India cannot do much. Should India do something Pakistan is in for a long fight because India has the staying power the other 39 NATO states lack.
BTW NATO has 29 states.
THE US DILEMMA by Lt General Tariq Khan
- Thread starter Zarvan
- Start date
India cannot do much. Should India do something Pakistan is in for a long fight because India has the staying power the other 39 NATO states lack.
BTW NATO has 29 states.
STAFF
- Joined
- May 1, 2015
- Messages
- 3,786
- Reaction score
- 34
- Country
- Location
US Might ‘Stay In Afghanistan For Another Five Decades’
A retired US military officer, Wilkerson, says super powers in the world and the region will probably enter a war in Afghanistan.
Colonel Lawrence B. Larry Wilkerson, a retired military officer and head of the Colin L. Powell office, the former US State Secretary has warned over the possible fight between the world and region super-power countries in Afghanistan.
In an interview with The Real News on Thursday, Wilkerson said the United States might stay for over 50 years in Afghanistan, because according to its strategic location, Afghanistan is the only place from where the US can take action against Russia and China.
He said the new US strategy on Afghanistan has designed the presence of US in Afghanistan in a way that the United States army will remain in Afghanistan for an unknown period of time.
The same plane was designed before this for Germany, South Korea and Japan, he said.
“What we have seen right now is a begging of the new great game that it involves China, it involves Russia, it involve the United States and it involves all those people who get in the way in Central Asia. The United States will probably be in Afghanistan, I have said repeatedly, for the next fifty plus years. Because it is the only place geographically speaking in that region from which the United State with high military power can affect China’s …One Belt One Road…,” said Wilkerson.
In reaction Washington’s remarks on India for taking more role in Afghanistan, Pakistan’s National Security Council has conditioned its anti-terror fight and has said its cooperation with the US depends on decrease of India’s role in Afghanistan.
Pakistan’s conditions include removing insurgents’ safe havens from Afghanistan, border management, refugees return and rehabilitation of the peace process to resolve Afghanistan’s crisis through political channels.
Pakistan’s National Security Council says that India can never bring peace in South Asia.
In reaction to the remarks by Pakistan’s Security Council, the White House said India has done a lot in Afghanistan and that the continuation of its cooperation is vital.
“We think it is important that there is a regional approach and part of that is developing and strengthening that relationship in partnership with India. They have been making important contributions towards Afghanistan’s democracy and their stability and we think it is important to continue that efforts,” a White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.
China however supported Pakistan’s efforts in resolving Afghanistan’s crisis.
“We should value Pakistan’s considerable role in Afghanistan’s issue and should respect its legitimate security concerns,” Hua Chunying, spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said.
Military analysts meanwhile said as much as more powerful countries of the world and region get engaged in Afghanistan’s war, the situation and the current crisis will get more complicated.
http://www.tolonews.com/afghanistan/us-might-‘stay-afghanistan-another-five-decades’
A retired US military officer, Wilkerson, says super powers in the world and the region will probably enter a war in Afghanistan.
Colonel Lawrence B. Larry Wilkerson, a retired military officer and head of the Colin L. Powell office, the former US State Secretary has warned over the possible fight between the world and region super-power countries in Afghanistan.
In an interview with The Real News on Thursday, Wilkerson said the United States might stay for over 50 years in Afghanistan, because according to its strategic location, Afghanistan is the only place from where the US can take action against Russia and China.
He said the new US strategy on Afghanistan has designed the presence of US in Afghanistan in a way that the United States army will remain in Afghanistan for an unknown period of time.
The same plane was designed before this for Germany, South Korea and Japan, he said.
“What we have seen right now is a begging of the new great game that it involves China, it involves Russia, it involve the United States and it involves all those people who get in the way in Central Asia. The United States will probably be in Afghanistan, I have said repeatedly, for the next fifty plus years. Because it is the only place geographically speaking in that region from which the United State with high military power can affect China’s …One Belt One Road…,” said Wilkerson.
In reaction Washington’s remarks on India for taking more role in Afghanistan, Pakistan’s National Security Council has conditioned its anti-terror fight and has said its cooperation with the US depends on decrease of India’s role in Afghanistan.
Pakistan’s conditions include removing insurgents’ safe havens from Afghanistan, border management, refugees return and rehabilitation of the peace process to resolve Afghanistan’s crisis through political channels.
Pakistan’s National Security Council says that India can never bring peace in South Asia.
In reaction to the remarks by Pakistan’s Security Council, the White House said India has done a lot in Afghanistan and that the continuation of its cooperation is vital.
“We think it is important that there is a regional approach and part of that is developing and strengthening that relationship in partnership with India. They have been making important contributions towards Afghanistan’s democracy and their stability and we think it is important to continue that efforts,” a White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.
China however supported Pakistan’s efforts in resolving Afghanistan’s crisis.
“We should value Pakistan’s considerable role in Afghanistan’s issue and should respect its legitimate security concerns,” Hua Chunying, spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said.
Military analysts meanwhile said as much as more powerful countries of the world and region get engaged in Afghanistan’s war, the situation and the current crisis will get more complicated.
http://www.tolonews.com/afghanistan/us-might-‘stay-afghanistan-another-five-decades’
Once again, it is known that actual US intention has noting to do with issue in Afghanistan. Afghanistan is just tool to coerce Pakistan to forego its interest and serve US one. That is the bottom line.
When establishment, media and general mass will come to terms with that????
When establishment, media and general mass will come to terms with that????
friendly_troll96
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- May 29, 2010
- Messages
- 3,857
- Reaction score
- -10
- Country
- Location
Love general Tariq Khan. He's a delight to read/listen to. 
Centurion2016
BANNED
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2016
- Messages
- 864
- Reaction score
- -31
- Country
- Location
ONE QUESTION TO YOUR GENERAL AND YOUR PEOPLE ... ALL 200 MILLION OF THEM..
What the HELL WAS OBL doing hiding in your country"
YOU BLAME USA and the west & INDIA ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, AND YOU where hiding the biggest terrorist in the world
WHY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What the HELL WAS OBL doing hiding in your country"
YOU BLAME USA and the west & INDIA ,,,,,,,,,,,,,, AND YOU where hiding the biggest terrorist in the world
WHY >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
The Sandman
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2015
- Messages
- 8,645
- Reaction score
- 16
- Country
- Location
We weren't "hiding" him so stop asking the same question again and again like a broken record and stay on topic.
US says Pakistan didn’t know of Osama’s whereabouts
What a read i am sure it's gonna be really really hard for the americans to answer the questions he asked i hope our FM will raise these questions as well (although i have little to no hope).
Hakikat ve Hikmet
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 14, 2015
- Messages
- 15,534
- Reaction score
- 21
- Country
- Location
Pasha is right. It's certainly not about Taliban or safe havens or anything in President Trump's speech!!!! It's fundamentally about OBOR and a part of Pentagon's anti-OBOR strategies leaving little room for "live and let live" and fear from "winners take it all" mindset. The fundamental folly with this approach is it's not readily acceptable or plausible even to the domestic audiences, especially the folks who own most of the USA's assets. Needless to say, it also includes Trump & Co. At the end of the day they want to make money - if the children of Adam are given a mountain full of gold they vie for another one - and, rarely go for loyalty!!! Doesn't matter whether it's a blue "Zion", or Red or even Green!!!!! And, they have sniffed "money" in OBOR. And, Pentagon wants to nullify their "aspirations". But the question is how to "bell the cat"!!!!! Definitely they have no right answer for they have pulled out almost all the cats from the hat without terminal successes!!!! No surprises here, for if they knew, would President Truman, thankfully he went only up to the 8th grade, have displayed "Buck stops here" on his desk??????
django
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2007
- Messages
- 9,692
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
Unfortunately just like yourself I have little confidence in that happening. Kudos
Gen Bajwa has a very soft and weak personality which is why Nawaz Sharif has made him COAS. The 3 generals who were superseded were more deserving than him.
hussain0216
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 29, 2012
- Messages
- 21,096
- Reaction score
- -22
- Country
- Location
We are not a isolated state
We are a prominent member of the Muslim world
Our defence is based upon our capabilities and determination to build by hook or crook the weapons we need to defend our state
Our main allies are China, Turkey, Saudi/GCC, we have good relations with most of the Muslim world and non Muslim world
Our mutual embrace with China exists because so many of our interests have become aligned
It is not tolerable for us to forsake our interests for the benefit of anyone especially a enemy like India, so regardless of any real or imagined world standing we will do what we have to for the defence of our people
imadul
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 7, 2007
- Messages
- 3,600
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
He lives in a fool's paradise. Without Pakistan, no one can stay in Afg and Pkistan won't be doing it anymore but will slowly disengage. This will be due to regional interests as well, from China, Russian Fed, and OBOR. RF looking for the opportunity for Afg defeat. They are in ME, STARTED massive military exercises with Belarus, and can do a lot in Afg through ex Soviet states. This war now will drain USA. US spend 1 trillion in Afg in last 16 years and no victory. It will remain elusive.US Might ‘Stay In Afghanistan For Another Five Decades’
A retired US milidisengage. er, Wilkerson, says super powers in the world and the region will probably enter a war in Afghanistan.
Colonel Lawrence B. Larry Wilkerson, a retired military officer and head of the Colin L. Powell office, the former US State Secretary has warned over the possible fight between the world and region super-power countries in Afghanistan.
In an interview with The Real News on Thursday, Wilkerson said the United States might stay for over 50 years in Afghanistan, because according to its strategic location, Afghanistan is the only place from where the US can take action against Russia and China.
He said the new US strategy on Afghanistan has designed the presence of US in Afghanistan in a way that the United States army will remain in Afghanistan for an unknown period of time.
The same plane was designed before this for Germany, South Korea and Japan, he said.
“What we have seen right now is a begging of the new great game that it involves China, it involves Russia, it involve the United States and it involves all those people who get in the way in Central Asia. The United States will probably be in Afghanistan, I have said repeatedly, for the next fifty plus years. Because it is the only place geographically speaking in that region from which the United State with high military power can affect China’s …One Belt One Road…,” said Wilkerson.
In reaction Washington’s remarks on India for taking more role in Afghanistan, Pakistan’s National Security Council has conditioned its anti-terror fight and has said its cooperation with the US depends on decrease of India’s role in Afghanistan.
Pakistan’s conditions include removing insurgents’ safe havens from Afghanistan, border management, refugees return and rehabilitation of the peace process to resolve Afghanistan’s crisis through political channels.
Pakistan’s National Security Council says that India can never bring peace in South Asia.
In reaction to the remarks by Pakistan’s Security Council, the White House said India has done a lot in Afghanistan and that the continuation of its cooperation is vital.
“We think it is important that there is a regional approach and part of that is developing and strengthening that relationship in partnership with India. They have been making important contributions towards Afghanistan’s democracy and their stability and we think it is important to continue that efforts,” a White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said.
China however supported Pakistan’s efforts in resolving Afghanistan’s crisis.
“We should value Pakistan’s considerable role in Afghanistan’s issue and should respect its legitimate security concerns,” Hua Chunying, spokeswoman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry said.
Military analysts meanwhile said as much as more powerful countries of the world and region get engaged in Afghanistan’s war, the situation and the current crisis will get more complicated.
http://www.tolonews.com/afghanistan/us-might-‘stay-afghanistan-another-five-decades’
Thorough Pro
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2008
- Messages
- 13,232
- Reaction score
- -21
- Country
- Location
Their real target is China..........
django
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2007
- Messages
- 9,692
- Reaction score
- 8
- Country
- Location
@Zibago @Hell hound @Moonlight @The Sandman @Dawood Ibrahim and how could I forget the worlds number one troll @friendly_troll96 
Verve
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- May 15, 2014
- Messages
- 11,116
- Reaction score
- 10
- Country
- Location
How wrong you are!
niaz
PDF THINK TANK: CONSULTANT
- Joined
- Jun 18, 2006
- Messages
- 5,164
- Reaction score
- 211
- Country
- Location
A slightly different view point but essentially the same.
The US has stepped up its criticism over Pakistan’s perceived non-cooperation in delivering Afghanistan. Pakistanis lost no time in shredding to pieces Washington’s one-sided narrative and warnings. Pakistan would do well not to lose sight of the larger picture and draw appropriate inferences from the much heralded review of America’s strategy in Afghanistan. The bottom line of all that has been said by Trump & Co is that there will be no fundamental change in the US’ plans for the war-ravaged country.
I watched Trump’s speech in full and must say that the man does not suffer from the ideological baggage of nation-building or remaking the world a la neo-cons nor does he struggle with Obama’s agony over the just war in Afghanistan and the unjust one in Iraq. Trump is simply asking: what’s in it for him and his country? And he has added that he will not reveal the specifics of his war plans. By the end, the whole exercise appeared as a theatrical presentation rather than a genuine policy review. There is a clear intent to stay the course with some operational course correction.
The Trump speech also brought to fore the perennial dilemma of dealing with the terrible two of South Asia – Pakistan and India – while trying to sort out the mess in Afghanistan. Here, there is no originality. His muttering against Pakistan and lavishing praise on India was so 1962-ish. Washington has been going through pangs of love for India since New Delhi got into a big misadventure with China. Pakistan was quickly warned not to take advantage of ‘India’s China war’ by moving troops into Held Kashmir.
The edifice of Pak-US alliance came crumbling as the Kennedy administration, suitably filled by Boston Brahmins, worked day and night to take advantage of the situation to bring India into America’s fold. One begins to wonder if the Indian provocations on China’s frontier, somewhat like her current hostile military moves on the Chinese border, were not meant to wreck Pak-US relations, by demonstrating that Washington could count on India to be a challenger to China.
To some, this thesis may be farfetched. I have one simple question for their consideration. Did or did not 1962 war shake the very foundation of the Pak-US defence alliance which went into a state of limbo till the Soviet tanks came rolling across the Amu Darya into Afghanistan in 1979? India joined the group of countries that remained sympathetic to Moscow’s flagrant violation of a small country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Trump and Modi share a visceral hatred for the Muslims. We have yet to hear a single word from Trump about India’s colonial style repressive policies in Occupied Kashmir. It should not be a matter of surprise if Trump wants his pal in Delhi to join in Washington’s plans for Afghanistan. Trump has been briefed about American corporations’ assessment of the country’s mineral wealth. Some have been audacious to suggest the colonisation of Afghanistan to exploit its resources to pay for America’s war.
The US, of course, refuses to admit certain basic facts about Afghanistan. The Afghan Taliban whom Trump labels as terrorists were in power till they were dislodged from Kabul by the US and allied forces including those of the Northern Alliance. They should not be called dissidents for trying to recover what they have lost. Secondly, the Afghan National Army is so dominated by the erstwhile Northern Alliance elements that a US withdrawal will hasten the Taliban’s return to Kabul.
The US is no doubt aware that terrorist attacks form part of the Taliban’s war tactics. That tactic will not change whether they have support in Pakistan or not. The only way for Washington to convince Pakistan against sheltering Afghan dissidents is to disprove the Pakistani thesis that the Taliban will outlast the American forces in Afghanistan.
Can official America have the brashness to side openly with corporate America to tell Pakistan that the US has plans for a long-term stay in Afghanistan? This stay will stretch up to the time when Afghanistan becomes another country depending on US/Western capital and technology to emerge from its millenary state of underdevelopment. That can only happen if the American troops can sit out till the present generation of Taliban leaders become history.
The stalemate in Afghanistan has links with the evolving alignments in the larger region. US actions to consolidate ties with India as a balancing factor to China have produced an opposite reaction by greater China-Pakistan cooperation in economic and defence fields. Nor will China look benignly at Washington’s overt invitations to India to get more active in Afghanistan. Traditional Taliban critics Russia and Iran too have regular contacts with the Afghan Taliban.
This is not the first time that Pakistan is confronted with a fundamental choice of sending the Afghan ‘dissidents’ back or continuing to allow them shelter or, as the US alleges, bases on our soil. Surprisingly, Pakistan’s public narrative lacks an important element: to offer reciprocal steps if India and Afghanistan renounce their assistance to anti-Pakistan networks operating out of Afghanistan. Let us hope that this issue is forcefully raised in meetings between Pakistani and American interlocutors, both civil and military, here as well as in Washington.
After a week of effervescence around the review, we basically stand where we were. The US strategy is designed not to abandon its protégés because the result would be their ouster from Kabul. Washington, despite its periodic tendency to leave, is going to stay in Afghanistan. Whether it is a holding exercise or develops into a colonial adventure depends on their stamina and their relative success.
Email: saeed.saeedk@gmail.com
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/226264-Staying-the-course-in-Afghanistan
The US has stepped up its criticism over Pakistan’s perceived non-cooperation in delivering Afghanistan. Pakistanis lost no time in shredding to pieces Washington’s one-sided narrative and warnings. Pakistan would do well not to lose sight of the larger picture and draw appropriate inferences from the much heralded review of America’s strategy in Afghanistan. The bottom line of all that has been said by Trump & Co is that there will be no fundamental change in the US’ plans for the war-ravaged country.
I watched Trump’s speech in full and must say that the man does not suffer from the ideological baggage of nation-building or remaking the world a la neo-cons nor does he struggle with Obama’s agony over the just war in Afghanistan and the unjust one in Iraq. Trump is simply asking: what’s in it for him and his country? And he has added that he will not reveal the specifics of his war plans. By the end, the whole exercise appeared as a theatrical presentation rather than a genuine policy review. There is a clear intent to stay the course with some operational course correction.
The Trump speech also brought to fore the perennial dilemma of dealing with the terrible two of South Asia – Pakistan and India – while trying to sort out the mess in Afghanistan. Here, there is no originality. His muttering against Pakistan and lavishing praise on India was so 1962-ish. Washington has been going through pangs of love for India since New Delhi got into a big misadventure with China. Pakistan was quickly warned not to take advantage of ‘India’s China war’ by moving troops into Held Kashmir.
The edifice of Pak-US alliance came crumbling as the Kennedy administration, suitably filled by Boston Brahmins, worked day and night to take advantage of the situation to bring India into America’s fold. One begins to wonder if the Indian provocations on China’s frontier, somewhat like her current hostile military moves on the Chinese border, were not meant to wreck Pak-US relations, by demonstrating that Washington could count on India to be a challenger to China.
To some, this thesis may be farfetched. I have one simple question for their consideration. Did or did not 1962 war shake the very foundation of the Pak-US defence alliance which went into a state of limbo till the Soviet tanks came rolling across the Amu Darya into Afghanistan in 1979? India joined the group of countries that remained sympathetic to Moscow’s flagrant violation of a small country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Trump and Modi share a visceral hatred for the Muslims. We have yet to hear a single word from Trump about India’s colonial style repressive policies in Occupied Kashmir. It should not be a matter of surprise if Trump wants his pal in Delhi to join in Washington’s plans for Afghanistan. Trump has been briefed about American corporations’ assessment of the country’s mineral wealth. Some have been audacious to suggest the colonisation of Afghanistan to exploit its resources to pay for America’s war.
The US, of course, refuses to admit certain basic facts about Afghanistan. The Afghan Taliban whom Trump labels as terrorists were in power till they were dislodged from Kabul by the US and allied forces including those of the Northern Alliance. They should not be called dissidents for trying to recover what they have lost. Secondly, the Afghan National Army is so dominated by the erstwhile Northern Alliance elements that a US withdrawal will hasten the Taliban’s return to Kabul.
The US is no doubt aware that terrorist attacks form part of the Taliban’s war tactics. That tactic will not change whether they have support in Pakistan or not. The only way for Washington to convince Pakistan against sheltering Afghan dissidents is to disprove the Pakistani thesis that the Taliban will outlast the American forces in Afghanistan.
Can official America have the brashness to side openly with corporate America to tell Pakistan that the US has plans for a long-term stay in Afghanistan? This stay will stretch up to the time when Afghanistan becomes another country depending on US/Western capital and technology to emerge from its millenary state of underdevelopment. That can only happen if the American troops can sit out till the present generation of Taliban leaders become history.
The stalemate in Afghanistan has links with the evolving alignments in the larger region. US actions to consolidate ties with India as a balancing factor to China have produced an opposite reaction by greater China-Pakistan cooperation in economic and defence fields. Nor will China look benignly at Washington’s overt invitations to India to get more active in Afghanistan. Traditional Taliban critics Russia and Iran too have regular contacts with the Afghan Taliban.
This is not the first time that Pakistan is confronted with a fundamental choice of sending the Afghan ‘dissidents’ back or continuing to allow them shelter or, as the US alleges, bases on our soil. Surprisingly, Pakistan’s public narrative lacks an important element: to offer reciprocal steps if India and Afghanistan renounce their assistance to anti-Pakistan networks operating out of Afghanistan. Let us hope that this issue is forcefully raised in meetings between Pakistani and American interlocutors, both civil and military, here as well as in Washington.
After a week of effervescence around the review, we basically stand where we were. The US strategy is designed not to abandon its protégés because the result would be their ouster from Kabul. Washington, despite its periodic tendency to leave, is going to stay in Afghanistan. Whether it is a holding exercise or develops into a colonial adventure depends on their stamina and their relative success.
Email: saeed.saeedk@gmail.com
https://www.thenews.com.pk/print/226264-Staying-the-course-in-Afghanistan
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
Bajwa calls Bushra's allegations against Saudi Arabia 'baseless'
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
-
-
Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts
-
Bajwa calls Bushra's allegations against Saudi Arabia 'baseless'
- Latest: Novus ordu seclorum
-
-
-
-
