We know how to deal with you, India warns Pakistan

[afriend]

An addendum to that - Zardari is correct that the US and Pakistan (and Soviets and Saudis) were responsible for creating the conditions regionally that led to the rise of the Taliban.

I thought you had categorically said that pakistan didnt have any role in creating taliban..???? Playing a part in setting up the enviornment for creating taliban is as good as creating them..!!! The same policy you are adopting in kashmir too..which clearly shows you have not learnt your leassons..!!

I agree with harish, the fostering of these extrimists elements and subsequent war against them are all direct examples of pakistan using the terrorism.. as a forgien policy. There should not be any conditions for fighting terror..and the definition should be very clear.. else these groups witih uneducated and extrimists people at their helm can grow on to be a force by themselves and turn back and bite every one.

And people have been blaming indians for blasts in pak, i was wondering if we are indeed responsible.. couldnt we have taken out these LET leaders... or their assets in pakistan..!!

So i think india now have made up her mind and now have clear plans for any level of contingencies she may have in future.. the plan which she didnt have in 1962 war or kargil....!!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Your original clarification 'debunking' a claim is between you and the person making such a claim. But there are other participants in this thread too, who I presume are free to disagree with or 'debunk' statements made by you regardless of whether they follow the straight and narrow axis of your own original argument or choose to go off on to a tangent as long as they remain within the ambit of the broad topic of the thread.

In which case I assume you agree with my clarification that Pakistan did not create the Taliban, since you offered no rebuttal to my arguments on that count, and wish to discuss a separate issue of whether Pakistan supported the Taliban.

On that issue, please reference my first clarification on the issue of 'Pakistan created the Taliban' in which I did reference Pakistani support and when it occurred - subsequently I expect a retraction of your claim that I 'glossed over' Pakistan's support for the Taliban and a needless attempt on your part to smear me by suggesting I was dissembling by virtue of not addressing that particular issue.

And speaking of tangentials, where did your response to original claim fit into the original axis of a thread purportedly dealing with India's ability to deal with Pakistan? Someone said something, someone else said something in return, someone made a claim, and you responded right? After all, 14 pages and 210 posts have not all followed a single train of thought right? That's how a thread develops.

Why should I lie go unchallenged? An Indian put forward a lie and it was countered, other Indians chose to press the issue and attempt to perpetuate the lie and hence the exchange continued.

I can read just fine, and the argument I wish to make, without 'weaseling' or otherwise digressing from the thread topic under discussion, is that Pakistan is responsible for the Taliban by surrogate parenting if not progeniture,

The Taliban had already gained considerable influence and control of territory before Pakistan started backing them. They had the support of the local populace, warlords and Pasthun tribal leaders. Karzai's family and karzai himself supported them at one point. They were also far more disciplined than any of the raping, pillaging and murdering warlords and their hordes which made them a very attractive faction, and perhaps the only faction, to support in order to stabilize Afghanistan.

Extrapolating from that rise and leaving out intervention by any foreign government, the Taliban would have risen to power in any case - they had discipline, ideological zeal, and a powerful fund-raising apparatus utilizing donations from the Gulf and Pakistan, as well as revenue from drugs, taxes (extortion) etc. Pakistan's (and Saudi) support merely hastened the inevitable.

and that India is well capable of replying back to Pakistan in its own coin many times over, thus making Pakistan's current policy of proxyism an enterprise of diminishing returns. Not to mention of course that India would deal with Pakistan for misdemeanours against Indian interests, be they on Indian or foreign soil. So neither will the sanctimonious hand washing-off nor victim card wash as India makes it tersely clear that the time for accountability or reprisals is nigh.

Well deal with Indian braggadocio when there Indian actions are able to match up to their words. Initiating a proxy war against Pakistan (If India has not already been doing so through its sponsorship of terrorism in Baluchistan and elsewhere) will only mean that the gloves come of once again in Kashmir.

We have silenced our guns and allowed the Kashmir insurgency to peter off in the interest of utilizing dialog to resolve the J&K dispute, on which substantial progress was made during Musharraf's rule - that desire to see progress through dialog should not be mistaken for weakness and inability to reverse direction were India to engage in a proxy war with Pakistan.

Indian attacks on Pakistan, overt or covert, will not go unanswered. India will burn so long as it attempts to harm Pakistan, cold start or no cold start and chest thumping by Indian politicians, notwithstanding.

 

[achimus]

How was the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan Pakistan's fault? How was the cold war, and the US decision to support Mujahideen in Afghanistan as an extension of that, Pakistan's fault? How was the subsequent abandonment of Afghanistan by the international community Pakistan's fault? How was the inability of the various warlords in Afghanistan to come to a compromise and power sharing agreement Pakistan's fault? How was the decision of various Afghan governments to be hostile to Pakistan and supporting insurgencies in Pakistan Pakistan's fault?

A lot more went into the mess that is Afghanistan than what Pakistan did.

You cannot control circumstances but you are responsible for you actions.

Soviet invasion of Afganistan is not pakistan's fault but subsequent actions are.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I thought you had categorically said that pakistan didnt have any role in creating taliban..???? Playing a part in setting up the enviornment for creating taliban is as good as creating them..!!! The same policy you are adopting in kashmir too..which clearly shows you have not learnt your leassons..!!

Oh right, but I left out the rather major role played by the Soviets in creating those conditions through their invasion. The rather major role played by the international communnity in abandoning Afghanistan after the Soviet defeat. The Iranian, Russian and Indian roles in supporting factions allied against those being supported by Pakistan .....

So if 'creation of conditions for the rise of the Taliban' is the direction you wish to go in, then there are far more players than just Pakistan, and some with a far greater impact than that of Pakistan.

I agree with harish, the fostering of these extrimists elements and subsequent war against them are all direct examples of pakistan using the terrorism.. as a forgien policy. There should not be any conditions for fighting terror..and the definition should be very clear.. else these groups witih uneducated and extrimists people at their helm can grow on to be a force by themselves and turn back and bite every one.

You can agree with harish but you would both be factually wrong. Pakistan's support for the Taliban, as I outlined in my response to harish, was not support for terrorism but support for one faction in the Afghan civil war. Taliban barabarity was matched by that of pretty much all the other factions.

The Nothern Alliance had warlords in it that were responsible for attempted genocides of some ethnic and sectarian communities. Their barbarism was the reason the Taliban were initially welcomed by Afghans, especially the Pashtun.

So no, Pakistan's past support for the Taliban during the Afghan civil war can in no way be argued to be support for terrorism.

And people have been blaming indians for blasts in pak, i was wondering if we are indeed responsible.. couldnt we have taken out these LET leaders... or their assets in pakistan..!!

The argument would be that India is using an existing mindset of hatred and terrorism that would turn its guns on India once it controlled Pakistan, and so it would be hard to make them turn on their own.

Since India knows the TTP is unlikely to defeat the PA, the objective is to keep supporting these terrorists in attacking Pakistan enough to keep Pakistan weak.

So i think india now have made up her mind and now have clear plans for any level of contingencies she may have in future.. the plan which she didnt have in 1962 war or kargil....!!

huh?

 

[afriend]

Well deal with Indian braggadocio when there Indian actions are able to match up to their words. Initiating a proxy war against Pakistan (If India has not already been doing so through its sponsorship of terrorism in Baluchistan and elsewhere) will only mean that the gloves come of once again in Kashmir.

If indeed your calims about baluchistan and elsewhere is true.. why are indians not trying to hit the assets of people who are raising anti india tirade???

We have silenced our guns and allowed the Kashmir insurgency to peter off in the interest of utilizing dialog to resolve the J&K dispute, on which substantial progress was made during Musharraf's rule - that desire to see progress through dialog should not be mistaken for weakness and inability to reverse direction were India to engage in a proxy war with Pakistan.

Indian attacks on Pakistan, overt or covert, will not go unanswered. India will burn so long as it attempts to harm Pakistan, cold start or no cold start and chest thumping by Indian politicians, notwithstanding.

I do not think so, saeed salhudin was on camera motivating people who are ready to cross over to india to wage jihad..!! and the response to that by some one from your ministry was the same age old one that is solve kashmir..!!! Which clearly states that you have not done anything to allow the insurgency to peter off..!!!

And please note that we have been burning for long.. and i dont think no amount of chest thumping or big talk by pakistan with their toy bomb threat can stop india if we really push the pedal to our resolve..!!! Pakistan based terror groups have been bleeding india for long and nirupama raos statement have reitrated the fact that indian patience is wearing thin and there is a limit of abuse india can take !!!

So i would suggest we should be honest in our resolve.. and discussions should not be done for point scoring just like your forgien secratary salman bashir said.. lets forget kashmir for a second and try to gain trust..!!! Coz a war is very bad for us.. but even badder for you guys..!!!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

You cannot control circumstances but you are responsible for you actions.

Soviet invasion of Afganistan is not pakistan's fault but subsequent actions are.

Read through the entire list I posted - that is a whole lot of events and actions in Afghanistan that Pakistan had little to no control over. Woudl the Soviets have merely stayed put in Afghanistan or would they have eventually marched East in conjunction with India?

Given historical Afghan hostility to Pakistan, and Afghan attempts to destabilize Pakistan and claim its territory, would Afghanistan have been emboldened with a Soviet military presence on its soil to once again spark terrorism and insurgencies on Pakistani territory in order to occupy and claim it?

And what of the international abandonment of Afghanistan after the Soviets were defeated? After the invasion that was probably the next most significant cause for Afghanistan's slide into chaos - and again, none of Pakistan's doing.

 

[afriend]

huh?

Well was refering to the War doctrine that india have now..!!!

 

[Bang Galore]

.......... that desire to see progress through dialog should not be mistaken for weakness and inability to reverse direction.........

212 posts later you are using almost the exact same words that Nirupama Rao was quoted as saying which got a lot of people here excited.
Funny how things turn out.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

I do not think so, saeed salhudin was on camera motivating people who are ready to cross over to india to wage jihad..!! and the response to that by some one from your ministry was the same age old one that is solve kashmir..!!! Which clearly states that you have not done anything to allow the insurgency to peter off..!!!

Pep talks at rallies do not equate an active insurgency - I fail to see how you can go from the rallies to the conclusion that Pakistan has done nothing, when the insurgency in Kashmir continues to be marginal, the LoC largely silent, and cross border infiltration still relatively low.

Pakistan, if it wished to, could reverse all of that and go back to the days of the nineties. That it has instead chosen to assist in tamping down the insurgency negates your argument.

And please note that we have been burning for long.. and i dont think no amount of chest thumping or big talk by pakistan with their toy bomb threat can stop india if we really push the pedal to our resolve..!!! Pakistan based terror groups have been bleeding india for long and nirupama raos statement have reitrated the fact that indian patience is wearing thin and there is a limit of abuse india can take !!!

The braggadocio is all on your end - Pakistan is not the one threatening offensive military action - our statements remain confined to a defensive response in case of Indian aggression.

And you have been burning due to your own faults, your own extremists and your own refusal to end the occupation and subjugation of the people of Kashmir, and not because of Pakistan.

So i would suggest we should be honest in our resolve.. and discussions should not be done for point scoring just like your forgien secratary salman bashir said.. lets forget kashmir for a second and try to gain trust..!!! Coz a war is very bad for us.. but even badder for you guys..!!!

Unfortunately that is pretty much all India appears to be doing nowadays, puerile point scoring and whining in the international community and domestically in an attempt to isolate Pakistan.

Pakistan is ready for meaningful talks and dialog, it has been since before India canceled the back channel dialog with Musharraf - it is for India to indicate it is serious about dialog by ending the whining and smear campaign against Pakistan and agree to talk about the various disputes. The rest will follow.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well was refering to the War doctrine that india have now..!!!

Ahh yes, dhaka start (thanks Tech) - a long way from being completely operational.

 

[harish]

In which case I assume you agree with my clarification that Pakistan did not create the Taliban, since you offered no rebuttal to my arguments on that count, and wish to discuss a separate issue of whether Pakistan supported the Taliban.

On that issue, please reference my first clarification on the issue of 'Pakistan created the Taliban' in which I did reference Pakistani support and when it occurred - subsequently I expect a retraction of your claim that I 'glossed over' Pakistan's support for the Taliban and a needless attempt on your part to smear me by suggesting I was dissembling by virtue of not addressing that particular issue.

Yes I agree that you did not create the Taliban. But I do not agree that your role was merely a simple 'support' of the Taliban. You gave them much more. You ensured they survived as an entity way beyond their sell-by-date. You gave them refuge on your land. You gave them arms. You gave them money. You protected them and even today continue to protect factions of the same as convenient to you under the flawed good taliban, bad taliban theory. The seed of the Taliban may have germinated elsewhere, but you were the gardener and curator of the soil that ensured the sapling grew into full fledged poison ivy. Your motives were neither altruistic nor neighbourly as you played a dangerous game of meddling in a foreign country in the garb of a nation burdened by millions of refugees. You knew well the pound of flesh your minions were going to extract for you but you lost control and are now paying the price. Hope my reading of the situation is the same as yours and if so I humbly issue a retraction of my earlier accusation and apologise for the same.

Why should I lie go unchallenged? An Indian put forward a lie and it was countered, other Indians chose to press the issue and attempt to perpetuate the lie and hence the exchange continued.

By the same yardstick, I replied to you, annexing my own clarification to your own clarification, to show both sides of the coin.

The Taliban had already gained considerable influence and control of territory before Pakistan started backing them. They had the support of the local populace, warlords and Pasthun tribal leaders. Karzai's family and karzai himself supported them at one point. They were also far more disciplined than any of the raping, pillaging and murdering warlords and their hordes which made them a very attractive faction, and perhaps the only faction, to support in order to stabilize Afghanistan.

Extrapolating from that rise and leaving out intervention by any foreign government, the Taliban would have risen to power in any case - they had discipline, ideological zeal, and a powerful fund-raising apparatus utilizing donations from the Gulf and Pakistan, as well as revenue from drugs, taxes (extortion) etc. Pakistan's (and Saudi) support merely hastened the inevitable.

Lets face it. The Taliban would not have survived if they did not have Pakistan to run to when the heat turned on at the start of this decade. Even today, you and your former ally the US are fighting at crossed purposes, allowing the Taliban breathing space to escape, recoup, and come back. You can no longer hunt with the hounds and run with the hare. The sooner you realise that, the safer your cities will be.

Well deal with Indian braggadocio when there Indian actions are able to match up to their words. Initiating a proxy war against Pakistan (If India has not already been doing so through its sponsorship of terrorism in Baluchistan and elsewhere) will only mean that the gloves come of once again in Kashmir.

We have silenced our guns and allowed the Kashmir insurgency to peter off in the interest of utilizing dialog to resolve the J&K dispute, on which substantial progress was made during Musharraf's rule - that desire to see progress through dialog should not be mistaken for weakness and inability to reverse direction were India to engage in a proxy war with Pakistan.

Indian attacks on Pakistan, overt or covert, will not go unanswered. India will burn so long as it attempts to harm Pakistan, cold start or no cold start and chest thumping by Indian politicians, notwithstanding.

Thank you for the perpetuation of the mutual chest thumping frenzy. Your gloves have come off. They never went back on. You were merely busy elsewhere but have now realised, like India has, that the best defense against the other is offense. So as you reattempt to make India burn, you leave yourself and your cities open to more of the same of the past year. And coming back to the original statement of Nirupama Rao, and a sentiment shared by the Indian leadership now, we will just have to make sure that you burn more than we do, so that a point comes when the burning will have to stop and true talking begin.

And the funny part about the whole thing is that Indian leadership has finally realised what Pakistani leadership knew all along. That this policy makes good political sense. That it may have a positive effect on national security for the masses is at best a happy coincidence. The leadership understands that our intelligence will never be good enough to prevent Pakistani terror strikes in our cities. We have huge porous borders. And many impoversished easily swayed disgruntled nationals. It is not possible to police and monitor a nation of a billion plus. So bomb blasts will happen. Indians will die. And the leadership will be able to do nothing about it.

So how does the leadership survive its term and get re-elected? It ensures that for every blast in an Indian city, there are two in Pakistan. For every Indian killed, 10 Pakistanis pay a similar price. For a population that is busy with earning its living and aspiring to a better future, living with terrorist strikes has become a part of modern life. Lives are shattered, but we learn to pick up the pieces and move on. But we draw the line at being the only ones picking up the pieces. The Indian public needs mollification. They need to see their neighbour suffering as badly if not worse. Heard the story of the pail full of crabs? This is the subcontinent today. So if Pakistani cities burn, just the mere suspicion that India is in some way involved is enough to convince the ordinary Indian that his government is doing something and that he is not suffering alone. Feeling of retribution are primal and strong. The leadership knows this and banks on this. The classic placebo. And a further 5 years in power. And they need to thank Pakistani leadership, both military and civilian, for showing them the way.

 

[Bang Galore]

Interesting reading:

Pakistan: "The Taliban's Godfather"?

Documents Detail Years of Pakistani Support for Taliban, Extremists

Pakistan: "The Taliban's Godfather"?

(Excerpt)
Washington D.C., August 14, 2007 - A collection of newly-declassified documents published today detail U.S. concern over Pakistan's relationship with the Taliban during the seven-year period leading up to 9-11. This new release comes just days after Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, acknowledged that, "There is no doubt Afghan militants are supported from Pakistan soil." While Musharraf admitted the Taliban were being sheltered in the lawless frontier border regions, the declassified U.S. documents released today clearly illustrate that the Taliban was directly funded, armed and advised by Islamabad itself.

Obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, the documents reflect U.S. apprehension about Islamabad's longstanding provision of direct aid and military support to the Taliban, including the use of Pakistani troops to train and fight alongside the Taliban inside Afghanistan. [Doc 17] The records released today represent the most complete and comprehensive collection of declassified documentation to date on Pakistan's aid programs to the Taliban, illustrating Islamabad's firm commitment to a Taliban victory in Afghanistan. [Doc 34].

These new documents also support and inform the findings of a recently-released CIA intelligence estimate characterizing Pakistan's tribal areas as a safe haven for al-Qaeda terrorists, and provide new details about the close relationship between Islamabad and the Taliban in the years prior to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Declassified State Department cables and U.S. intelligence reports describe the use of Taliban terrorist training areas in Afghanistan by Pakistani-supported militants in Kashmir, as well as Pakistan's covert effort to supply Pashtun troops from its tribal regions to the Taliban cause in Afghanistan-effectively forging and reinforcing Pashtun bonds across the border and consolidating the Taliban's severe form of Islam throughout Pakistan's frontier region.

Also published today are documents linking Harakat ul-Ansar, a militant Kashmiri group funded directly by the government of Pakistan, [Doc 10] to terrorist training camps shared by Osama bin Laden in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. [Doc 16]

Of particular concern was the potential for Islamabad-Taliban links to strengthen Taliban influence in Pakistan's tribal regions along the border. A January 1997 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan observed that "for Pakistan, a Taliban-based government in Kabul would be as good as it can get in Afghanistan," adding that worries that the "Taliban brand of Islam…might infect Pakistan," was "apparently a problem for another day." [Doc 20] Now ten years later, Islamabad seems to be acknowledging the domestic complications that the Taliban movement has created within Pakistan. A report produced by Pakistan's Interior Ministry and obtained by the International Herald Tribune in June 2007 warned President Pervez Musharraf that Taliban-inspired Islamic militancy has spread throughout Pakistan's tribal regions and could potentially threaten the rest of the country. The document is "an accurate description of the dagger pointed at the country's heart," according to one Pakistani official quoted in the article. "It's tragic it's taken so long to recognize it."

Islamabad denies that it ever provided military support to the Taliban , but the newly-released documents report that in the weeks following the Taliban takeover of Kabul in 1996, Pakistan's intelligence agency was "supplying the Taliban forces with munitions, fuel, and food." Pakistan's Interservice Intelligence Directorate was "using a private sector transportation company to funnel supplies into Afghanistan and to the Taliban forces." [Doc 15] Other documents also conclude that there has been an extensive and consistent history of "both military and financial assistance to the Taliban." [Doc 8]

The newly-released documents also shed light on the complexity of U.S. diplomacy with Pakistan as the State Department has struggled to maintain the U.S.-Pakistan alliance amid concerns over the rise of the Taliban regime. In one August 1997 cable, U.S. Ambassador Thomas W. Simons advises, "Our good relations with Pakistan associate us willy-nilly, so we need to be extremely careful about Pakistani proposals that draw us even closer," adding that, "Pakistan is a party rather than just a mediator [in Afghanistan]." [Doc 24] In another 1997 cable, the Embassy asserts that "the best policy for the U.S. is to steer clear of direct involvement in the disputes between the two countries [Pakistan and Iran], and to continue to work for peace in Afghanistan." [Doc 22]

As to Pakistan's end-game in supporting the Taliban, several documents suggest that in the interest of its own security, Pakistan would try to moderate some of the Taliban's more extreme policies. [Doc 8] But the Taliban have a long history of resistance to external interests, and the actual extent of Pakistani influence over the Taliban during this period remains largely speculative. As the State Department commented in a cable from late-1995, "Although Pakistan has reportedly assured Tehran and Tashkent that it can control the Taliban, we remain unconvinced. Pakistan surely has some influence on the Taliban, but it falls short of being able to call the shots." [Doc 7]....................................

 

[afriend]

Pep talks at rallies do not equate an active insurgency - I fail to see how you can go from the rallies to the conclusion that Pakistan has done nothing, when the insurgency in Kashmir continues to be marginal, the LoC largely silent, and cross border infiltration still relatively low.

Pakistan, if it wished to, could reverse all of that and go back to the days of the nineties. That it has instead chosen to assist in tamping down the insurgency negates your argument.

Well addressing a group of people with ak-47s in their hands and what from the surrondings seems like a training camp doesnt amount to instigating terrorism??? This is a childish argument agno..!!! This also negates and contradicts your government categorical statements that pakistani soil will not be used for any anti india activity. do you think we can trust you if we recieve such informations??? Still you cry that india is going around the world trying to maligin and isolate you.. we wouldnt have had to go around the world if you had taken action and stick to your words..!!!

The braggadocio is all on your end - Pakistan is not the one threatening offensive military action - our statements remain confined to a defensive response in case of Indian aggression.

And you have been burning due to your own faults, your own extremists and your own refusal to end the occupation and subjugation of the people of Kashmir, and not because of Pakistan.

This is like making the world dark by closing eyes..!!! And we have not threatned an military offensive and always maintaned that military offensive is not good. But as i said it seems pakistan have been needling india to another fight with their hypocratic support to anti india terrorists even as your government calim other wise. And yes its because of our Inaction that we are buring.. so when become rigid after years of inaction from your part you claim india is mongering war.. forgetting the very fact that you never ceased your support for these terror groups..!!!!!

Pakistan is ready for meaningful talks and dialog, it has been since before India canceled the back channel dialog with Musharraf - it is for India to indicate it is serious about dialog by ending the whining and smear campaign against Pakistan and agree to talk about the various disputes. The rest will follow.

Well see india is very clear on its policy we will never talk with a person who uses terrorism as its tool.. india is ready to talk to seperatists but not to terrorists..!!! That is why we have remained sane all these years with the proper system...!! So india is right in every way to say that support for anti india groups have to stop for any meaning full dialog..!!!

 

[IceCold]

Well addressing a group of people with ak-47s in their hands and what from the surrondings seems like a training camp doesnt amount to instigating terrorism??? This is a childish argument agno..!!! This also negates and contradicts your government categorical statements that pakistani soil will not be used for any anti india activity. do you think we can trust you if we recieve such informations??? Still you cry that india is going around the world trying to maligin and isolate you.. we wouldnt have had to go around the world if you had taken action and stick to your words..!!!

And what exactly have we not done to stick to our words? Have we not taken action against those accused in 26/11? You can surely disagree by saying that Hafiz Saeed was released but then again what you failed to understand is that Pakistan too has a judical system and unless and untill sufficent evidence is provided by India to charge him, prosecution would have its hands tied.

This is like making the world dark by closing eyes..!!! And we have not threatned an military offensive and always maintaned that military offensive is not good.

Ohh please spare us the usual BS. Right after 26/11 within the 1st hour India through some magic wand knew Pakistan was behind it and talks about every option open and IAF violating Pakistan airspace means what to you?

Well see india is very clear on its policy we will never talk with a person who uses terrorism as its tool.. india is ready to talk to seperatists but not to terrorists..!!! That is why we have remained sane all these years with the proper system...!! So india is right in every way to say that support for anti india groups have to stop for any meaning full dialog..!!!

By all means carry on with this policy, surely no one will loose sleep on the other side of the border. Your last line by the way clearly resembles an Indian mindset "India is right in every way" Ofcourse how can India be wrong, it has to be Pakistan.......is the kind of mentality, we cant possibly hope for peace in South Asia.

 

[IceCold]

Interesting reading:

Pakistan: "The Taliban's Godfather"?

Documents Detail Years of Pakistani Support for Taliban, Extremists

Pakistan: "The Taliban's Godfather"?

(Excerpt)
Washington D.C., August 14, 2007 - A collection of newly-declassified documents published today detail U.S. concern over Pakistan's relationship with the Taliban during the seven-year period leading up to 9-11. This new release comes just days after Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, acknowledged that, "There is no doubt Afghan militants are supported from Pakistan soil." While Musharraf admitted the Taliban were being sheltered in the lawless frontier border regions, the declassified U.S. documents released today clearly illustrate that the Taliban was directly funded, armed and advised by Islamabad itself.

Obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the National Security Archive at George Washington University, the documents reflect U.S. apprehension about Islamabad's longstanding provision of direct aid and military support to the Taliban, including the use of Pakistani troops to train and fight alongside the Taliban inside Afghanistan. [Doc 17] The records released today represent the most complete and comprehensive collection of declassified documentation to date on Pakistan's aid programs to the Taliban, illustrating Islamabad's firm commitment to a Taliban victory in Afghanistan. [Doc 34].

These new documents also support and inform the findings of a recently-released CIA intelligence estimate characterizing Pakistan's tribal areas as a safe haven for al-Qaeda terrorists, and provide new details about the close relationship between Islamabad and the Taliban in the years prior to the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Declassified State Department cables and U.S. intelligence reports describe the use of Taliban terrorist training areas in Afghanistan by Pakistani-supported militants in Kashmir, as well as Pakistan's covert effort to supply Pashtun troops from its tribal regions to the Taliban cause in Afghanistan-effectively forging and reinforcing Pashtun bonds across the border and consolidating the Taliban's severe form of Islam throughout Pakistan's frontier region.

Also published today are documents linking Harakat ul-Ansar, a militant Kashmiri group funded directly by the government of Pakistan, [Doc 10] to terrorist training camps shared by Osama bin Laden in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan. [Doc 16]

Of particular concern was the potential for Islamabad-Taliban links to strengthen Taliban influence in Pakistan's tribal regions along the border. A January 1997 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan observed that "for Pakistan, a Taliban-based government in Kabul would be as good as it can get in Afghanistan," adding that worries that the "Taliban brand of Islam…might infect Pakistan," was "apparently a problem for another day." [Doc 20] Now ten years later, Islamabad seems to be acknowledging the domestic complications that the Taliban movement has created within Pakistan. A report produced by Pakistan's Interior Ministry and obtained by the International Herald Tribune in June 2007 warned President Pervez Musharraf that Taliban-inspired Islamic militancy has spread throughout Pakistan's tribal regions and could potentially threaten the rest of the country. The document is "an accurate description of the dagger pointed at the country's heart," according to one Pakistani official quoted in the article. "It's tragic it's taken so long to recognize it."

Islamabad denies that it ever provided military support to the Taliban , but the newly-released documents report that in the weeks following the Taliban takeover of Kabul in 1996, Pakistan's intelligence agency was "supplying the Taliban forces with munitions, fuel, and food." Pakistan's Interservice Intelligence Directorate was "using a private sector transportation company to funnel supplies into Afghanistan and to the Taliban forces." [Doc 15] Other documents also conclude that there has been an extensive and consistent history of "both military and financial assistance to the Taliban." [Doc 8]

The newly-released documents also shed light on the complexity of U.S. diplomacy with Pakistan as the State Department has struggled to maintain the U.S.-Pakistan alliance amid concerns over the rise of the Taliban regime. In one August 1997 cable, U.S. Ambassador Thomas W. Simons advises, "Our good relations with Pakistan associate us willy-nilly, so we need to be extremely careful about Pakistani proposals that draw us even closer," adding that, "Pakistan is a party rather than just a mediator [in Afghanistan]." [Doc 24] In another 1997 cable, the Embassy asserts that "the best policy for the U.S. is to steer clear of direct involvement in the disputes between the two countries [Pakistan and Iran], and to continue to work for peace in Afghanistan." [Doc 22]

As to Pakistan's end-game in supporting the Taliban, several documents suggest that in the interest of its own security, Pakistan would try to moderate some of the Taliban's more extreme policies. [Doc 8] But the Taliban have a long history of resistance to external interests, and the actual extent of Pakistani influence over the Taliban during this period remains largely speculative. As the State Department commented in a cable from late-1995, "Although Pakistan has reportedly assured Tehran and Tashkent that it can control the Taliban, we remain unconvinced. Pakistan surely has some influence on the Taliban, but it falls short of being able to call the shots." [Doc 7]....................................

Have you bothered to read the date of the article or is just because the title is "Pakistan: "The Taliban's Godfather" you find the read very interesting. Also i would remind you before you harp somemore on this crap, read the statement made by Hillary Clinton. SInce you can dig down back to 2007 to find an article to support your strawman argument, you dont have to go that far to find out what she had to say regarding where the responsibility lies for taliban.

By the way both US and NATO have realised that without bringing Taliban into the mainstream, peace cannot be accomplished, something Pakistan has been saying since WOT started, Indian babbling does not matter anymore, because the fact of the matter is Pakistan was right.