U.S. Asks More From Pakistan in Terror War

[Goodperson]

The reason why US is in Afghanistan is not a Joke.

US came after perpetrators and King-pin of 9'11 attacks, Its unforunate for Pakistan than these organisation were sheltered by Taliban and Taliban have close link with Pakistan. hence Pakistan got involved rest is well known.

 

[Goodperson]

Saddam and his max ruling baath party members dead or captured, the bad guy of Mid East gone, are the US forces gone too or are they gonna leave in a year or two, no way. So if OBL is dead or captured (which i don't believe will happen for many years to come), US is not gonna leave so easily. Only another vietnam may do it.

US intelligence believed Saddam was creating WOT, Saddam was defying UN. Irag invading UAE did not help.

And US had many other options to destroy AQ guys if it wanted to, invading Afghanistan was not the only option.

OBL was in Afghanistan US believed that he and his organizations were behind 9'11.
Afghanistan was also target of Tomohawk missiles during Clinton's presidency period.
So Afghanistan was the only option. Pakistan helped CIA to capture perpetrators of 9'11 attacks. Many were sent to Guantanamo bay prison.

 

[pakomar]

this list will go on and on remember US pressure on swat operation than waziristan and on and on.there no stopping it .
US is good at giving orders on the other hand running from afghanistan border.

 

[bigmoneymaker]

so what do the usa want exactly despite of its present loss in there??? this really puzzles me, can anyone tell me that reason??? its invisible long term national interests????

 

[MastanKhan]

Hi,

Sometimes we need to set apart conspiracy theories and look to understand for simple answers. The AFG invasion was just simply an invasion---a show of force---a wham bam---a techno thriller---shoot and scoot---pin point bombing---letting the bom fly through the the chimney of the house---here in afg or there in iraq---.

Sometimes the pak have to look at americans as normal, regular, average, less than intelligent, chest thumping individuals who have the most impressive arsenal of weaponery in the history of mankind---they want to show the world---basically russia and china and iran what they can do right in their backyard---this was a total show of force for the benefit of the above mentioned two---.

When stupidity is aligned with religious zealotary, when the leader of the state states that he talks to GOD, when his religious mentor and confidant states that God talks to him---when the puritans control the govt and the most destructive weapons in the history of mankind, they don't need to have to make up any conspiracy theories to attack AFG---.

Everytime we start up this conspiracy issue, our focus gets away from the problem at hand---that is the war on terror---the war in our background---we have been playing this game for 8 years now---blaming it on conspiracy theory---what difference does it make---conspiracy or not----if my house is on fire---my first priority is to put the fire out and then worry about the conspiracy---. But first you have to have the understanding of how to deal with it.

Tragically, majority of the pakistanis are totally clueless how that situation needed to be handled---pakistanis never took the threat seriously---and neither did the pak army---the pak army has been struting around all these years by saying---we will get them when we want to---oh yes you will---no doubt about that----but by that time, they would have instilled so much damage to the infra-structure---by inflicting a thousand small wounds----that pakistan would be really hurting for peace---.

The terrorists don't need to do much---they can just explode one bomb here and the other bomb there and all through that, they are ahead of the eight ball---.

Truthfully---pak army has lost its leadership capability for the last many years---it is acting out of fear for what would and could happen---it has become a reactionary force instead of a pro-active force---its analysis of the situation has been full of holes---bad advice---bad judgement---the genrals have started to think like politicians and politicians are gutless and worthless---.

The american generals and pak generals are made from the same mould---both unsure in how to handle the situation from day one---both under-estimating the enemy's resolve and sustaing power---both trying to please their political leadreship rather than painting the real picture---.

This is frig-gin "WAR OF THE ROSES"---if you haven't seen that 80's movies---maybe you should.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Pakistan Strongly Reacts to Reported Obama Letter​

By Sean Maroney
Islamabad
16 November 2009


Pakistan has strongly reacted to a reported letter from the U.S. president to his Pakistani counterpart that is said to urge Pakistan to do more in the fight against extremists. The response was made as four people were killed and 25 injured by a bomb in northwestern Pakistan, the seventh such attack in as many days.

Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi says his country will decide on its own, according to its priorities and resources, on how to fight militants.

He says the international community recognizes Pakistan's sacrifices and unity in the face of Islamist extremists. He says his country does not need to do more or less because someone is saying so.

Qureshi was responding to a U.S. media report that quoted unnamed American officials as saying U.S. National Security Advisor Jim Jones delivered a letter from U.S. President Barack Obama to Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari.

Jones arrived Friday in Pakistan, the same day two suicide bombers struck in and around Peshawar. One blast targeted the regional office of Pakistan's spy agency, destroying much of the building.

According to a New York Times article, Mr. Obama encouraged his Pakistani counterpart to rally the nation's political and national security institutions in the fight against extremists.

Qureshi says Pakistan is in close consultations with senior U.S. officials on Afghan policy. President Obama is considering whether to send more troops to the country, and Qureshi says he hopes any troop increase would not lead to instability in Pakistan.

VOA News - Pakistan Strongly Reacts to Reported Obama Letter

===========
"Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi says his country will decide on its own, according to its priorities and resources, on how to fight militants."

Which is essentially the three points I argued in the first post as determining if and when Pakistan will expand the ops.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Even if Pakistan increase the scope of operations, one thing is to be remembered that it can't be done all alone by Pakistan. Taking the example of bajaur, the militants crossed over into Afghanistan after they were driven out of their strongholds, and they crossed over very easily with no one stopping them or even giving a little resistance to them, and now they are back & creating problems once again knowing PA has limited resources & it can't be every where. Same will happen and is happening here, the militants will cross over into Afghanistan as they have plenty of sanctuaries there too to hide and let the storm get over and then move back in. Until the ANA and US forces don't take constructive steps on their side, the cat and mouse game will keep going on. PA will launch operation, they will run, when PA withdraws they will be back. Until both parties don't chalk out a comprehensive and mutual strategy to tighten the grip around the militants, neither PA do more will succeed nor US plans. I was hoping to hear some action on the Afghan side but alas not a word, rather reports of militants fleeing across the border or reports of TTP leadership being evacuated by Allied occupational forces to safety appear, very disappointing. PA knows what to do and how to do it and they have shown it too, its i believe time for US to show some seriousness and act in way to show that it is serious.

 

[bigmoneymaker]

Hi,

Sometimes we need to set apart conspiracy theories and look to understand for simple answers. The AFG invasion was just simply an invasion---a show of force---a wham bam---a techno thriller---shoot and scoot---pin point bombing---letting the bom fly through the the chimney of the house---here in afg or there in iraq---.

Sometimes the pak have to look at americans as normal, regular, average, less than intelligent, chest thumping individuals who have the most impressive arsenal of weaponery in the history of mankind---they want to show the world---basically russia and china and iran what they can do right in their backyard---this was a total show of force for the benefit of the above mentioned two---.

When stupidity is aligned with religious zealotary, when the leader of the state states that he talks to GOD, when his religious mentor and confidant states that God talks to him---when the puritans control the govt and the most destructive weapons in the history of mankind, they don't need to have to make up any conspiracy theories to attack AFG---.

Everytime we start up this conspiracy issue, our focus gets away from the problem at hand---that is the war on terror---the war in our background---we have been playing this game for 8 years now---blaming it on conspiracy theory---what difference does it make---conspiracy or not----if my house is on fire---my first priority is to put the fire out and then worry about the conspiracy---. But first you have to have the understanding of how to deal with it.

Tragically, majority of the pakistanis are totally clueless how that situation needed to be handled---pakistanis never took the threat seriously---and neither did the pak army---the pak army has been struting around all these years by saying---we will get them when we want to---oh yes you will---no doubt about that----but by that time, they would have instilled so much damage to the infra-structure---by inflicting a thousand small wounds----that pakistan would be really hurting for peace---.

The terrorists don't need to do much---they can just explode one bomb here and the other bomb there and all through that, they are ahead of the eight ball---.

Truthfully---pak army has lost its leadership capability for the last many years---it is acting out of fear for what would and could happen---it has become a reactionary force instead of a pro-active force---its analysis of the situation has been full of holes---bad advice---bad judgement---the genrals have started to think like politicians and politicians are gutless and worthless---.

The american generals and pak generals are made from the same mould---both unsure in how to handle the situation from day one---both under-estimating the enemy's resolve and sustaing power---both trying to please their political leadreship rather than painting the real picture---.

This is frig-gin "WAR OF THE ROSES"---if you haven't seen that 80's movies---maybe you should.

thanks for your reply, i see now . the usa admin is having its internal conflicts and struggle for power. they are still blinded by their sole superpower status that can take on anything on the planet by their abusive way of inflicting pain outside usa territory. i think i find the answer now . thousand thanks.

 

[S-2]

"IMO, Pakistan will not expand the war unless it sees the following:

1. A long term US commitment to Afghanistan and some sort of measurable road plan for stabilizing Afghanistan.

2. Military assistance in terms of expanding and replenishing its military assets expended in the fighting in Swat and SW, specifically its air assets (Especially rotary).

Fred Kagan talks about the limitations in Pak Mil resources in his analysis: Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban: Military Considerations | Critical Threats

3. Some sort of stabilization of South Waziristan before even considering an expansion into North Waziristan."

Pakistan WILL expand the war regardless of what it sees in Afghanistan, IMHO. How and at what speed it does so seems the larger question?

The war, afterall, to which Pakistan is engaged is Pakistan's war. No more nor less. Not a single soldier nor citizen of Pakistan has died anywhere but upon Pakistani soil. So whether you agree or disagree with why this war is being fought, from where it came, or even when it started, if Pakistan wishes to be truly sovereign and in control of its destiny it will attempt to control that which it can without respect to adjoining issues. Doing so means asserting the state's sovereignty over those lands ostensibly Pakistani.

At present, great swaths of Pakistan are not under the control of your government. Whether peace comes tomorrow to Afghanistan or not, that fact is the case today and why this war of yours shall continue. It will do so, however, at your pace and your whims-correct in your assessment of matters or otherwise.

A.M.'s assessment of the two contingent requirements to carry forth Pakistan's reclaiming of lands adjacent to S. Waziristan are likely correct. You will no doubt require additional assistance in the way of supplies and possibly technical intelligence support. I don't know the state of your equipment deployed in the west. Virtually all of you do not either. However, we can reasonably assume that much of it is or shall in due course be in some state of disrepair or in need of replacement.

Secondly, you may use it as a strategic rationale to not proceed further but I'd concur that it's irrelevant under any strategem until you can be assured that you've effectively displaced those elements that had previously held a grip on S. Waziristan. I didn't say kill nor shall I say destroy. Neither matter or are likely necessary if your citizens know that you are the dominant species in the neighborhood. At present that isn't the case although it's beginning to change. Note the use of beginning. Like the effort of ISAF across the border, gains anywhere in this war are tenuous and easily reversed until affirmed through a very long period.

Consider Bajaur- fourteen months and running of combat operations. Is it secure? I'd say no although it certainly is contested by your army and with each day that commitment appears more genuine it offers real hope to those of that area. Still, consider all that must yet be done to make Bajaur truly as physically habitable as it once was and emotionally more connected to the rest of your country. You've got a very long road to hoe there.

The same applies to SWAT. It is NOT a victory. That will come for SWATIs when they can no longer remember the last time they heard gunfire, a bomb explode, or a neighbor who hasn't been kidnapped. Have you reason to be proud? Of course. Is your work there finished or is the use of the term "victory" yet justified? No. Just the other day, more militants were captured. Capturing militants is a double-edged blade, is it not? It certainly beats not capturing them yet indicates their continued presence. As your public returns, they know that and will wonder if the presence of your security forces will be as permanent as that of the militants. That's a challenge of trust and, frankly, remains to be seen.

So too then with S. Waziristan. IMHO, it will be some considerable time before your Waziri citizens can be assured that they are, indeed, safe and living under a nat'l flag of Pakistan. To believe that simply because your army is now actively patrolling up and down roads that had as of three months ago not been a part of their presence in years is no basis to believe that S. Waziristan has been retaken and fully sanitized.

Then there are the IDPs. Are all of them returned to Bajaur? I'm unsure but would guess not. SWAT and Buner? Many, yes, but all? And how about S. Waziristan? It will appear that those IDPs must now plan for a winter in refugee camps, does it not? Even if things go marvelously though the winter and next spring, will they return to S. Waziristan en masse and overnight? I doubt it.

Can Pakistan wait for all these issues to be fully answered before proceeding on to N. Waziristan? Likely not in my estimation. At some point you will do so despite complete and thorough resolution of Bajaur, SWAT, and S. Waziristan. Will it be at a pace belonging to anybody but Pakistan, though? No. You don't have the means to resolve all your issues immediately and to your thorough satisfaction.

Will you go after the Haqqani network and the Quetta shura? Maybe. That answer, though, we only be addressed after you've determined WHY it's in your interest to do so. My answer to that is, regardless of Jana's thoughts about external forces, your issues today are rooted in the maintenence of these proxy options for Pakistan.

Your tribals have been infected more by the observable leniency provided to these groups. They see these men as ascendant in the natural order of things. Clearly it is better by virtue of both prestige and pay to be a militant than a member of your F.C. Even now that will be recognized in the manner and deference shown to Maulvi Nazir and Hafez Gul Bahadur's men. A commitment to attacking Afghanistan pays in Pakistan.

Should you trust these men? Maybe but the moment they feel threatened by the state, I guarantee you that they shall turn against Pakistan rather than acquiesce. Failure to give them what they want will mean more, not less, enemies on your plate. Again, that deference won't be missed by your young tribals as it wasn't before.

Can you provide those young tribals with any other options? I guess we're back to resources, are we not? Without eventually transforming the nature of these areas, whether Bajaur, SWAT, or S. Waziristan, the conditions of disaffectation remain and, thus, the potential to for attraction by charismatics.

Finally, it was interesting to note that what the NYT characterized as "ask", DAWN postured as "demand". As usual, it's all about the narrative in some quarters.

Maybe I'll chat about America the next time but that's really quite boring speculation and we're all on the cusp of receiving the definitive word from Obama here soon.

Thanks.

 

[pkd]

"IMO, Pakistan will not expand the war unless it sees the following:

1. A long term US commitment to Afghanistan and some sort of measurable road plan for stabilizing Afghanistan.

2. Military assistance in terms of expanding and replenishing its military assets expended in the fighting in Swat and SW, specifically its air assets (Especially rotary).

Fred Kagan talks about the limitations in Pak Mil resources in his analysis: Pakistan and the Afghan Taliban: Military Considerations | Critical Threats

3. Some sort of stabilization of South Waziristan before even considering an expansion into North Waziristan."

Pakistan WILL expand the war regardless of what it sees in Afghanistan, IMHO. How and at what speed it does so seems the larger question?

The war, afterall, to which Pakistan is engaged is Pakistan's war. No more nor less. Not a single soldier nor citizen of Pakistan has died anywhere but upon Pakistani soil. So whether you agree or disagree with why this war is being fought, from where it came, or even when it started, if Pakistan wishes to be truly sovereign and in control of its destiny it will attempt to control that which it can without respect to adjoining issues. Doing so means asserting the state's sovereignty over those lands ostensibly Pakistani.

At present, great swaths of Pakistan are not under the control of your government. Whether peace comes tomorrow to Afghanistan or not, that fact is the case today and why this war of yours shall continue. It will do so, however, at your pace and your whims-correct in your assessment of matters or otherwise.

A.M.'s assessment of the two contingent requirements to carry forth Pakistan's reclaiming of lands adjacent to S. Waziristan are likely correct. You will no doubt require additional assistance in the way of supplies and possibly technical intelligence support. I don't know the state of your equipment deployed in the west. Virtually all of you do not either. However, we can reasonably assume that much of it is or shall in due course be in some state of disrepair or in need of replacement.

Secondly, you may use it as a strategic rationale to not proceed further but I'd concur that it's irrelevant under any strategem until you can be assured that you've effectively displaced those elements that had previously held a grip on S. Waziristan. I didn't say kill nor shall I say destroy. Neither matter or are likely necessary if your citizens know that you are the dominant species in the neighborhood. At present that isn't the case although it's beginning to change. Note the use of beginning. Like the effort of ISAF across the border, gains anywhere in this war are tenuous and easily reversed until affirmed through a very long period.

Consider Bajaur- fourteen months and running of combat operations. Is it secure? I'd say no although it certainly is contested by your army and with each day that commitment appears more genuine it offers real hope to those of that area. Still, consider all that must yet be done to make Bajaur truly as physically habitable as it once was and emotionally more connected to the rest of your country. You've got a very long road to hoe there.

The same applies to SWAT. It is NOT a victory. That will come for SWATIs when they can no longer remember the last time they heard gunfire, a bomb explode, or a neighbor who hasn't been kidnapped. Have you reason to be proud? Of course. Is your work there finished or is the use of the term "victory" yet justified? No. Just the other day, more militants were captured. Capturing militants is a double-edged blade, is it not? It certainly beats not capturing them yet indicates their continued presence. As your public returns, they know that and will wonder if the presence of your security forces will be as permanent as that of the militants. That's a challenge of trust and, frankly, remains to be seen.

So too then with S. Waziristan. IMHO, it will be some considerable time before your Waziri citizens can be assured that they are, indeed, safe and living under a nat'l flag of Pakistan. To believe that simply because your army is now actively patrolling up and down roads that had as of three months ago not been a part of their presence in years is no basis to believe that S. Waziristan has been retaken and fully sanitized.

Then there are the IDPs. Are all of them returned to Bajaur? I'm unsure but would guess not. SWAT and Buner? Many, yes, but all? And how about S. Waziristan? It will appear that those IDPs must now plan for a winter in refugee camps, does it not? Even if things go marvelously though the winter and next spring, will they return to S. Waziristan en masse and overnight? I doubt it.

Can Pakistan wait for all these issues to be fully answered before proceeding on to N. Waziristan? Likely not in my estimation. At some point you will do so despite complete and thorough resolution of Bajaur, SWAT, and S. Waziristan. Will it be at a pace belonging to anybody but Pakistan, though? No. You don't have the means to resolve all your issues immediately and to your thorough satisfaction.

Will you go after the Haqqani network and the Quetta shura? Maybe. That answer, though, we only be addressed after you've determined WHY it's in your interest to do so. My answer to that is, regardless of Jana's thoughts about external forces, your issues today are rooted in the maintenence of these proxy options for Pakistan.

Your tribals have been infected more by the observable leniency provided to these groups. They see these men as ascendant in the natural order of things. Clearly it is better by virtue of both prestige and pay to be a militant than a member of your F.C. Even now that will be recognized in the manner and deference shown to Maulvi Nazir and Hafez Gul Bahadur's men. A commitment to attacking Afghanistan pays in Pakistan.

Should you trust these men? Maybe but the moment they feel threatened by the state, I guarantee you that they shall turn against Pakistan rather than acquiesce. Failure to give them what they want will mean more, not less, enemies on your plate. Again, that deference won't be missed by your young tribals as it wasn't before.

Can you provide those young tribals with any other options? I guess we're back to resources, are we not? Without eventually transforming the nature of these areas, whether Bajaur, SWAT, or S. Waziristan, the conditions of disaffectation remain and, thus, the potential to for attraction by charismatics.

Finally, it was interesting to note that what the NYT characterized as "ask", DAWN postured as "demand". As usual, it's all about the narrative in some quarters.

Maybe I'll chat about America the next time but that's really quite boring speculation and we're all on the cusp of receiving the definitive word from Obama here soon.

Thanks.

Well S-2 i have only one reply to you long harangue

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

S-2:

Thanks for the thoughts.

My own opinion about North Waziristan and Gul Bahdir changed after the ambush of the PA convoy in NW by Bahdur. It has been reinforced by the accounts of the kidnapped NYT journalist, who narrated tales of a region infested by foreign militants and militants who cheered a suicide bombing of a Jirga in Charsadda.

Of late there has been plenty of speculation over where the TTP-SW leadership has found sanctuary, and continues to plot from. There is also a new report in the LA Times that traces the path of Punjabi extremists to Miramshah (NW) for training and their return to Punjab for committing terrorism. Pakistan Taliban taps Punjab heartland for recruits -- latimes.com

All of this points to North Waziristan possibly becoming the new center of terrorism in Pakistan, unless the Haqqanis, Gul Bhadur and the local tribes are pressured to expel their 'guests' and limit their activities, and we know now that 'applying pressure on the Taliban from a position of weakness' is a bit of an oxymoron.

Orakzai, Khyber, Bajaur and Mohmand (and of course Swat) continue to see military activity and presence, indicating that in a way the theater had been expanded before the SW ops began, and this is how it should be.

It is not feasible to seal off one tribal agency from another, so by having an active military presence in only one agency the only thing we do is play 'wack a mole'. We chase the Taliban from Swat, and they go to FATA, we chase them from SW and they go to Khyber, Orakzai and NW. The continued military engagement in Khyber, Orakzai, Bajaur and Mohmand is therefore welcome.

P.S: All of the Bajaur refugees have not been repatriated yet:
Katcha Garhi IDPs oppose relocation to Jalozai camp

 

[Solomon2]

As I've written before, something is very wrong here. In all previous wars I can think of, the U.S. followed the rule that the ally who could muster the most power on the battlefield takes the leading role in strategic and tactical planning.

Since April, that would appear to be Pakistan. That this isn't happening - as evidenced by the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan's border area, opposite a Pakistani offensive, implies several things, none of them good: distrust, stupidity, or misrepresentation by Pakistan of the power of its own offensive.

The current Administration is young, but the U.S. military are professionals. So what does this letter mean?

 

[S-2]

That is twice now that you've used this specific cartoon as a post in reply to me-and done so on two separate threads. You must presume that you're particularly witty and/or the half-life of such is quite long.

In this case, my harangue (as you put it) seems far the more relevant. Afghanistan's issues have little bearing on what Pakistan chooses or doesn't choose to do on its lands in the near term.

America leaving Afghanistan, however, might. As I've indicated, you may be one of those here that cheers our departure. Why, however, I'm unsure as it only exacerbates your problems for a myriad of reasons.

Then again, I should suppose that any clown who twice resorts to a cartoon to express his thoughts on issues that offer far more opportunity to do so has likely defined the limits of his thinking. As such, you may be certain that you've become the latest in a long list of those who merit my ignore option.

Welcome...and goodbye.

 

[S-2]

"That this isn't happening - as evidenced by the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan's border area...

To date, we've withdrawn from six locations. I don't know the exact nature of those locations and nobody else seems to either. They could be as small as a joint border checkpoint manned by Afghan Border Police and possible OMLT (Operational Mentoring & Liaison Team) to a platoon or company-sized combat outpost.

My SUSPICION is that all of these may be in the Korengal valley of Konar or locations in Nuristan. We've for some time indicated our intent to do so (although I'm not convinced of the underlying rationales). The Korengal is an interesting example- we've had a company-sized element postured there in three separate platoon-sized locations for the best part of two years.

The combat has been constant but to no real purpose. We are fighting, to a great extent, natives of that valley and doing so over about 400 or so inhabitants spread throughout. There has been some infiltration from Bajaur but, as near as we can determine, they've done so to fight those U.S. forces there. It's hard fighting and good training, no doubt. Beyond that, though, we've no indication that militants are attempting to use that valley as an ingress point to locales further in-country.

Therefore, it begs the question of what we are doing allocating 100+ troops to 400 or so inhabitants whose living comes from smuggling timber into Pakistan aside from offering some great OJT for the local bad-boys and anybody who wants to wander across the border to take a whack at us. Our kids don't care. They're going to fight anybody that comes their way but are they serving our best purposes doing so in the Korengal and Nuristan? Gen. McChrystal doesn't seem to think so. I'm less certain.

"...opposite a Pakistani offensive, implies several things, none of them good: distrust, stupidity, or misrepresentation by Pakistan of the power of its own offensive."

That Pakistan offensive didn't kick off until late September-early October and was imminent nearly all summer long. McChrystal's announcement to re-align our forces preceded it. Moreover, IIRC, he specified that it would entail areas in RC-East. Personally, given the numbers of troops involved on our end, I don't see it as a big deal nor impeding their operations in S. Waziristan.

Finally, two points- 1.) there's some movement afoot by some in Pakistan to cast ANYTHING we do in a bad light and, 2.) the SWA offensive is well away from the border, targeted primarily on Mehsud lands and is shielded by the Wazir tribes who've every interest in raiding into Afghanistan and have no particular love for the Mehsud clans.

Anybody that can read a basic map can see that there are great distances involved between where Pakistani forces are actively engaged and the actual border. Nor has America wholly and thoroughly left RC-East. Nor shall we. Doing so means abandoning Abadabad and Jalalabad. Both of those cities are of sufficient size and political prominence that they won't be let go.

Functionally, I sense much ado about nothing but for the PR value to some of promoting American duplicity. Remember, we've been along that border for some years and have actively seeked tactical coordination and even joint operations to which we've been turned down. Suddenly we're the bad guy here?

It's not worth worrying about. They've got to do what they've got to do. So do we. When both sides reach a point where it's seriously in their mutual interests to conduct joint ops of some significance, it'll happen but I suspect we're both a long way from that.

 

[H2O3C4Nitrogen]

PA needs to push its forces in NW too but only to persue the anti-state elements and to establish the writ of the Gov and ensure that these areas do not fall into the wrong hands . We have to go through this bloody process which may take nearly a Decade of milletery adventure . Plenty of time for our rivals to weave another web of Perals .
What i fear is " Wat if all that milletery adventure of retaking and setteling the wild territory prove useless and the unrest continues and the PA while persuing all this becomes so weak that it would ultimately negotiate Forign Intervention Then what...?
Are their any alternatives or fighting them to the last is the only option left on the table ...?"