"CIA funding bought Afghanistan to the state its in today."
Horsecrap. Your ignorance of the participants supporting the mujahideen is embarassing if that's what you believe.
"Let's not forget that crucial part..."
Let's hope for your sake that you do as quickly as possible.
"If the US were to acknowledge that, then you could show the backbone to sit in Afghanistan for the next 60 years to build up the local forces if needed."
Sixty years won't be necessary. It took YOU that long to reach your current condition. We've no reason to believe it'll take that long to raise an Afghan army capable of defending itself from your proxies.
"Oh really, keep from destroying us? What is keeping you from destroying us or for that matter the taliban, the quetta shura, the PA or the dreaded ISI? A longing for peace?"
Yes.
"So, it's ok if this "mankind"consisting of the West and its allies in the region go along with something one day and not the other?"
Yes. It makes a considerable difference in the achievable possibilities. You really are all hormones and absent other critical cell mass, aren't you?
"And I'm not arguing in favor of supporting any militant group, inside or outside Pakistan, but you seem to think its OK when it suits "mankind's" aka the West's interests."
Where the alternative was to cede Afghanistan to a highly-capable nuclear power like the Soviet Union and where common concurrence exists between notable powers like the PRC, Great Britain, France, W. Germany, Pakistan, and ourselves as an alternative, of course.
"But they apparently have been revealed to you and a number of hack journos."
Can't speak for the hack journos but it's possible that some good ones know. As for myself, I've no clue what Kiyani intends. I do believe that the afghan taliban government is on your lands and absolutely believe that the Haqqani network owns Miram Shah by tacit agreement. So do others in your own country like Talat Masood.
"Good one. Rings of the Iraqi WMD attack in 40m mins fable."
You must think I care. Iraq had demonstrated its willingness to use chemical weapons repeatedly while slaughtering tens of thousands of its own citizens and making war on its neighbors twice. We were justified to make war simply on their multiple U.N. cease fire violations without regard to any weaponized warheads or otherwise.
Net result? No Saddam. No Baath party. No irridentist adventures in Iran and Kuwait or elsewhere for the foreseeable future. No Iraqi regional hegemony over the Persian gulf, the G.C.C. and KSA. Kurdish autonomy. NO WMD program. A shia-dominated democracy. Yeah. I'm DAMNED pleased by events as they've unfolded.
We'll see how things go but if it's fcuked up again, it won't be because Iraqis haven't been afforded a chance.
"It is the ground reality, not a strawman or rationalization. We do not have the capacity to deal with those two individuals."
Perhaps. That will be clear in the next six months what capacity you possess to prosecute these miscreants. .
Oh I think you're willfully wrong about the rest of the world, particularly those with forces engaged in Afghanistan beside us. The rest of that comment is childish machoism.
"Even all your coalition partners are unwilling to fight in Afghanistan to this day, many of them not providing enough troops, others leaving, while others sitting it out in bases, hoping the taliban to disappear. If that's the level of seriousness or commitment, then may God help NATO."
The Netherlands and Canada both have been projected to leave for two years. Are you new to this news? Who is sitting it out on their bases? Can you tell me? There are unquestionably issues in any joint command but, nonetheless, they are there, patrolling, fighting, and even dying. Rain on their parade all you wish but it's a voluntary endeavor and they've VOLUNTEERED when their immediate self-defense might argue otherwise. More contribute aid, training and mentoring. Had your country possessed such altruism in 1992-94 their efforts today might quite possibly have been unnecessary. Heed a lesson...if possible.
"
Tribal history is older then the country of Pakistan or the US. You don't defeat radicalization in the tribal areas by going into full war mode and disregarding the their way of life.'
You defeat such by preventing the radicalizing agent of change from coming or staying on your lands.
"Your failure to understand this even after being on this forum for so long is appalling."
What you perceive as my failing is praise indeed. Thank you.
"Seven years is nothing. We will try for the next seventy years if we have to, to bring peace to the year using the combination of military ops and jirgas and lashakrs. Sorry, but this cannot be wrapped in a few years. The nature of the conflict does not allow for it."
I absolutely concur. Remember such in Afghanistan with their army and more the next time you reach for a snide aside to their efforts to lift themselves from the dust.
"Nobody invited anyone. The US never planned for this and never put enough troops on the ground. Remember, the US began the war and failed to prosecute it effectively from day one."
We prosecuted the war famously and with not much more than 100 Special Forces and our Air Force. You memory is self-servingly short. Winning the subsequent peace hasn't been easy. We share in that by our focus in Iraq and discounting the liklihood that sanctuary would be afforded to our afghan taliban enemy in Pakstan. Without such, we still faced issues of graft and corruption endemic to the region. With such, the problems of peaceful stabilization were far harder.
"Don't lump your failures on others."
Good advice that you can feel free to heed yourself.
"Only thing that I can hope will change is the 2011 plan to print "mission accomplished" banners."
Then I've good news for you. That's subject to conditions on the ground. Our reinforcements are only now arriving. Those you see in Marjah and elsewhere have long been in Afghanistan. As our troop levels rise, so shall they fall IAW those ground conditions. It shall be slow, IMHO.
Thanks.