US Military Action Could Trigger Equal Response: ISI
- Thread starter SpArK
- Start date
TARIQ BN ZIYAAD
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2010
- Messages
- 1,951
- Reaction score
- 0
u.s was afraid of confrontation with iran coz it feared its force in iraq will be under it missiles. dO U think pakistanies doesnot have the capability of hitting those bases? in iraq and afghanistan these americans will have to leave those heavily guarded place where the taliban and alqaeda be happy to have them as a dinner
TARIQ
TARIQ
hunter_hunted
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2010
- Messages
- 4,082
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
Sharif said all such issues should be taken up in parliament,
He must be a crazy person he has a bad taste of army. last time joint resolution was passed in parliament n on same day the Americans attacked using drones
He really have a think skull with nothing in it
He must be a crazy person he has a bad taste of army. last time joint resolution was passed in parliament n on same day the Americans attacked using drones
He really have a think skull with nothing in it
Perceptron
BANNED
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2010
- Messages
- 834
- Reaction score
- 0
Now let me muse over another interesting tidbit, albeit rooted in reality.
A few decades ago, four to be precise, a land which was considered (by itself) to be a central geopolitical piece in the whole jigsaw of a continent, tried to crush an impoverished, though bigger in size, almost mano-a-mano in weaponry, with a doctrine embedded in martial theory. What happened as a consequence was that the entity considered of geopolitical importance, was sundered apart into two, and was made to suffer immense humiliation through an en masse capture of its martially superior personnel. I do not know which God came to its help during this event, though a level-headed analysis could certainly have helped itself.
Now this same geopolitical entity, is trying to whip up jingoism to crush an enemy, several times larger in size, and with immense weaponry sophistication. What might happen if we extrapolate geometrically is that, this time, the entity might be sundered into four. Of course, it can invoke the same God and leave aside level-headed analysis to fasten towards that process.
The interesting notion you bring up is, if GOD alone was to be trusted, and not our machines, then perhaps you do not need those machines and fight simply with God's name on your lips. But to me, it just is another percentage, maybe like Genius. Only in this case, rely 99% on your analysis, and maybe leave the 1% contingency to God to take care of it.
Fireurimagination
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2009
- Messages
- 3,594
- Reaction score
- -15
- Country
- Location
Better to Pray then, God never helped Afghanistan or Iraq nor it's going to send angels for Pakistan
---------- Post added at 12:13 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:10 PM ----------
Yups but before you nuke Kabul you can very well say bye-bye to few million Pakistanis and couple of Pakistani cities, no need to engage US hostilities with US will only harm Pakistan
LeGenD
MODERATOR
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2006
- Messages
- 15,813
- Reaction score
- 162
- Country
- Location
This is where you get it wrong.
We will not damage USA but we will damage neighbouring countries including Islamic ones, since many US military basis are situated in them.
Loss of military basis is not a big deal. And US can protect them through its advanced defensive weapons.
Sinnerman108
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2009
- Messages
- 8,994
- Reaction score
- -3
- Country
- Location
Expected response, here are the facts.
This nation you talk about had another encounter some 6 years before the one you are trying to advertise here.
What happened in that encounter is not of concern here.
AFTER the encounter the people of that nation came up with strange notions
they made a singer and some proclaim "concubine" the reason for victory.
The same people also let themselves be governed away from the principles of Islam, with what they called "Moderation".
Those people carved fake Gods, some times in and around graves and some times alive who claimed to be leaders...
Savvy ?
Let me repeat the concept one more time for I might not have been able to articulate properly.
God guarantees victory no matter what the odds are, if that struggle/war is made ONLY for God's cause and NO OTHER !
This victory is awarded AFTER the nation is tested, to separate the REAL believers from those who think they are believers.
This is the principle of God, and he has illustrated this principle many times in history AND he has made promises for future.
So, why don't we wait for the people to struggle in the name and for the cause of God and God alone, and see when the day comes.
Riseup
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- May 30, 2011
- Messages
- 155
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
The Pakistani army’s complex relationship with jihadists
CLUTCHING a glass of distinctly un-Islamic whisky, a retired senior Pakistani official explains at a drinks party in Islamabad, the capital, that his country has no choice but to support the jihadist opposition in Afghanistan. The Indians are throwing money at their own favourites in Afghanistan, he says, and the Russians and Iranians are doing the same. So Pakistan must play the game too. “Except we have no money. All we have are the crazies. So the crazies it is.”
Chief among the crazies is the Haqqani network, an Islamist militia with a 30-year history of fighting foreign occupations of Afghanistan. In mid-September the network struck in the heart of Kabul, launching a 20-hour assault on the American embassy and other targets. A week later, the leader of President Hamid Karzai’s efforts to make peace with the insurgents, Burhanuddin Rabbani, was assassinated in Kabul. The suicide bomber is suspected by some to have been linked to the Haqqanis.
Just after this Mike Mullen, chairman of America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared that the Haqqani network was a “veritable arm” of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spy agency, part of the country’s all-powerful army. A raft of other American officials, incensed by recent attacks on Western targets in Afghanistan, joined the verbal assault on Pakistan.
Perhaps because he is retiring this week, Admiral Mullen seems to have overstated things. It is not clear that the Americans have, as he claimed, a smoking gun linking the ISI to the ordering of strikes in Afghanistan. More to the point, America’s abilities to influence Pakistan’s army are limited. Admiral Mullen’s comments are likely only to worsen relations with Pakistan, and to fuel anti-American sentiment among ordinary Pakistanis.
The Haqqani network is based in Pakistan’s North Waziristan region, part of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which border on Afghanistan. The border is porous. American officials say that the district capital, Miranshah, houses compounds used by the Haqqanis under the noses of Pakistani intelligence. Pakistan angrily denies that it supports the Haqqanis, whom it po-facedly insists are based in Afghanistan, not Pakistan at all.
In an Afghan or Pakistani tribal context, Jalaluddin Haqqani (pictured), founder of the group, is a supremely successful guerrilla commander, once lauded by America for his services as a CIA-backed mujahid repelling the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Mr Haqqani, now said to be bedridden, was a minister for border and tribal affairs when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan. To their supporters in Afghanistan today, the Haqqanis are fighting an occupying force, just as they did the Soviets before, says Saifullah Mahsud, of the FATA Research Centre, an independent think-tank in Islamabad.
The chief help that Pakistan gives the Haqqanis takes the form of sanctuary, and perhaps guidance. Little suggests any direct Pakistani role in Haqqani operations. Pakistan’s generals believe that, with an unfriendly government in place in Afghanistan, they need proxies to represent their interests there. Pakistan prefers to make common cause with ethnic Pushtuns, who straddle the border, to guard against Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, whom the generals regard as close to India, their arch-enemy. The Pakistani army’s paranoia is fed by scenario planning in which a hostile Afghan government, with a growing army now trained and equipped by the Americans, joins India to mount a two-front war against Pakistan, sandwiched between the two countries.
To the ISI, which has had a relationship with him since the 1970s, Jalaluddin Haqqani is a more reliable proxy than the Taliban ever were. Since Pakistan formally abandoned its support for the Taliban under great American pressure following the September 11th attacks, distrust has reigned on both sides. The Haqqani network has demonstrated its willingness to hit targets in Afghanistan that please Pakistan’s military men most—especially Indian ones, including its embassy, in 2008, and Indian construction companies.
The Haqqani and the Taliban are operationally separate, with the first handling eastern Afghanistan and the second focusing on the south. But the Haqqani network appears to recognise the Taliban leadership, based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, as the authority guiding the insurgency. If the Taliban reconciled with the government in Kabul, says Mr Haqqani’s son, Sirajuddin, not entirely convincingly, his group would too.
Amazingly, America has until now not designated the Haqqani network as a terrorist organisation. Meanwhile, it will probably hope to increase missile strikes in North Waziristan by its drone aircraft. The drone campaign has been less successful against the Haqqani than against other groups, especially al-Qaeda. Perhaps Pakistan does not share much intelligence on the Haqqanis. However, America will be pulling its front-line troops out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014. Pakistan will have to live with the jihadists it promotes.
The Haqqani network: Snake country | The Economist
Oh man … They never understand what they want to say but they want to say some thing. The totally confused and mix-up of US / Pakistani experts’ opinion. But there is only one thing concluded there is no war considering as an option.
CLUTCHING a glass of distinctly un-Islamic whisky, a retired senior Pakistani official explains at a drinks party in Islamabad, the capital, that his country has no choice but to support the jihadist opposition in Afghanistan. The Indians are throwing money at their own favourites in Afghanistan, he says, and the Russians and Iranians are doing the same. So Pakistan must play the game too. “Except we have no money. All we have are the crazies. So the crazies it is.”
Chief among the crazies is the Haqqani network, an Islamist militia with a 30-year history of fighting foreign occupations of Afghanistan. In mid-September the network struck in the heart of Kabul, launching a 20-hour assault on the American embassy and other targets. A week later, the leader of President Hamid Karzai’s efforts to make peace with the insurgents, Burhanuddin Rabbani, was assassinated in Kabul. The suicide bomber is suspected by some to have been linked to the Haqqanis.
Just after this Mike Mullen, chairman of America’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, declared that the Haqqani network was a “veritable arm” of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) spy agency, part of the country’s all-powerful army. A raft of other American officials, incensed by recent attacks on Western targets in Afghanistan, joined the verbal assault on Pakistan.
Perhaps because he is retiring this week, Admiral Mullen seems to have overstated things. It is not clear that the Americans have, as he claimed, a smoking gun linking the ISI to the ordering of strikes in Afghanistan. More to the point, America’s abilities to influence Pakistan’s army are limited. Admiral Mullen’s comments are likely only to worsen relations with Pakistan, and to fuel anti-American sentiment among ordinary Pakistanis.
The Haqqani network is based in Pakistan’s North Waziristan region, part of the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA), which border on Afghanistan. The border is porous. American officials say that the district capital, Miranshah, houses compounds used by the Haqqanis under the noses of Pakistani intelligence. Pakistan angrily denies that it supports the Haqqanis, whom it po-facedly insists are based in Afghanistan, not Pakistan at all.
In an Afghan or Pakistani tribal context, Jalaluddin Haqqani (pictured), founder of the group, is a supremely successful guerrilla commander, once lauded by America for his services as a CIA-backed mujahid repelling the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. Mr Haqqani, now said to be bedridden, was a minister for border and tribal affairs when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan. To their supporters in Afghanistan today, the Haqqanis are fighting an occupying force, just as they did the Soviets before, says Saifullah Mahsud, of the FATA Research Centre, an independent think-tank in Islamabad.
The chief help that Pakistan gives the Haqqanis takes the form of sanctuary, and perhaps guidance. Little suggests any direct Pakistani role in Haqqani operations. Pakistan’s generals believe that, with an unfriendly government in place in Afghanistan, they need proxies to represent their interests there. Pakistan prefers to make common cause with ethnic Pushtuns, who straddle the border, to guard against Tajiks, Uzbeks and Hazaras, whom the generals regard as close to India, their arch-enemy. The Pakistani army’s paranoia is fed by scenario planning in which a hostile Afghan government, with a growing army now trained and equipped by the Americans, joins India to mount a two-front war against Pakistan, sandwiched between the two countries.
To the ISI, which has had a relationship with him since the 1970s, Jalaluddin Haqqani is a more reliable proxy than the Taliban ever were. Since Pakistan formally abandoned its support for the Taliban under great American pressure following the September 11th attacks, distrust has reigned on both sides. The Haqqani network has demonstrated its willingness to hit targets in Afghanistan that please Pakistan’s military men most—especially Indian ones, including its embassy, in 2008, and Indian construction companies.
The Haqqani and the Taliban are operationally separate, with the first handling eastern Afghanistan and the second focusing on the south. But the Haqqani network appears to recognise the Taliban leadership, based in the Pakistani city of Quetta, as the authority guiding the insurgency. If the Taliban reconciled with the government in Kabul, says Mr Haqqani’s son, Sirajuddin, not entirely convincingly, his group would too.
Amazingly, America has until now not designated the Haqqani network as a terrorist organisation. Meanwhile, it will probably hope to increase missile strikes in North Waziristan by its drone aircraft. The drone campaign has been less successful against the Haqqani than against other groups, especially al-Qaeda. Perhaps Pakistan does not share much intelligence on the Haqqanis. However, America will be pulling its front-line troops out of Afghanistan by the end of 2014. Pakistan will have to live with the jihadists it promotes.
The Haqqani network: Snake country | The Economist
Oh man … They never understand what they want to say but they want to say some thing. The totally confused and mix-up of US / Pakistani experts’ opinion. But there is only one thing concluded there is no war considering as an option.
Similar threads
