What's new

‘Taliban’s participation necessary for peace’

Do you indians Salim, Shivakumar really think i am going to waste my time answering your stupid questions....
You must be loving this,pakistani killing pakistani.
How i can not wait for that idiot mushy to get kicked out and the jihad in kashmir to start again with the help of the taliban.

dream on. the likes of you and your taliban masters are just cannon fodder for NATO. This is not the crumbling Soviet army you r facing. taliban are taking heavy casualities. lets just see how long they can go on.

and about jihad in kashmir, they have been trying for a long time now, and i dont see IA losing. the taliban have their hands full with NATO and USA. they cant afford to open up another front in kashmir.

ok, let me just ask u this out of curiousity. why do u support taliban?
 
dream on. the likes of you and your taliban masters are just cannon fodder for NATO. This is not the crumbling Soviet army you r facing. taliban are taking heavy casualities. lets just see how long they can go on.

and about jihad in kashmir, they have been trying for a long time now, and i dont see IA losing. the taliban have their hands full with NATO and USA. they cant afford to open up another front in kashmir.

This is bs..Kashmir is being fought by Kashmiri people, not the Taliban. Again it's just Indians wishing to be in the same boat as the West. Keep wishing!
 
i never said taliban was in kashmir. read my post. all i said was there has jihad in kashmir for a long time and that taliban wasnt going to open up another front in kashmir when they r too busy getting killed by NATO.

Now how u interpreted that to mean India wishing to b on the same boat as the west is beyond me.
 
The Taliban never were in Kashmir. Kashmir is being fought by Kashmiris, not by anyone from outside of Kashmir.
 
................but this won't mean these liberal bimbos and himbos will be murdering, cutting heads, whipping people for showing their arms, or all sorts of other radical pleasures.

The trouble is you see the extreme in everything because you yourself are an extremist. I know that Islam, as with any religion, has extremes, and a majority in between. The same exists in the West. You find sex objects, and the majority are not - it's a cultural thing - most Hijabed women would probably be sex objects in highly conservative regions where face showing is not the norm. You need to think in another mode, other than black and white..

You are the ones that jumps to the extreme postion when it comes to the taliban/tribals/islam.
"Every time a woman shows a bit of ankle, there will be beheadings or suicide bombings for all who threaten the writ of the government, education will be listening to a Mullah all day instead of Physics, Chemistry, Maths etc."
I was only using the same kind of extreme wording as yourself to make a point.

.....If Pakistani society follows the West in some ways, it will be good, in others it will not. But if Pakistani society followed the extremists ways (it would need to be forced since there is no ideological support for them in mainstream Pakistani society), then Pakistan will have set itself on a path for regression and destruction. .

I dont know why you think i want the mullah's in power?
Is it not the army that has given political to the mullahs during the past couple of decades.
The MMA is a creation of the army.
Right wing islamic groups have been fostered and nurtured by the military for decades.




.....The internet ! There are plenty of blogs that give different opinions, some neutral, some not. Use them, a wide selection of reputable news sources, and you'll get an indication of the truth. Use some common sense also. It's obvious Pak Army who are tribals themselves in many cases, are not going to act the way you claim they are acting. Al Q wants to schism Pak Army, I would say you're the brainwashed one here. .

You have your opinion on how the problem in FATA should solved and i have mine.
I think it was a mistake to attack the Lal masjid complex,as this has led to a predicted chain of events that could have been averted.
The "blockhouse technique" that was being applied to the tribal areas was working,The intelligence led attacks on terrorist by the pakistan army was also working.
The aim of giving the tribals electricity,water,roads,hospitals with a increase in FC personnel would have given them a stake in the pakistan state.
We should choose the pace and place of where military action is needed and not be forced into ill judged and badly conceived "operations" forced on us by NATO/US.



.....But I do know I'd prefer Pakistan society to not be radical, not that I want it to be Western. It would be better to be the same society as it is today.

Just becauce i do not support the way in which mushy is carrying this "war on terror" plan out does not automatically make me an extremist.
 
You are the ones that jumps to the extreme postion when it comes to the taliban/tribals/islam.
"Every time a woman shows a bit of ankle, there will be beheadings or suicide bombings for all who threaten the writ of the government, education will be listening to a Mullah all day instead of Physics, Chemistry, Maths etc."
I was only using the same kind of extreme wording as yourself to make a point.

What is quoted there is extreme, but is it untrue? I think you'll find men were forced to grow beards, and you'll find women were forced to wear burkhas. If they did not, they were punished. Is it me being extreme, or is it that you're the one living in denial here?

I dont know why you think i want the mullah's in power?
Is it not the army that has given political to the mullahs during the past couple of decades.
The MMA is a creation of the army.
Right wing islamic groups have been fostered and nurtured by the military for decades.

MMA is an army creation? First I've heard of it. some links?
The JUI was aided in the beginning as part of the Soviet Afghan war.

You have your opinion on how the problem in FATA should solved and i have mine.
I think it was a mistake to attack the Lal masjid complex,as this has led to a predicted chain of events that could have been averted.
The "blockhouse technique" that was being applied to the tribal areas was working,The intelligence led attacks on terrorist by the pakistan army was also working.
The aim of giving the tribals electricity,water,roads,hospitals with a increase in FC personnel would have given them a stake in the pakistan state.
We should choose the pace and place of where military action is needed and not be forced into ill judged and badly conceived "operations" forced on us by NATO/US.

And if PA does nothing, the Americans will. This will suck the whole region into more war, and lead to a flattening of the whole region. Musharraf knows it well. It is good there are educated leaders in Pakistan who can predict future scenarios with some accuracy.
 
What is quoted there is extreme, but is it untrue? I think you'll find men were forced to grow beards, and you'll find women were forced to wear burkhas. If they did not, they were punished. Is it me being extreme, or is it that you're the one living in denial here? .


The same way in france if a muslim woman wears the headscarf she will be punished ,and where not talking about the burkha but the normal headscarf.
If the so called liberal west can force things on muslims and it is not taken as an extreme measure,then why the big deal when the taliban/mullahs do the same thing?
The west think that by banning the headscarf it will somehow stop the dilution of western ideology,can we not use the same barometer when it comes to islam,that woman not covering there heads will weaken islamic ideology?
We can not have one set of benchmarks to mark how tolerant the west is and another for the muslims.



MMA is an army creation? First I've heard of it. some links?
The JUI was aided in the beginning as part of the Soviet Afghan war..

BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Musharraf and the mullahs
Try googling military mullah alliance...theres plenty of articles.

And if PA does nothing, the Americans will. This will suck the whole region into more war, and lead to a flattening of the whole region. Musharraf knows it well. It is good there are educated leaders in Pakistan who can predict future scenarios with some accuracy.

As i said from the start ,let the americans go in with pakistans permission.
Let the US forces get killed... not pakistanis.
 
The same way in france if a muslim woman wears the headscarf she will be punished ,and where not talking about the burkha but the normal headscarf.
If the so called liberal west can force things on muslims and it is not taken as an extreme measure,then why the big deal when the taliban/mullahs do the same thing?

This is the difference. In Afghanistan, the Burkha was made part of their private lives and public lives. If a woman went shopping (not sure there are shops there), she had to wear a Burkha. If a man went out for a walk, he had to have a beard. In France, the ban on Hijab only applies to work places, or school. A person can wear their Hijab as much as they like when they go shopping, or go to the pictures, or go out. Not that I really agree with the French on this, but the two situations are not the same. The French are perhaps being a bit extreme here, but if some French person went to Afghanistan, do you not think the Taliban would have forced them into a Burkha, much like the French, perhaps more mildly, are enforcing no Hijabs in work places in France? Both are extreme measures. Time will tell whether the French move will make a better society. In any case, the French applied the ban to all religions, the Taliban forced their religion only onto a particular section of society (was it only Muslim men that had to grown beards in Afghanistan?)

The west think that by banning the headscarf it will somehow stop the dilution of western ideology,can we not use the same barometer when it comes to islam,that woman not covering there heads will weaken islamic ideology?

That's not the reason. The reason is that the French believe Hijab to be divisive, and they want all French to think of each other as one nation, not Islam first, France third, but they all have a common goal and unity. Whether it's the right idea, time will tell. But it's not about dilution of western ideology whatever that means. It's about "liberte, fraternite, egality" as the french motto goes.

We can not have one set of benchmarks to mark how tolerant the west is and another for the muslims.

I agree with this of course. Perhaps I am being a bit biased here, as I do not have a beard, and would choose not to live in Afghan Taliban society, in fact the French vision would suit me more. But the idea of a morality police is a Taliban one to enforce their ideology on the private life of citizens. The French, as far as I'm aware, do not do this. They only make citizens observe a dress code i schools and workplaces. Now the question is, is this really wrong? Recently there's been a smoking ban in workplaces all round Europe in workplaces. Why, because it's unhealthy. Isn't a Hijab ban in the workplace just for the same reason? Because they find it unhealthy and divisive? If it can lead to an unhealthier more divided society, then the French vision is not some fascist vision..though I'm all for everyone wearing whatever they want. Like I said, it is perhaps an extreme measure by the French, but not as extreme as the Taliban, and for sure the Taliban society is not one in which I'd like to live in.


BBC NEWS | World | South Asia | Musharraf and the mullahs
Try googling military mullah alliance...theres plenty of articles.

Dude, please get a clue. Musharaf is no friend of MMA. It was a choice between Bhutto and MMA. He chose MMA (and now regrets it), but he was forced between choosing crazed Mullahs, or corrupt politicians who would try and knock him off his perch. Who to choose. I'd have made an alliance with the MMA in his position too. No way would I want Bhutto or NS having any power in Pakistan anymore. They messed it up.

As i said from the start ,let the americans go in with pakistans permission.
Let the US forces get killed... not pakistanis.

The US forces will not get killed. The tribals will get bombed from 10,000 ft. The US wont have any qualms about carpet bombing villages they consider uncivilized. And the world media won't pay so much attention to people who they consider to be that also. It will only add fire to your point of view that it's a war in Islam, when it is not. Why do you want to see more Muslims die? Because it helps build your case that it's a war in Islam, and they're only interested in killing Muslims (which to an extent I would not completely remove as an objective), but they are in Afghanistan for the oil as a primary goal. It's as simple or as complicated as this, there is no way I would prefer Americans forces searching houses and carrying out raids on Pakistani soil, compared to Pakistani troops doing the same. You preferring American troops for this, just shows your real intentions.
 
KARACHI - Similar to US General David Petraeus' plan of reconciliation with the Iraqi tribal-based national resistance and alienation of al-Qaeda, Washington has a two-pronged approach of political settlement with "reconcilable" insurgents and all-out war on radical extremists in the theater of Afghanistan and Pakistan.

This initiative was given a fillip this week by both the government in Kabul and the Taliban, while al-Qaeda, which stands to lose the most, is already on the offensive - as in Osama bin Laden's latest video - in a bid to re-energize itself to maintain its support in the Afghan struggle.

A Taliban spokesman on Tuesday responded that they were prepared for talks with Kabul after President Hamid Karzai offered on Sunday to stage negotiations. "Peace cannot be achieved without dialogue," Karzai said.

Taliban spokesman Yousuf Ahmadi was quoted in the media as saying, "For the sake of national interests ... we are fully ready for talks with the government." He added that the Taliban had a "limited" number of conditions, but he did not explain further.

Let's talk about it
Tribal elders and clerics in Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province are now active in canvassing for a jirga (tribal meeting) that would include the Taliban. These endeavors are backed by both Pakistan and the United States.

The lessons of last month's grand "peace jirga" in Kabul have been learned. While that meeting was groundbreaking in bringing together hundreds of tribal elders, clerics and others from Afghanistan and Pakistan, it was always doomed to be nothing more than symbolic without the participation of the Taliban, who were not invited.

The Taliban realize that jirgas are an Afghan tradition in which rivals attempt to hammer out their differences, and there are now high hopes that once the Taliban and members of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar's Hezb-e-Islami Afghanistan sit down face-to-face with Afghan government officials, the ice will melt.

Whatever the results of such jirgas, one thing is sure - the Taliban's relations with al-Qaeda, which have had their ups and downs before the present reconciliation, will deteriorate.

Despite optimism in Washington and Islamabad over the latest peace moves, in the meantime there will be no let-up on the part of coalition troops in Afghanistan, as they are committed to applying maximum pressure on the Taliban.

Operations have already been increased in the southwestern provinces of Kandahar and Helmand. However, with the number of casualties rising, most member countries want to see tangible results, such as the Canadians, who are engaged in operations in Kandahar, the second-toughest area after Helmand.

Six years since the US-led invasion of Afghanistan, there is also war fatigue in the militant camp, as well as among the population. The indigenous segment of the Afghan resistance, drawn from the tribes, especially wants to see results.

Men want to get back to their fields and to the routines of life. The tribes of southern Afghanistan want dominance in the central government and prosperity in the Pashtun heartland. And they don't mind whether the Taliban achieve this target through the bullet, the ballot or the jirga - they just want results in the near future.

The Taliban are aware of this, and that the tribals are not ideologically motivated to fight an indefinite battle. This is one of the factors in their willingness for talks with Kabul.

An alert al-Qaeda
For the al-Qaeda ideologues sitting in Iraq and the Pakistani tribal areas, they face a situation similar to the one they now have in Iraq.

Four years ago, after Saddam Hussein fell, al-Qaeda saw the opportunity to grab the resistance by the scruff of the neck and transform it from a low-level guerrilla war into a real "surge" against the US military.

Al-Qaeda's calculated strikes at the nerve center of the US-Shi'ite alliance abruptly sharpened the round edges of the resistance and stoked the fires of sectarian strife. In the atmosphere of intense insecurity that resulted, many common Iraqi people lost their impartiality, joined the resistance and helped al-Qaeda by providing bases and logistics. Al-Qaeda emerged as a leader of Iraqi resistance.

The situation has changed over the past months, though, as the US has been relentless in pursuing al-Qaeda and courting Iraqi tribes, which are turning their backs on al-Qaeda. Many top al-Qaeda commanders have been assassinated by tribals and they are increasingly calling for al-Qaeda to leave and allow the Iraqi national resistance to fight its own battle.

In Pakistan, al-Qaeda adopted a similar approach in North Waziristan and South Waziristan in 2005 by breaking the natural alliance between Pakistani militants and tribals on the one side and the Pakistan army on the other. The result was the establishment of the Islamic State of North Waziristan and the Islamic State of South Waziristan, with al-Qaeda as a key player in both.

But under relentless pressure from the US to crack down on foreign militants in Pakistan, Islamabad was able to drive a wedge between locals and al-Qaeda. This culminated in January in the Pakistani Taliban massacre of hundreds of Uzbek militants and the expulsion of al-Qaeda commanders from the town of Mir Ali in North Waziristan. They have since been able to re-establish themselves. (See The Pakistani road to German terror, Asia Times Online, September 7.)

Osama bin Laden's videotape can be seen in this context. Al-Qaeda has lost its supremacy in Iraq, and risks being sidelined in Afghanistan and Pakistan should the nascent peace process take hold.

Bin Laden's appearance is a powerful reminder that al-Qaeda is still the leader in the global resistance. One can expect a "surge" in al-Qaeda's activities in Afghanistan and Pakistan in an effort to justify this tag and reclaim the resistance movements.

Syed Saleem Shahzad is Asia Times Online's Pakistan Bureau Chief. He can be reached at saleem_shahzad2002@yahoo.com.
 
^^
"Similar to US General David Petraeus' plan of reconciliation with the Iraqi tribal-based national resistance and alienation of al-Qaeda,"

Pakistan has been crying itself hoarse trying to get support for its strategy of "reconciliation" with the Taliban, while going after the "foreign fighters aka Al Qaeda", and encouraging the tribes to do so as well - but our efforts amount to "appeasement and coddling of terrorists", while the Americans have apparently hit upon a "brilliant strategy"!
 
^^
"Similar to US General David Petraeus' plan of reconciliation with the Iraqi tribal-based national resistance and alienation of al-Qaeda,"

Pakistan has been crying itself hoarse trying to get support for its strategy of "reconciliation" with the Taliban, while going after the "foreign fighters aka Al Qaeda", and encouraging the tribes to do so as well - but our efforts amount to "appeasement and coddling of terrorists", while the Americans have apparently hit upon a "brilliant strategy"!

Yes, one of the reasons not to have the US in the region at all is because they're too unstable. One day it's Pakistan is appeasing the enemy by making deals with then, next it's here's an idea, why dont we follow "our" Iraq strategy and apply it to Afghanistan. Too much power to the US in Pakistan's backyard. Every country in the region must be thinking what they're going to do next. Might make them stronger though, and even unify them.
 
The best strategy as far as i see is to create a peace deal which was working in the past for pretty good 2-3 years (until the incident of Lal Masjid, and launching more troops towards the tribal areas).

Its not an easy task to eliminate these guys. They have to live off, and they have every right to. The discussions should be taken place, and that is to ask them. Please not use our land for the purpose of your interests. The government is in every position to ask this, and i am sure our tribal allies will be supported for this move.

Having a lot of troops there makes them feel threatened. We shouldn't move by the pressure of United States on how to fight this war, their policy of conducting this warfare is simply a failure even with the resources & technology they have.

Secondly, to curb the attacks that are pointed towards Afghanistan through our border. We need a different tactics to fight off this, and that includes more fencing, and patrolling equipment i.e.. The Predator and other armed UAVs. This will surely help, and will be in interest of Pakistan.

Having said that, there are many long term advantages for this solution, as well as decreasing the danger of our troops. Over the time, and after the election. We should see decrease in the attacks.
 
The Taliban never were in Kashmir. Kashmir is being fought by Kashmiris, not by anyone from outside of Kashmir.

i know that. but taliban might start operating in kashmir if NATO withdraws from afghanistan. Thats why i said i wanted NATO to smash them.
 
i know that. but taliban might start operating in kashmir if NATO withdraws from afghanistan. Thats why i said i wanted NATO to smash them.

Taliban won't, Al Qaeda might. Taliban are the wrong ethnic group for Kashmir. They would not leave their homeland and go and live somewhere else long term.
 
i know that. but taliban might start operating in kashmir if NATO withdraws from afghanistan. Thats why i said i wanted NATO to smash them.


Dream on..........you could not even control a couple of hundred kashmiri freedom fighters until mushy stepped in.......NATO smash the taliban:rofl: :rofl:
 
Back
Top Bottom