Every military force in the world is effective only until their supply lines are intact. Once you cut the supply lines, the mightiest and bravest armies crumble like a badly made cookie.
Talibanic power is depending on logistics from the South and East. Once you cut these supply lines, Talibanic tiger will be meowing like a little pussy cat..
What logistics are you talking about?
There are no "fixed" supply lines that are supposed to be feeding and arming the taliban,there are "fluid" supply lines that are flexible and will just change with the need of the moment.
Even if pakistan was able to seal the border with afghanistan, there are enough weapons in afghanistan for the taliban to carry on fighting for the next hundred years.
Your theory about pak army invading the south is doomed to failure.
Let's do this analysis in dispassionate way. If you bring emotions into scientific analysis, the results will almost always be incorrect.
1. Russians lost because of two reasons:
1a. Russians could not cut off Muj supply lines from Pakistan...
The russians with all there power could not cut the supply lines but somehow the pakistan army is going to cut the supply lines to the taliban.....even though there is no fixed supply line to cut.
If it was not for the training of Pakistan and weapons (stingers) from Americans, Afghan Jihad was kapoot in 1986....
The stingers hastened the retreat of the russians,there where being bled dry by the constant attacks on there army by the mujahid and would have retreated sooner or later.
The afghans where fighting the russians before the PAK/US started helping them and would have carried on fighting with or without PAK/US help.
This does not mean i do not acknowledge that the PAK/US helped the afghans a lot and if it was not for there help that the afghans would have not been able to inflict heavy losses on the russians.
2. British may have lost some battles, but they won the wars against Afghanis in every way. Here is how.
Afghanistan was mostly ruled by British installed mayors of Kabul. All the way from Shoojah to Zahir. Yes there were few interruptions but Afghans have been ruled by the "approved mayor". Just look at Karazai (2007)these day. There is no difference between him and Shoojah (1838). Here is 200 years of Afghan history for you.....
The same way Karazai "rules" afghanistan is the same way the British installed mayors of Kabul "ruled" afghanistan in there time......
* British successfully created a border aptly called "Durand line". Remember only victors draw the new maps and not the losers......
If my history is correct was the "Durand line" not drawn up after the british army was kicked out of afghanistan.
Remember sometimes borders are drawn up to stop further warfare.
* 3. Rag-tag militias may be a bit more difficult to control as compared to the standing armies. But the militias can also be subdued. However the techniques to defeat them are different. Invention of airborne cavalry (helicopters) have practically eliminated the strong points of guerrilla tactics ......
It worked really good during the vietnam war....
* However the use of air-cavalry is only 40 years old so many armies in the world including Pakistani army are still fine tuning the effective use of airborne troops. ......
If the US army with there pioneering use of air-cavalry have been defeated by the vietnamese and are on the verge of defeat in iraq what should the pak army "fine tune"?
* BTW cavalry is only one part of the game of chess. The other important factor is to deny and eliminate the supply lines of Talibanic menace. And that can only be done by attacking them from both North and South...
We need to reconize that the karzai and NATO are the enemy and not the taliban.
