong - Read up or Listen to the man who hunted OBL for so many years as part of the CIA - Michael Scheuer ! Just go through some of his interviews & talks posted on Youtube ! Hes the guy who was there in the midst of things & was the guy who headed the team who hunted OBL after the above bombings (Pre 9/11).

We earned the right to police the world since we are the lone superpower. That being said we must change our foreign policy because it is not beneficial to what we are trying to achieve. The good news is that more and more people here are realizing our foreign policy flaws today than even a couple of months ago. The recent article by the Guardian on the drone and the death of children's and the positive reaction by the majority of commentators reflects that along with the comments on CNN which is usually filled with people of the far left who now are changing their views of the situation.

 

[RescueRanger]

They key questions are,

-Who will control ANA? will NATO allow to dilute it by adding Taliban fighters?
-How will be the power sharing/administration?

Given the history, it will lead to more trouble.

Who will control ANA?

regional warlords

will NATO allow to dilute it by adding Taliban fighters?

What do you mean will? It has already happened:

Another concern, officials say, is Karzai’s newly created Afghanistan Public Protection Force, or APPF, which is run by the Afghan Interior Ministry. APPF is now responsible for investigating the backgrounds of recruits for the Afghan army and police, which according to the senior official, “are riddled with Taliban.”

The APPF certifies recruits primarily by checking them against local criminal records and interviewing tribal elders for references, many of whom are sympathetic to the Taliban.

Ideally, Afghan recruits should be subject to psychological screening, including polygraph tests, asserts a high-level military intelligence officer who has done tours at Bagram.

“But we’ve got problems getting our own people polygraphed for their Top Secret clearances due to a lack of polygraphers,” he said. “So imagine trying to get that done on 170,000 ANA (Afghan National Army), or ANP (Afghan National Police).”

: Afghan president increasingly pro-Taliban

How will be the power sharing/administration?

See above.

 

[Sashan]

@Sashan : Right...that many 'secrets' to an article in Telegraph is the epitome of credibility !

Try this instead : Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over | World news | guardian.co.uk

Supported by whom & supported in what way ? The same ANA that is allegedly skewed in favor of the Non-Pashtuns, is composed of the remnants of the Northern Alliance & has a tendency of blowing the brains out of their NATO/ISAF instructors every now & then or the same Afghan institutions that are so riddled with corruption that they make Zardari look like Jesus Christ ! Yeah good luck betting on them ! Even now when the Taliban run with near impunity throughout the country, no one, least of all the Americans themselves think that the ANA would be able to wrest control of most of Afghanistan from the Taliban !

Read a candid take on the Afghan War by a US Soldier himself instead of articles riddled with talk of 'unnamed intelligence sources' & 'secret reports' : Truth, lies and Afghanistan - February 2012 - Armed Forces Journal - Military Strategy, Global Defense Strategy

Yes we do know the answer to why Pakistan would support the Taliban & had your military planners any sense before going Vietnam style on them...they'd pause & consider our narrative instead of blabbering about how we support 'barbarians' ! But no...cultural sensitivities & local narratives aren't something that Uncle Sam considers...you bomb the sh*t out of problems instead.

If your problem is the skewed nos in favor of Non-Pashtuns, have the Pashtuns come to the peace table and fight the elections and have your folks(pasthuns) join the ANA. Will ANA survive or not is upto the people over there after 2014 but we are doing what is rightful at this moment. When you are 40% of the population, can't you pull your might here? If you can't or don't want to, then stop whining. Do not compare it with Vietnam mate. Afghanistan is more of a reaction when we were left with no option. Do not tell me it is about oil - The negotiations might have happened before but Bush or not - any President would have been foolish to not go by people's sentiments.

As for cultural sensitivities, stop seeing everything through religious angle and Afghanistan is not your country. You have your interests and you were/are a player just like us pre-9/11 and you never had altruistic intentions.

Why should I leave out Iraq & all other instances of US hypocrisy & world policing when Afghanistan..nay the Al Qaeeda itself didn't just manifest out of thin air but was instead a reaction to your actions ! Afghanistan, Pakistan & the whole godforsaken War On Terror doesn't exist in a bubble...had the US planners thought about these things the United States probably would have taken a much better approach to this situation ! Instead you declare anyone a terrorist or a supporter of terrorism who doesn't agree with your views, plant WMDs on them that are never found or accuse them of targeting civilians whilst you never indulge in any of that...right ? And then have the temerity of crying 'victim' when the worst elements of that disgruntled society (Read Al Qaeeda & Others) strikes back in the most gruesome ways imaginable !

You want a more constructive & wholesome view on where & why you're wrong - Read up or Listen to the man who hunted OBL for so many years as part of the CIA - Michael Scheuer ! Just go through some of his interviews & talks posted on Youtube ! Hes the guy who was there in the midst of things & was the guy who headed the team who hunted OBL after the above bombings (Pre 9/11).

If you want to discuss about Iraq and other instance of US hypocrisy then I can show you numerous instances of your country's hypocrisy as well mate. Everyone has geopolitical aspirations and every country does what they can to achieve those aspirations. You wanted strategic depth. Bush and his cohorts wanted oil in Iraq. I will not defend why we went into Iraq as personally I felt it was not the right thing but I will not allow some especially from Pakistan to take the moral highground by bringing in Iraq. That is my position here. Beyond that, if you want to debate, it is only a slippery slope.

As for Al Qaeda striking back, let me know whether your stated position is US did it - so they have struck back? If so, there is nothing for us to discuss here as you seem to justify Al Qaeda's actions.

 

[Sashan]

@Sashan is mistaken in many points. Did we want to get OBL?? The answer is yes but that was not the main motivating factor that led to the invasions on Afghanistan and then subsequently Iraq. Before 9/11 US government was actually negotiating with the Taliban on pipeline projects and the it was the US who actually protected the Taliban from Iran after the slaughter of Iranian diplomats. It was only after the Taliban started playing hardball and also the fact that they were kicking up a HR sht storm with their treatment of citizens that the US backed away from the Taliban. 9/11 just triggered a pretext for the invasion and BTW the Taliban did not know OBL was going to do something so stupid. In fact Mullah Omar did not even like OBL or his organization and it was actually Ahmad Shah Massoud who invited OBL into Afghanistan. After the Taliban took over the province OBL was living in than OBL switched allegiances and he was also the one who had Massoud assassinated in order to show his worth. If we really wanted we could have captured OBL long ago but we got sidetracked with trying to secure Iraqi pipelines first, which was a huge failure in itself and now Iraq has become a Iranian proxy. Military's do not build nations and it is not our responsibility to remain in Afghanistan any longer, but we will stay because it is in geopolitical interest to secure any and all future pipelines that will pass through Afghan land. Sure the Chinese and India can have a couple of mining rights but as long as we got troops on the ground we will have the final say. Besides we need that Chinese and Indian investments for now anyway because we do not want to front the whole bill in rebuilding Afghanistan but we will always hold the best cards as long as we maintain a military presence in Afghanistan.

Mate - I am not mistaken with my points. What you have done here is add more details like US preventing Iran from going against Taliban. If Taliban did not know that OBL is going to attempt something, then they are foolish as OBL was a fugitive who was running away from different countries. It was guilt by association. Period.

Bro - Let me keep it simple for you.

Did US talk to Taliban for extradition of OBL post 1998 bombings and Taliban denied having OBL? - yes
Did US talk to Taliban pre 9/11 about pipeline? - yes they did.
Is that the reason for going to Afghanistan? No
The real reason? 9/11 as no president could have ignored the people's sentiments at that time.
Going to Iraq is for Oil? Either that or Bush had a personal agenda as the Saddam tried to go against senior Bush - Either way I felt it was wrong from day 1 - So I will not justify that.
If we want to maintain a presence - Yes - I would say - why would we want to concede the space to Russia, China, India, Pakistan or Iran? We have to look for ourselves as well.

 

[Armstrong]

If your problem is the skewed nos in favor of Non-Pashtuns, have the Pashtuns come to the peace table and fight the elections and have your folks(pasthuns) join the ANA. Will ANA survive or not is upto the people over there after 2014 but we are doing what is rightful at this moment. When you are 40% of the population, can't you pull your might here? If you can't or don't want to, then stop whining. Do not compare it with Vietnam mate. Afghanistan is more of a reaction when we were left with no option. Do not tell me it is about oil - The negotiations might have happened before but Bush or not - any President would have been foolish to not go by people's sentiments.

Oh so you think the Pashtuns haven't tried ! Why do you think the Taliban movement metamorphed from being a purely Islamist nut-job movement into being one interspersed with Pashtun Nationalism in Afghanistan ? Because you failed to understand the dynamics or the history of Afghanistan & failed to appreciate the enmity that existed between the Pashtuns & the Non-Pashtuns when you included the Northern Alliance into both the Government & the so-called Afghan National Army.

And how is that justified 'No President would go against the People'...what kind of 'blood lust or warmongering' are we talking about here ? You asked the Taliban to hand over OBL...they agreed to hand him over to a neutral country provided you show the evidence of his involvement...you said 'foOk it' & invaded the country ! Yup that sounds pretty 'reactionary' to me !

As for cultural sensitivities, stop seeing everything through religious angle and Afghanistan is not your country. You have your interests and you were/are a player just like us pre-9/11 and you never had altruistic intentions.

Where did I mention 'religion' for me to be accused of seeing everything through a 'religious angle' ? Nor did I call 'Afghanistan' as my country !

The cultural sensitivities part was to impress upon you the inherent flaw in building a Non-Pashtun dominated army, bureaucracy & government comprising of the same element who had fought with the Pashtuns for the last decade or so. That failure to appreciate the structural & historical dynamics of Afghanistan is the reason why even now the Taliban refuse to recognize the Karzai Government with their Farsi-khwan Pashtuns & Tajiks & Uzbeks who have more than enough bad blood with the Pashtuns of the South & East of the country, even when the United States has tried multiple times to bring them to the negotiating table.

And no we never had any altruistic intentions when we nurtured & supported the 'Taliban'...we had 'damage containment' in mind to try to put an end to the bloody & vicious civil war that raged on for years in Afghanistan between 10 dozen different warlords each with their private armies & their share of the stockpile of weapons the Russians left when they ran from Afghanistan. Where most of the Western World, the Muslim World & Pakistan had been rooting for the so-called Mujahideen (many of whom now are the Taliban) no one came forth with any developmental aid or solution to bring some semblance of peace to a war torn Afghanistan where generations had grow up to knowing nothing but death & destruction. Pakistan tried to do the best of a pretty foOked up situation where our reward for being on the 'winning side' was to be slapped with sanctions & being left with a self-imploding Afghanistan & thousands of Afghan refugees pouring into Pakistan almost every day !

We are guilty of short-sightedness & supporting the 'Afghan Jihad' championed by Uncle Sam !

If you want to discuss about Iraq and other instance of US hypocrisy then I can show you numerous instances of your country's hypocrisy as well mate. Everyone has geopolitical aspirations and every country does what they can to achieve those aspirations. You wanted strategic depth. Bush and his cohorts wanted oil in Iraq. I will not defend why we went into Iraq as personally I felt it was not the right thing but I will not allow some especially from Pakistan to take the moral highground by bringing in Iraq. That is my position here. Beyond that, if you want to debate, it is only a slippery slope.

As for Al Qaeda striking back, let me know whether your stated position is US did it - so they have struck back? If so, there is nothing for us to discuss here as you seem to justify Al Qaeda's actions.

Indeed I too am more than capable of sketching a long list of Indian hypocritical behavior through our 65 year existence to even the odds had I mentioned 'American Hypocrisy' in that context. However as it so happens my meaning has been lost in the quoted part; Iraq wasn't mentioned because of the 'oil' nor were dictatorships propped up in the Muslim world mentioned because I like writing long replies...it was simply to apprise you to the 'perception' it created in the Muslim World & how behind every militancy & every act of terrorism is a political motive. In the case of Al Qaeeda the US desire to control Muslim countries by supporting corrupt to the core, nepotistic & dictatorial regimes has irked more than a few Muslims over the years & in that was created an audience that provided the perfect opportunity for Al-Qaeeda & ***** like them to recruit from ! That & the growing negative perception of the United States & her failing credibility amongst the Muslims further compounded by the callousness or the retardedness of US foreign policy with respect to the Muslim world in general & the AF-PAK region in particular has strengthened the AL-Qaeeda hand even further.

Al-Qaeeda didn't lob a bomb into the World Trade Centre because of Jewish bankers working there or democracy or McDonalds or the Western way of life...they struck it because of the incessant meddling of the US in the affairs of the Muslim World where the champion of 'democracy' not only facilitates dictators to stay in power but has the temerity of jumping on the democratic bandwagon once the people initiate a campaign for their democratic right ! In that disgruntled audience the most vicious, most ****** & worst segment arose in the form of the Al-Qaeeda & to get back at Uncle Sam they smashed two planes into the World Trade Centre killing thousands of innocent people !

You guys still can't see can you ? They have won & you but most of all 'us' have lost ! OBL in his initial interviews argued not for the complete destruction of the United States but by giving your economy a serious blow, by stretching your forces thin, by creating Afghanistan into a quagmire & by creating Anti-Americanism in the Muslim World the likes of which there never was ! And they have won on all of those fronts ! But who really looses ? You guys who are sitting in your cosy apartments in Manhattan or New York ? Its us...we're the ones who suffer the fallout of your foOked policies because the suicide bombers may not be able to reach Washington but they can sure as hell bomb the sh*t out of Peshawar, Lahore & Karachi !

And if you think that an attempt to understand the raison detre for why the Al-Qaeeda was born & why the US War On Terror, despite all the chest thumping to the contrary, has been a monstrous failure, is indicative of support for the Taliban or Al-Qaeeda than my friend there really isn't a need to discuss this further !

P.S A word to the wise - I didn't mention Michael Scheuer just to score points....listen to him....he makes a good case for why & where the US went wrong with the WOT & her foreign policy !

 

[FaujHistorian]

......
If you want to discuss about Iraq and other instance of US hypocrisy then I can show you numerous instances of your country's hypocrisy as well mate.....

Two wrongs don't make it right. Do they?

 

[Sashan]

Oh so you think the Pashtuns haven't tried ! Why do you think the Taliban movement metamorphed from being a purely Islamist nut-job movement into being one interspersed with Pashtun Nationalism in Afghanistan ? Because you failed to understand the dynamics or the history of Afghanistan & failed to appreciate the enmity that existed between the Pashtuns & the Non-Pashtuns when you included the Northern Alliance into both the Government & the so-called Afghan National Army.

So you meant to say 60% should not be included into the government - is that what you are stating here when you say we hurt Pasthun sensitivies - if so, so be it.

And how is that justified 'No President would go against the People'...what kind of 'blood lust or warmongering' are we talking about here ? You asked the Taliban to hand over OBL...they agreed to hand him over to a neutral country provided you show the evidence of his involvement...you said 'foOk it' & invaded the country ! Yup that sounds pretty 'reactionary' to me !

What is that had Taliban demostrated before in terms of trust for us to trust them to handover OBL? So you mean 3000 deaths of ours is something which needs to be dealth with diplomatically? Mind it - especially after we had atleast 2 prior incidents. So tell me should we show the other cheek?

Where did I mention 'religion' for me to be accused of seeing everything through a 'religious angle' ? Nor did I call 'Afghanistan' as my country !

I apologize especially knowing you seeing it wrongly as a religious one.

The cultural sensitivities part was to impress upon you the inherent flaw in building a Non-Pashtun dominated army, bureaucracy & government comprising of the same element who had fought with the Pashtuns for the last decade or so.

That failure to appreciate the structural & historical dynamics of Afghanistan is the reason why even now the Taliban refuse to recognize the Karzai Government with their Farsi-khwan Pashtuns & Tajiks & Uzbeks who have more than enough bad blood with the Pashtuns of the South & East of the country, even when the United States has tried multiple times to bring them to the negotiating table.

Again my question stands - 60% should not be represented in the government? Is that what it is?

And no we never had any altruistic intentions when we nurtured & supported the 'Taliban'...we had 'damage containment' in mind to try to put an end to the bloody & vicious civil war that raged on for years in Afghanistan between 10 dozen different warlords each with their private armies & their share of the stockpile of weapons the Russians left when they ran from Afghanistan. Where most of the Western World, the Muslim World & Pakistan had been rooting for the so-called Mujahideen (many of whom now are the Taliban) no one came forth with any developmental aid or solution to bring some semblance of peace to a war torn Afghanistan where generations had grow up to knowing nothing but death & destruction. Pakistan tried to do the best of a pretty foOked up situation where our reward for being on the 'winning side' was to be slapped with sanctions &
being left with a self-imploding Afghanistan & thousands of Afghan refugees pouring into Pakistan almost every day !
We are guilty of short-sightedness & supporting the 'Afghan Jihad' championed by

Uncle Sam !

In retrospect we made the mistake in proping up religious sentiments to win the cold war - but we achieved the larger goal - winning the cold war but lets say we made our mistake. But do not say it is damage containment on your part due to refugees or something else - you fought with Taliban for strategic depth reason.

Indeed I too am more than capable of sketching a long list of Indian hypocritical behavior through our 65 year existence to even the odds had I mentioned 'American Hypocrisy' in that context.

Leave India out mate as I am not taking a position in favor of India.

However as it so happens my meaning has been lost in the quoted part; Iraq wasn't mentioned because of the 'oil' nor were dictatorships propped up in the Muslim world mentioned because I like writing long replies...it was simply to apprise you to the 'perception' it created in the Muslim World & how behind every militancy & every act of terrorism is a political motive. In the case of Al Qaeeda the US desire to control Muslim countries by supporting corrupt to the core, nepotistic & dictatorial regimes has irked more than a few Muslims over the years & in that was created an audience that provided the perfect opportunity for Al-Qaeeda & ***** like them to recruit from ! That & the growing negative perception of the United States & her failing credibility amongst the Muslims further compounded by the callousness or the retardedness of US foreign policy with respect to the Muslim world in general & the AF-PAK region in particular has strengthened the AL-Qaeeda hand even further.

Al-Qaeeda didn't lob a bomb into the World Trade Centre because of Jewish bankers working there or democracy or McDonalds or the Western way of life...they struck it because of the incessant meddling of the US in the affairs of the Muslim World where the champion of 'democracy' not only facilitates dictators to stay in power but has the temerity of jumping on the democratic
bandwagon once the people initiate a campaign for their democratic right ! In that disgruntled audience the most vicious, most ****** & worst segment arose in the form of the Al-Qaeeda & to get back at Uncle Sam they smashed two planes into the World Trade Centre killing thousands of innocent people !

You guys still can't see can you ? They have won & you but most of all 'us' have lost ! OBL in his initial interviews argued not for the complete destruction of the United States but by giving your economy a serious blow, by stretching your forces thin, by creating Afghanistan into a quagmire & by creating Anti-Americanism in the Muslim World the likes of which there never was ! And they have won on all of those fronts ! But who really looses ? You guys who are sitting in your cosy apartments in Manhattan or New York ? Its us...we're the ones who suffer the fallout of your foOked policies because the suicide bombers
may not be able to reach Washington but they can sure as hell bomb the sh*t out of Peshawar, Lahore & Karachi !

Again mate - lets not take the moral high ground here. We made mistakes sometimes and at other times we got it right. We are a global player and we will play our game to keep ourselves ahead. China plays that. Russia play that game. You play that game. So let us not go there.

As for suicide bombers in Peshawar, Lahore and Karachi - I sympathize with the common people who suffer at the hands of the generals and politicians and geopolitics.

And if you think that an attempt to understand the raison detre for why the Al-Qaeeda was born & why the US War On Terror, despite all the chest thumping to the contrary, has been a monstrous failure, is indicative of support for the Taliban or Al-Qaeeda than my friend there really isn't a need to discuss this further !

Agreed. Let us not discuss further about Al-Qaeda.

P.S A word to the wise - I didn't mention Michael Scheuer just to points....listen to him....he makes a good case for why & where the US went wrong with the WOT & her foreign policy !

Mate - As I said we made our mistake but I am concrete with my opinion - Afghanistan - we are right, Iraq - we are wrong. I will look up Michael Scheuer sometime - not now but would.

Two wrongs don't make it right. Do they?

It is not - we made our mistakes(not in Afghanistan after 9/11) - that is my stated position. But Pakistan made mistakes as well - so one should not take a moral high ground over other.

 

[batmannow]

So you meant to say 60% should not be included into the government - is that what you are stating here when you say we hurt Pasthun sensitivies - if so, so be it.




What is that had Taliban demostrated before in terms of trust for us to trust them to handover OBL? So you mean 3000 deaths of ours is something which needs to be dealth with diplomatically? Mind it - especially after we had atleast 2 prior incidents. So tell me should we show the other cheek?



I apologize especially knowing you seeing it wrongly as a religious one.




Again my question stands - 60% should not be represented in the government? Is that what it is?





In retrospect we made the mistake in proping up religious sentiments to win the cold war - but we achieved the larger goal - winning the cold war but lets say we made our mistake. But do not say it is damage containment on your part due to refugees or something else - you fought with Taliban for strategic depth reason.



Leave India out mate as I am not taking a position in favor of India.



Again mate - lets not take the moral high ground here. We made mistakes sometimes and at other times we got it right. We are a global player and we will play our game to keep ourselves ahead. China plays that. Russia play that game. You play that game. So let us not go there.

As for suicide bombers in Peshawar, Lahore and Karachi - I sympathize with the common people who suffer at the hands of the generals and politicians and geopolitics.




Agreed. Let us not discuss further about Al-Qaeda.



Mate - As I said we made our mistake but I am concrete with my opinion - Afghanistan - we are right, Iraq - we are wrong. I will look up Michael Scheuer sometime - not now but would.



It is not - we made our mistakes(not in Afghanistan after 9/11) - that is my stated position. But Pakistan made mistakes as well - so one should not take a moral high ground over other.

Sense started prevaling!
Good to see, ya we all got wrong?
Heavy left rights,both of you guys, bt by giving the keys of afghanistan back to talibans will not work either, it not permenent solution?
Just because you guys , really going for iran doesn't mean don't clean your lefted mess?
World hve seen your solutions in IRAQ, & will keep looking in afghanistan?
Ya, I know moraly afghanistan has been losted in US public eyes you guys wants to present IRAN as new big hit movie, cause that's where the oil is?again?
& off-course KSA-UAE-kuwaties & budy ISRAEL all are afraid off the rise of a economicly , & militrly strong IRAN , which is reason why you leaving afghanistan?
To show up your rightouesness to the world, good show guys good show!

 

[Armstrong]

@Sashan : I didn't say that you ignore the 60% !

I implied that you stop ignoring the other 40%; the current setup is full of Ex-Northern Alliance guys who were as bad as the Taliban & representative of the two extremes of the ethnic group ! That failure to understand the structural makeup of Afghanistan & the history that went with it, whether deliberate or a case of oversight, is the reason why this war has continued to prolong for so long & why you'd see Tribes divided between Pakistan & Afghanistan fighting in unison against what is perceived as 'Anti-Pashtun' Afghan establishment propped up by the United States; so its essentially 'puritanical Islam' & 'ethno-linguistic nationalism' all rolled into one what the Taliban Movement has metamorphed into !

As far as the Taliban's lack of credibility is concerned ! What were you to loose ? Nothing...except some inflated egos ! You should have taken that offer up & explored it for the credibility or the lack thereof it presented instead of blowing that option up with such reckless abandonment & proceeding the way you guys did ! We don't fight the Taliban because we can't drive them out...we don't fight them, assuming that we'd want to, because for the Taliban - Winning is to 'not loose' ! How can anyone win against something like that ? They'd never surrender, after them the next generation will pick up arms & continue the struggle & after the next, the next - You cannot win against such a mentality especially when you've got something to loose & they don't ! No one can win against such a mentality ! For a thousand years or more the Pashtuns, being the fiercely independent race they are, have fought against every single invader that has ever visited these lands & have either died trying or have driven them off their lands.

As for why Pakistan created the Taliban : I've said what our narrative is & indeed we appreciated a Pro-Pakistan government in Afghanistan especially considering the fact that Afghanistan was the only country in '47 that opposed our inclusion in the United Nations, refused to recognize the International border separating Pakistan & Afghanistan, claimed Pakistani lands up to Jhelum (thats in the heartland of Punjab), hosted Baloch militants during the first & second Baloch uprisings, raked up the Pashtunistan issue & attacked us in '54/55 in Bajaur to claim our lands before the Bajauri Tribals kicked them out ! So yes we do have a history & Afghanistan has been a bitter to Pakistan since the beginning & consequently an Afghanistan post-Soviet withdrawal isn't as anti Pakistan as the one 'pre' it was indeed an objective but this vaunted 'strategic depth' issue is a farce for anyone who has been to Pakistan knows that between Balochistan & KPK we've got more than enough strategic depth due to topograhical changes between Punjab-Sindh & the Balochistan-KPK divide & all our major cities being fairly close to the border makes any Indian incursion not only a nightmare for the Indians to hold onto for even a few days but also a priority for us to defend at all costs. We don't need strategic depth !

As for the 'moral high ground'...dude no ones taking the moral high ground it is our fault & our fault alone that we're in this mess ! Like Turkey we could have refused to allow Pakistani sovereign territory to be used for the Afghanistan War or more so our stupidity at opposing the Soviet Union well before their presence in Afghanistan despite them extending a hand of friendship was a mistake that our succeeding generations will castigate us for ! And there is no escaping the fact that Pakistan hasn't acted like a 'sovereign state' since perhaps the '50s when Liaquat Ali Khan died & have continued to sell ourselves short to the highest bidder in a regressive cycle of moral, intellectual, economic, social & political prostitution ! But thats for another time !

Okay...enough of this talk this was my last post ! Take care !

I was supposed to read up on the Forex Market today & yet I've wasted most of the day on PDF !

 

[Pakistanisage]

Pixels on a laptop screen are normally not representative of realities on ground. Take it from me... Taliban are going to reconcile with USA.. Give them a permanent base in Afghanistan (like they had in Japan).. and will be the biggest headache for China and Pakistan in decades to come.

Oh, you forgot one more prediction. Taliban will invite India to come and open few bases in Afghanistan.

I mean if you are going to have wishful thinking and start dreaming, why just stop with American bases. Why not go all the way to la la land.

There is absolute no logic in your assertion and a total disconnect with realit my friend.

 

[Sashan]

Okay...enough of this talk this was my last post ! Take care !

I was supposed to read up on the Forex Market today & yet I've wasted most of the day on PDF !

Good you stopped this mate - I do not always get into intense discussions on a weekday (luckily things are slow at office due to holiday season) and I lost my evening as well - Have made up my mind not to repeat it again.

Sense started prevaling!
Good to see, ya we all got wrong?
Heavy left rights,both of you guys, bt by giving the keys of afghanistan back to talibans will not work either, it not permenent solution?
Just because you guys , really going for iran doesn't mean don't clean your lefted mess?
World hve seen your solutions in IRAQ, & will keep looking in afghanistan?
Ya, I know moraly afghanistan has been losted in US public eyes you guys wants to present IRAN as new big hit movie, cause that's where the oil is?again?
& off-course KSA-UAE-kuwaties & budy ISRAEL all are afraid off the rise of a economicly , & militrly strong IRAN , which is reason why you leaving afghanistan?
To show up your rightouesness to the world, good show guys good show!

Lets leave out Iran as I do not get into discussions about a topic if I do not believe in something.

 

[KingMamba]

Mate - I am not mistaken with my points. What you have done here is add more details like US preventing Iran from going against Taliban. If Taliban did not know that OBL is going to attempt something, then they are foolish as OBL was a fugitive who was running away from different countries. It was guilt by association. Period.

Bro - Let me keep it simple for you.

Did US talk to Taliban for extradition of OBL post 1998 bombings and Taliban denied having OBL? - yes
Did US talk to Taliban pre 9/11 about pipeline? - yes they did.
Is that the reason for going to Afghanistan? No
The real reason? 9/11 as no president could have ignored the people's sentiments at that time.
Going to Iraq is for Oil? Either that or Bush had a personal agenda as the Saddam tried to go against senior Bush - Either way I felt it was wrong from day 1 - So I will not justify that.
If we want to maintain a presence - Yes - I would say - why would we want to concede the space to Russia, China, India, Pakistan or Iran? We have to look for ourselves as well.

You are missing the point, we would have invaded anyway because it was in our interest to do so.

 

[FaujHistorian]

Two wrongs don't make it right. Do they?

...


It is not - we made our mistakes(not in Afghanistan after 9/11) - that is my stated position. But Pakistan made mistakes as well - so one should not take a moral high ground over other.

fair enough.

Thank you.