Terrorists?: US Congress to vote on Haqqani network bill

[pak-marine]

Terrorists?: US Congress to vote on Haqqani network bill


By Huma Imtiaz
Published: July 9, 2012

US authorities have repeatedly pressed the Government of Pakistan to take action against the Haqqani network, an insurgent group that has been accused of several attacks on US-led and coalition forces in Afghanistan. PHOTO: FILE

WASHINGTON: The US Congress is set to vote on a bill on Monday evening, calling for the Secretary of State to report whether the Haqqani network meets the criteria for being designated as a terrorist network.

The Haqqani Network Terrorist Designation Act of 2011 stipulates that 30 days after the President has approved the bill, the Secretary of State has to submit a report to Congressional committees on the matter. Additionally, the bill includes that “nothing in this Act may be construed to infringe upon the sovereignty of Pakistan to combat militant or terrorist groups operating inside the boundaries of Pakistan.”

The text of the bill states that the Congress has found that the Haqqani Network was responsible for attacks on US-led forces in Afghanistan, as well as on the US Embassy in Kabul.

Citing former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen’s Senate testimony calling the Haqqani Network as a “veritable arm” of the ISI, the bill states that top leaders of the Haqqani network have already been added to a list of “specially designated global terrorists.”
The Senate has already passed the bill, which was introduced by Senator Richard Burr, in December 2011. The bill is now being brought to the House floor, where it was expected to be voted on on Monday evening.

US authorities have repeatedly pressed the Government of Pakistan to take action against the Haqqani network, an insurgent group that has been accused of several attacks on US-led and coalition forces in Afghanistan and is believed to have bases on both sides of the Durand line.
Read more: haqq

 

[foxbat]

what are the implications if this bill is passed?

 

[W.11]

after nato supply resumption, we all know US has already won the chess game, actually its an acceptance of american domination

 

[mjnaushad]

So they are going to declare them terrorists ......... finally. What took them so long

 

[INDIC]

after nato supply resumption, we all know US has already won the chess game, actually its an acceptance of american domination

America was just fine even the route was closed for 7 months which show Pakistan lost bargaining power using NATO supply route.

 

[Puchtoon]

what are the implications if this bill is passed?

Aapas ki baat - 3rd july 2012 part 1 - YouTube

 

[FEDEX]

US's biggest complaint against Pakistan is that it provides safe havens to Haqqanis and Quetta Shura. It would be fine if Pakistan did not think they were terrorists and stated that openly. But Pakistan claims to be a NATO ally. In that capacity, it is Pakistan’s duty to take action against Haqqanis and Afghan Taliban. It is this running with Haqqani hare and hunting with NATO hound policy of Pakistan that is seen as duplicitous by the whole world.

 

[RazorMC]

... It is this running with Haqqani hare and hunting with NATO hound policy of Pakistan that is seen as duplicitous by the whole world.

I see that PDF is once again plagued with the "whole world syndrome".
A quick reminder that the Indian version of "whole world" is a fabrication of an over-active brain cell.

 

[RazorMC]

what are the implications if this bill is passed?

If it passes then apart from the obvious result of the Haqqani Network being labelled as a terrorist organisation, the US would have to work around the "sovereignty" issue that the drone strikes on the same network would violate.

The US could also seek to pursue limited sanctions against Pakistan to pressurize us into attacking the group regardless of the losses we'd incur in terms of lives and resources.

 

[Kompromat]

Absolutely since they are of no use to the American mother land.

 

[Vassnti]

Absolutely since they are of no use to the American mother land.

I find if my argument can only be supported be reaching so low as to rely on reagan for its support its probably best i rethink my argument.

The fox, as has been pointed out by more than one philosopher, knows many small things, whereas the hedgehog knows one big thing. Ronald Reagan was neither a fox nor a hedgehog. He was as dumb as a stump. He could have had anyone in the world to dinner, any night of the week, but took most of his meals on a White House TV tray. He had no friends, only cronies. His children didn't like him all that much. He met his second wife—the one that you remember—because she needed to get off a Hollywood blacklist and he was the man to see. Year in and year out in Washington, I could not believe that such a man had even been a poor governor of California in a bad year, let alone that such a smart country would put up with such an obvious phony and loon.

The stupidity of Ronald Reagan. - Slate Magazine

 

[Kompromat]

What about the Nation that elected such a "stupid" leader ?

 

[batmannow]

Precautionry measure to save & justify the terrorists organizations like Ttp & BLA, which were given the targets, to increase danger level of voilence, which can be a Premptive dialoge to dismantle pakistan of its nucks.

All pakistAn can do with ease, is to ripoff NATO supplies going into or comming off from afghanistAn, declaring TTp attacks, on the supplies are far more beneficial thn stopping them, & coUldbe seen as a hurdle in the way of peace, by 50 different nations in the world?

America knows , that even they declare HAQANI,s terrorists even calling sanctions on pakistan , will never bring the , sweetly writtEn soft retrun & victory of NATO allies in afghanistan.

So its a bluff , a election stunt or a madness, which is going to bring american arm muscle , down with humiliation of the centry!

 

[foxbat]

Absolutely since they are of no use to the American mother land.

Those who live in the past are condemned to repeat it..

 

[Mav3rick]

US's biggest complaint against Pakistan is that it provides safe havens to Haqqanis and Quetta Shura. It would be fine if Pakistan did not think they were terrorists and stated that openly. But Pakistan claims to be a NATO ally. In that capacity, it is Pakistan’s duty to take action against Haqqanis and Afghan Taliban. It is this running with Haqqani hare and hunting with NATO hound policy of Pakistan that is seen as duplicitous by the whole world.

Kinda like how the US arms and supports 2 warring countries or factions. We are probably doing the same thing but not because of financial gains but because of our belief I guess. We believe that the US war on Afghanistan was unjust and illegal but how can one say 'NO' to the super power? So we were forced in to this war, much against our own wishes. But we have always supported the Talibaan and other Freedom Fighters who are fighting an invading country for their freedom.

We don't really have a choice here. Especially when we have tasted the bitter medicine of being abandoned time and again by our 'Ally'. Once again, in 2014, they will pack up and leave the mess behind for us to clean.