Who Won in Afghanistan???

[xyxmt]

The strategic Genius "the great General Hameed gul" has layed out complete Plan for this region for next 20 years and every turn of events you see how right he was. His phrase that future historian will write about ISI that ISI defeated Soviets with help of US and then ISI defeated US with the help of US...Epic

 

[Khan vilatey]

Whatever US money you got in the past were for using your land for supplies to Afg or as compensation for pounding your land with air strikes

i know it’s hard to understand western logic, it’s relentless, yet for us In the west it’s about survival. We have a declining populous and other issues. We need the modem equivalent of servants to sustain us. The simplest solution is too give outsource work to the poor populous, take their best and make them an exploited workforce. This is why a call center agent in india starts at 10$ an hour. We can not have two or three powers in the East so it’s easier to breakup the weakest power. The west will continue to arm Pakistan as this will force india to stay in line case and point India’s iron brother France just sold helicopters to Pakistan to destroy Indian tanks. Fear mongering will keep bigots like modi in power all the while their insane urge to prove the 51 inch chest will allow india to weaken from within.


pakistan has a lot of experience in defeating empires , user , America, India .... palestinanins.. the list is long and distinguished. Make peace focus on connectivity and trade or be destroyed

k

 

[Bouncer]

This war would have never happened if those idiots Taliban simply handed over Osama when asked nicely than picking up arms and start a never ending war.

You sweet summer child.. if you think the US would never have invaded Afghanistan "if those idiots Taliban simply handed over Osama when asked nicely than picking up arms and start a never ending war", I sure have bridge to sell you.

Bhai, the US would have invaded and bombed civilians if the Taliban had chopped up OBL and served him on a plate to the Americans with a side a fresh salad. The Taliban went as far as offering the Americans to present OBL in ICJ at the Hague, knowing full well that they won't have any real ability to ensure his physical safety out there. At the end America did what America does.

If you look from a neutral standpoint. Pakistan might have won in Afghanistan, but it actually lost in Pakistan itself. The war on terror has costed pakistan not only in terms of human and social cost but also economically, as it is at least 20 years (the same time WOT started in 2001) behind its regional peers.

Every war has a cost. Win or loose you have to pay it. Question is, was this cost bearable for Pakistan? Is Pakistan still standing? Were the objectives of keeping two successive super powers from attaining absolute control in your backyard met?

Pakistan also won the battle of waterloo.

Did some dude named Abhinandan crash his horse at Waterloo too?

 

[magra]

i know it’s hard to understand western logic, it’s relentless, yet for us In the west it’s about survival. We have a declining populous and other issues. We need the modem equivalent of servants to sustain us. The simplest solution is too give outsource work to the poor populous, take their best and make them an exploited workforce. This is why a call center agent in india starts at 10$ an hour. We can not have two or three powers in the East so it’s easier to breakup the weakest power. The west will continue to arm Pakistan as this will force india to stay in line case and point India’s iron brother France just sold helicopters to Pakistan to destroy Indian tanks. Fear mongering will keep bigots like modi in power all the while their insane urge to prove the 51 inch chest will allow india to weaken from within.

Western powers are just selling you their weapons for money. Its called business.
There was a time during cold war when US propped Pak against India, but not anymore.

Make peace focus on connectivity and trade or be destroyed

This applies to everyone including you.
Make peace --> convert LOC to IB and settle the borders
Focus on connectivity --> allow overland trade from India to Afg and vice versa
Trade --> India & Pak have negligible trade and should increase

 

[Khan vilatey]

Pak needs to make a deal with the TB, who are making rapid gains, to target and finish off the BLA/TTP. We've seen quite a few BLA members being killed in Kandahar, so when they take the city (probably in a year or two, depends if the Americans leave by the 1st), their operations will cease.

Western powers are just selling you their weapons for money. Its called business.
There was a time during cold war when US propped Pak against India, but not anymore.


This applies to everyone including you.
Make peace --> convert LOC to IB and settle the borders
Focus on connectivity --> allow overland trade from India to Afg and vice versa
Trade --> India & Pak have negligible trade and should increase

we agree on peace! you are still disilusioned on western powers not arming Pakistan today. They are still supplying parts and upgrades. Will also supply equipment as they start leaving Afghanistan.

It’s clear as day what the west is doing to India. The slow burn and decline of their bigoted partner. the worst part in this is they are making india buy their weapons, and become dependent on them for spares ensuring india has no will of its own.

why not seek peace and not fight the lost war india ?

k

 

[magra]

we agree on peace! you are still disilusioned on western powers not arming Pakistan today. They are still supplying parts and upgrades. Will also supply equipment as they start leaving Afghanistan.

It’s clear as day what the west is doing to India. The slow burn and decline of their bigoted partner. the worst part in this is they are making india buy their weapons, and become dependent on them for spares ensuring india has no will of its own.

why nit seek peace and not fight the lost war india ?

I see that you are in delusion. Its fine. Wait few more years and the situation may be more clear to you then.

 

[peagle]

Was Pakistan's "support" given freely or coerced? That answer makes a world of difference to what can be claimed. If the support was given freely, then how can one explain the thousands of dead, billions in losses and violations of sovereignty by drones and midnight helicopter raids. If it was coerced, then all of those make some sense, but then one cannot lay claim to being the kingmaker.

I'm afraid you still seem a little confused, whether it was coerced or not makes no difference, because whether you are pushed into a boxing ring or step inside willingly, if at the end of the fight you are still standing, that's all that matters. The fight may have been dirty and you get injured like hell, but if you are standing and your opponent is not, and your opponent has not been able to defeat you, that matters.

Again you are confusing the two issues, because the thousands of dead does not take away the result of the fight, that was the cost we paid, it was a heavy cost, sure, but it does not change the result.

Again you keep working on assumptions, I never made the claim that Pakistan was a king maker, why do you keep making assumptions? discuss what I have said not what you are assuming, that's very unfair, and makes this discussion pointless.

Pakistan's support was pivotal, means Pakistan had value, that was important enough to deliver victories, that does not amount to being a king maker, Pakistan never was and still isn't that strong. But that doesn't mean Pakistan doesn't have value, Pakistan's value is strong enough to deliver victories to the parties it decides to support. It should be recognised.

Please do not over read into what I am saying, stick with facts, look at what I have said, its not complicated, they are simple facts. In each of the situations I mentioned, the parties that had the support of Pakistan, won, that is a fact. In some of those situations Pakistan paid a heavy price, but that's life. Sometimes you pay a price for things you do, the fight came to us, we did not bend nor did we back down, we fought the best we could, and we were not defeated, that matters, it's important, please recognise it, we need to develop a new habit of self-respect and stop crying regarding anything positive about Pakistan.

It feels like if I swear at Pakistan and say bad things about Pakistan, that is more readily accepted among Pakistanis, but if I point out positive things, that are factually correct, Pakistanis go into drama mode, and try to find a million reasons why positive things about Pakistan should not be recognised, that's very unfair and sad, we really need to get out of this bad habit.

Has Pakistan "chosen" China, or was it left no other choice after the irreparable damage done to its transactional relationship with USA?

I do not know, and to be honest I don't care, I am confident in our capacity to tackle head-on anything anyone wants to throw at us, America, China or anyone else, they know our value. Right now, we need to keep a balance, and just get on with developing our bloody economy. Pakistan is a large country of 230 million, that matters, it will probably have a population of 400 million by the time it stops increasing, that's a massive country.

I think right now, the best thing for us is to try and keep a balance with a tilt towards China, nothing more then a tilt, develop ourselves, then see where we stand. Look at the 1980/90s South Korea, Turkey in the 2000s and see how fast they developed, Pakistan in the late 1950s and 60s, we have done it before, I see no reason why we cant again. SO, f.. everyone else and just concentrate on our own development, that's my honest opinion.

 

[Khan vilatey]

I see that you are in delusion. Its fine. Wait few more years and the situation may be more clear to you then.

It’s as clear as day, India is being used..... and if they keep on this track they will completely be dependent on the west losing all control over their foreign and defense policy. Resulting in a lot of Indian and Pakistani lives lost.

look at this another way. Why is China still in Galwan why doesn’t US commit troops to Force China to withdraw. Why doesn’t the Indian army Re occupy this Chinese territory. The answer is simple india does not have the capability to take any territory from Pakistan or China.

with this in mind what is the benefit for the west to invest in India to become a defense partner? Is it the sacrificial lamb that can be sacrificed to

1) allow the west to get smaller markets

2) create a defense foot hold in the smaller countries that will be created. Case and point South Korea or Japan

Now let’s look at the business side. Due to Pakistan India was not able to create a large economy

average income has not changed in India. Serbia has a done more for its people

Average income around the world

A comparison of the average income per capita over 89 countries worldwide

www.worlddata.info

India is 41 interns of purchasing power

Purchasing Power Index by Country 2020

www.numbeo.com

From a per capita Income perspective india is 144 and Pakistan is 145

List of countries by GDP (nominal) per capita - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

so I don’t understand why you think the west would help India. It’s so bad that I’m the US , Indians have their own lower tier when applying for visa’s all other countries are welcome.
k

 

[magra]

It’s as clear as day, India is being used..... and if they keep on this track they will completely be dependent on the west losing all control over their foreign and defense policy. Resulting in a lot of Indian and Pakistani lives lost.

India will never be overly dependent on a single country. It will always keep options open - US, Israel, France, UK, Russia. Hence it did not back down from purchasing S-400.
India is also focusing a lot on making stuff within, so that over long term, we buy very little military stuff from other countries.

look at this another way. Why is China still in Galwan why doesn’t US commit troops to Force China to withdraw. Why doesn’t the Indian army Re occupy this Chinese territory. The answer is simple india does not have the capability to take any territory from Pakistan or China.

The partnership with US is not a military alliance. We dont need their actual troops. Similarly, we wont give our troops in their conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran etc. We will welcome the tech they will offer.
We have no intention of capturing any Pakistani or Chinese territory. The focus in purely to defend what is ours.

From a per capita Income perspective india is 144 and Pakistan is 145

Pakistan is not so close to India.
Here is the stat for GDP per capita

GDP per Capita - Worldometer

GDP per capita by country. List by GDP at PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) and by Nominal GDP. Ratio to World's average GDP per capita at PPP

www.worldometers.info

 

[Khan vilatey]

India will never be overly dependent on a single country. It will always keep options open - US, Israel, France, UK, Russia. Hence it did not back down from purchasing S-400.
India is also focusing a lot on making stuff within, so that over long term, we buy very little military stuff from other countries.


The partnership with US is not a military alliance. We dont need their actual troops. Similarly, we wont give our troops in their conflicts in Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran etc. We will welcome the tech they will offer.
We have no intention of capturing any Pakistani or Chinese territory. The focus in purely to defend what is ours.


Pakistan is not so close to India.
Here is the stat for GDP per capita

GDP per Capita - Worldometer

GDP per capita by country. List by GDP at PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) and by Nominal GDP. Ratio to World's average GDP per capita at PPP

www.worldometers.info

According to your list Pakistan is 134 india is 122

so let me put it in context Pakistan with 200 million people Hurt by Indian terrorism and a leading country in the fight against terrorism is close to the per captia income of India a country with a population 8 times higher at 1.2 billion ......... this is why the west would invest in Pakistan . Europe has already focused on trade with China via Pakistan Iran and Turkey. With the Istanbul Tehran Islamabad (ITI) train Pakistan would connect Central Asia China with Europe via rail. Gawadar will allow us access to China and Central Asia by sea all year round.

so why do you think the west would invest in India ? What’s the value proposition that India offers. What happens when Pakistani and Chinese tanks role down the road in Bangalore? Why not invest in strong countries like China and Pakistan

k

 

[magra]

According to your list Pakistan is 134 india is 122

This gap is only increasing each year

so let me put it in context Pakistan with 200 million people Hurt by Indian terrorism

You are hurt by your religious extremism and a false bravado over Kashmir

this is why the west would invest in Pakistan

Let me know when anyone other than China, Saudi, UAE or Turkey makes a big investment in Pak. Each of these countries have their own agenda and not Pak's well being in mind.

 

[VCheng]

Pakistan's support was pivotal, means Pakistan had value, that was important enough to deliver victories, that does not amount to being a king maker, Pakistan never was and still isn't that strong. But that doesn't mean Pakistan doesn't have value, Pakistan's value is strong enough to deliver victories to the parties it decides to support. It should be recognised.

You built up a fairly reasonable argument, until you undermined it yourself by contending that the victories were possible for the parties that Pakistan "decides to support". The recognition you seek must deal with the perception that here is a country that can be paid or arm-twisted into doing just about anything, even going against its own national interests. That is hardly an argument for establishing any sort of value, is it?

After all, a used prophylactic might have been invaluable when in use for a good time, but very little value that can be recognized after the act.

do not know, and to be honest I don't care, I am confident in our capacity to tackle head-on anything anyone wants to throw at us, America, China or anyone else, they know our value.

I admire your confidence, but surely you may wish to consider that it would take more than the help as a hired hand to establish enduring value to other nations, particularly those you mention. Things like stable governance (no matter what system), a productive population (at least not widely radicalized) and a vibrant economy (or even a viable balance of payments) are far, far more important.

SO, f.. everyone else and just concentrate on our own development, that's my honest opinion.

Actually, I agree with that. I have been saying this on PDF for nearly a decade already: Pakistan must learn to serve its own national interests above any other considerations. Always.

 

[Khan vilatey]

This gap is only increasing each year


You are hurt by your religious extremism and a false bravado over Kashmir


Let me know when anyone other than China, Saudi, UAE or Turkey makes a big investment in Pak. Each of these countries have their own agenda and not Pak's well being in mind.

Oh that’s like saying Angkor khatey hein

1) Pakistani economy is improving and if we become a Transitional economy our economy will improve much faster. Europeans are interested investment in this transitional economy. So connectivity and trade is the highest priority. Inshallah Pakistan will move quickly up the gdp ladder

2) we knew we would not lose any territory to India but we did not have the ability to liberated Indian occupied Kashmir. We would need to fight a two front war with India if did in the past one front would be the Pakistani IB and the other would be Kashmir. Today with India losing to China and Pakistan getting closer to China, India is in a the same condition. India has already moved 60k troops or one strike corps from Pakistan. As things heat up further north east of India near Akashi chin india will have to move another strike corps To defend that border. This means India’s two front war is actually a four front war , two fronts with China and two with Pakistan. Which India could not defend.

furthermore one of the problems Pakistan had in the past was Pakistan’s lack in long range sustains supply lines I.e. more than 500 kms in India as we anticipated Indian strike corps to come in to support Indian holding corps that would be weakening quickly advance of Pakistan day 1-27 of the conflict in Kashmir or IB. This problem is significantly reduced due to Chinese liberation of Indian occupied territory , forcing India to move its strike elements to the northern theater and India building road infrastructure that would facilitate Chinese troop movement to mainland India Incase of the conflict. This was the main reason why the Chinese stopped in 62.

This is why it’s India’s last opportunity for saving the region from war and all of us growing in peace otherwise India is toast.

k

 

[magra]

1) Pakistani economy is improving and if we become a Transitional economy our economy will improve much faster. Europeans are interested investment in this transitional economy. So connectivity and trade is the highest priority. Inshallah Pakistan will move quickly up the gdp ladder

How are you claiming that Pak economy is improving. I only see it getting increasingly burdened by CPEC debt. Unsustainably high power tariffs mean industries are reluctant to work in Pakistan.
Your entire hope is rested in 'Inshallah', and not actual effort.

 

[Xone]

The answer to the question is very simple,The Afghan, second who enjoy the support and confidence of Afghans. The rest has to suffer humiliation at the hands of first two in the long run.