As we didn't provide the muscle, we can assume there's only a few areas of our possible involvement-target intelligence and operational planning. I discount the latter but others suggest the former. Target intelligence is without question critical.
Provision of intelligence, whether specific or not, I have little issue with. However, what sparked of the latest exchange was the insinuation in the original NYT article that the raid itself was some sort of a joint operation between CIA and ISI officers.
What kind of intelligence was provided, whether it was critical or not, I will reiterate remains to be seen.
Dissembling strawman. Finding anonymous sources isn't an American media specialty. Common enough in your own media.
Finding anonymous sources is common enough, using them to continuously push lies and malign and/or belittle the other side is an art perfected by the US establishment, one I have long pointed out, and you can see both 'belittling and maligning' in the reports out of the NYT and the WSJ respectively.
"at most" the intelligence serves as the basis for the arrest. Nothing happens otherwise. Our role was critical if true and it appears almost certainly true.
Again, whether the intelligence provided, and therefore the US role, was critical or not remains to be seen. The first NYT article quoted US sources as suggesting a joint raid was carried out, a day or so later that was toned down to something implying intelligence cooperation. The WaPo story from this morning suggests a CIA listening center in Karachi, but then again suggests a joint operation. And then there are the dozen theories and speculation about what actually happened - luck, coincidence, or deliberate target.
Carlotta Gall quotes a Pakistani intel officer as stating that they were after Baradar 3 weeks ago, and she has been in Pakistan a long time. Other say Pakistan had no clue who they were arresting. From all of this it is apparent that the various sources these people are being fed from have differing views on the details of the Operation and the kind of cooperation involved, and therefore I see no reason to simply accept your POV without credible evidence that the US role was critical in these arrests.
Some more Pakistani sources might come to light in the next few days in the Pakistani press, or we might get more information through our own contacts, substantiating one of these accounts, in which case I'll gladly accept that to be the case - but not till then.
I'll ask for your sources on what did happen and avoid your speculation on what you purport previous. I can provide one link that suggests B. Mehsud killing came following meetings between Leon Panetta and Pasha and include considerable communications intercepts and satelliate imagery-both areas of U.S. intelligence expertise.
My sources are multiple links in the Pakistani media quoting Pakistani military and intelligence sources, that have been provided to you time and time again when we have had this argument in the past. Your source is likely an American one - I do not doubt that there were meetings between the CIA and ISI that led to Mehsud finally being targeted, after multiple Pakistani requests to target him (when Pakistan forces had intelligence on his location) during Bush's last year were not taken up. Based on those accounts, Pakistani intelligence pin pointed B Mehsud's location multiple times without relying on US technology, so there is nothing to suggest that the strike that took out Mehsud was not directed to that particular compound by Pakistan intelligence once again.
H. Mehsud, OTOH, was almost certainly ours and I've seen no indication whatsoever that Pakistani intelligence developed that target.
I have seen no indication that US intelligence developed H Mehsud as a target on its own. Pakistan has on multiple occasions managed to almost take out both Falzullah and Faqir Mohammed, all without relying on US technology. That alone points to the effectiveness of Pakistani intelligence in locating targets.
Bull. Our satelliate communications intercepts are integral. How do you think Baradar was popped? Imagrey? Ours.
The extent of your contribution remains clouded given the multitude of different accounts presented in your own media and even by one news organization.
The security of Afghan borders is the responsibility of the Afghan government. No other. That's plain as day. ISAF involvement extends only to the training and equipping of Afghan Border Police and customs officials. Our ground troops don't guard border crossings nor do our advisors.
Don't guard the crossings then, but unless Baradar and various other Afghan Taliban commanders managed to teleport themselves to their final destination in Afghanistan, they traveled, ate, slept and lived in territory that was under the control of ISAF, and you failed to detect them - so before accusing Pakistan of 'willful duplicity', get your own act together.
Taliban rule provided the sanctuary of Al Qaeda bases and the subsequent attack upon America. That was indeed a mess which transcended national boundaries and had global implications reaching beyond simply America. We don't know what would have happened had you not sponsored the Taliban but we do know of Al Qaeda's return to Afghanistan in 1995 and their alignment with the taliban then.
Taliban rule did not provide sanctuary to AQ to conduct terrorist attacks on foreign targets, nor were the Taliban aware of OBL's plans. The Taliban did in fact offer two choices after 911 - a trial in Afghanistan or a trial in a third country. The US chose to not even provide the Taliban with evidence and build a case for deportation, let along explore the options of trial in a third country. Hence the subsequent mess is one of YOUR making.
What would have happened had Pakistan not supported the Taliban would be that the Taliban would have ruled a smaller chunk of Afghanistan, and OBL would have managed to stay in Afghanistan as he had been, either by calling in favors with the Taliban or whichever local warlord held sway in the region in which he was based, and OBL would have likely gone ahead with all his plans.
The Taliban had little to provide OBL - but OBL had plenty of money to win favor, whether from the Taliban or XYZ warlord.
Beyond the preference of some here, including you, for the stability offered by the taliban- I see none. The brutality manifested upon civil society no better and possibly worse. Certainly catastrophically worse for the prospects of women. Ask UNITY how he enjoyed taliban rule.
Ask some of villagers whose boys are raped by Afghan police, and whose livelihood is then extorted from them by these same rapists whether they enjoy the current Karzai regime.
Too many disagree. We fight their soldiers and ground commanders. That's why it's called WAR. Physical support? I consider Haqqani owning Miram Shah as pretty damned "physical". That very much appears by agreement. At least one Haqqani will say so. See Rohde/NYT and call him a liar. I won't.
Well by that yardstick I would have to consider the fact that Mullah Fazlullah decamped to North Eastern Afghanistan and Qari Zia-ur-Rehman's repeated forays into FATA to attack Pakistani positions and their threats to reignite the Taliban insurgency in Bajaur, Mohmand and Swat as evidence of 'material support' by the US to terrorists attacking Pakistan.
You cannot have it both ways S-2. For the umpteenth time, get your own house in order before making spurious allegations against Pakistan. You are a smart enough fellow, yet your proclivity to swallow the blatantly obvious propaganda pushed by the US establishment is breathtaking.
Dissemblance. The largest offensive hardly constitutes the ONLY offensive. You know too well that ISAF has been engaged in continuous combat with taliban forces since 2002 and INTENSIVE combat since 2006.
Yet the Taliban continue to maintain 'sanctuary' bases, training camps and entire parallel governments on Afghan soil ostensibly under your control. The same on Pakistani soil you claim is evidence of Pakistani duplicity, so why should the US not be judged by the same yardstick? You point to peace deals by Pakistan - i say they were/are an unsuccessful policy to bring about a resolution to the insurgency, but your own 'military' solutions have quite obviously been just as ineffective.
So in terms of results, I see little difference between peace deals and whatever ISAF has done in the past 9 years that has allowed the Taliban to maintain sanctuary in Afghanistan.
Virtually all outside of Pakistan disagree. Not obvious, therefore, to the rest of mankind.
I can see the bias in the reporting first hand - remember the suspicion and poisonous commentary in the West that greeted Pakistani Operations in Swat and SW. Similar tactics employed by NATO have the same commentators in rapture, praising the glorious Fuhrers MChrystal and Petraeus. When Pakistan announce the SW ops in advance we were allowing the Taliban leadership to escape, us deceitful Pakistanis, whereas the US announcement in advance of the assault on Marja is because of whatever Mchrystal says it is.
Yes, the double standards have been pointed out quite clearly in the comments immediately above and preceding that.
Not if the leadership direction, supply, R&R, and serious medical support is found in Pakistan it isn't.
Oh, I must have missed the ambulance service from Marja, Kunar and Nuristan to Peshawar. The fact is that the Taliban governors and commanders involved in the actual implementation of policy and execution of the insurgency are based in Afghanistan. That many have been arrested and killed by ISAF bears testimony to that. So to the reports that the Taliban imposed taxes on the poppy crop to raise resources, and Hawala and Hundi don't suddenly stop at the Afghan-Pakistan border.
You have nothing.
They failed, over and over again, as amply warned against and predicted by the rest of us. Afghanistan, IMHO, will learn the same should Karzai attempt serious negotiations and the insurgency isn't sufficiently crushed first. That will require your cooperation which has heretofore until two weeks ago been missing.
Obviously whatever ISAF tried for 9 years did not work either, so spare me the 'failed over and over again' spiel, given that you did no better. The constraints that made peace deals, often from a position of weakness, in FATA an attractive policy option for Pakistan did not really lift until the Swat deal collapsed in 2009.
Quetta shura, Haqqani, Baradar, etc...Nobody believe you.
Nobody has provided evidence to even prove the existence of a Quetta Shura.
Some, no doubt. Hardly all finances though. Donations from many in Karachi, the rest of Pakistan and the Gulf States/KSA is assured. Criminal enterprises inside Pakistan augment those resources as well.
Again, Hundi and Hawala do not stop at the Afghan-Pakistan border.
Haqqani, Miram Shah? That's assured. Quetta Shura? Assured.
Marja, Kandahar, Nuristan, Konar .... yep, all assured. Far more than one town in Pakistan.
And please do find some time to actually find evidence establishing this mythical Quetta Shura - try the library under
Tolkien perhaps.
He is. Look harder. DO MORE.
And would you mind providing the evidence, or do I have to go find a gypsy to look in a crystal ball after getting high to be able to see this man.
Let us know when you actually have evidence.
He is likely in the other parts of Afghanistan where ISAF has yet to run operations to eliminate sanctuaries and parallel taliban governments that don't exist according to you.
"unattributed" will suffice, remember? Do you have any from American officials. ONE unattributed source by an American official will be fine, A.M.
Do you have ONE concrete piece of evidence from Pakistani officials calling those characters 'strategic assets' - this was your strawman, don't deflect it on me.
The day I do, he'll be shot.
i.e. you have no evidence and are making nonsensical and unsubstantiated allegations.
Hardly. No country should HARBOR foreign suspects on their soil lest they be accused of providing sanctuary and fostering proxy war. The accusations by the world against Pakistan on this matter are longer than my very long arm and exceed simply your western front.
Argumentum ad numerum - a logical fallacy. You have fallen rather low to resort to childish argument of 'the world blah blah blah'. Allegations without substantiation are nothing but drivel and slander.
Again, since there is no evidence of Pakistan deliberately providing safe haven to these individuals, and they appear to have lived very active lives crossing back and forth between Afghanistan and Pakistan, traveling and living in territory under ISAF control, your argument that the arrest of these individuals in Pakistan somehow establishes that Pakistan was 'harboring' them is just ludicrous and fallacious.
I have yet to see any evidence indicating you do. What we do have is a myriad accounts of the same event. Again, don't let that exaggerated sense of self-importance get to your head too much,
Where would that be with your western sovereignty ostensibly challenged and the deep concern held for this man by your Afghan and ISAF allies?
That would be on holding off a military twice our size on our Eastern Front, that mounted the largest mobilization in decades in 2001, and has played the role of aggressor without cause in the past. but you already know that of course - its just that that exxagerated sense of self-importance doesn't let you acknowledge any but your own issues, the rest of the world be damned.
Like a spoiled brat - ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!
Haqqani? Not
a major concern, eh? No kidding!
No kidding, see above.
Recently will be a welcome change, if in fact it changes at all as he's been a PARAMOUNT concern of ours for years. Fascinating exercise in dissemblance there.
Yet more ME! ME! ME! ME! ME!
Get in line and wait your turn - we'll get to it when we get to it, and you'll know when we do.
We've discussed this. It was the basis for the arrest.
There's no other role we needed to play except to assure you acted upon that information. Assuring such consumes a lot of our time, btw.
If US provided intelligence played a critical role, we'll find out, as of now there isn't anything credible suggesting that.
There's no serious proof of that but, if so, it wouldn't be because we desired such any more than the insurgents passing daily to and from Afghanistan. It would confirm that it is to Pakistan where he returns however.
Fascinating exercise in hypocrisy and dissemblance - the Taliban insurgents, leaders commanders and foot soldiers livel and travel through territory under ISAF control and its 'par for the course' - the same on the Pakistani side and it is duplicity and willful deceit.
Can you really stick your foot in your mouth any further?
It should. They've their own border police and intelligence apparatus that is trying to establish now what Pakistan has had sixty plus years to do. Huge difference.
Sidestepping the question again I see - Unless they have mastered the art of teleportation, Taliban commanders, leaders and foot soldiers live and travel through territory under ISAF control, and your militaries and intelligence agencies are responsible, yet the same on the Pakistani side is somehow indicative of deceit and duplicity.
Again, the hypocrisy is breathtaking.