World's Largest Online Pashtun Community

Go Back   "Pull out your swords and slay anyone that says Pashtun and Afghan are not one! Arabs know this and so do Romans: Afghans are Pashtuns, Pashtuns are Afghans!" -Khushal Khattak > >
Reload this Page China/Israel/India dont give NATO supplies v. Pakistan does give NATO supplies
User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
(#11)
Old
randolph85's Avatar
randolph85 randolph85 is offline
PF senior
randolph85 is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 7,728
Thanks: 891
Thanked 2,719 Times in 2,012 Posts
My Mood: Blah
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Default 01-24-2014, 11:52 PM

Quote:
This is not an accurate representation of China's policy toward the power dispensation in Afghanistan or in other part of the region. In keeping with its soft power projection, China will do business with whomever rules Afghanistan, whether it be the Karzai regime or the Taliban. This will provide you a background to China's policy.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...to_the_taliban

In regards to China's strategic decisions. They have not been completely out of the loop. While they mainly keep their soft power projection policy intact, they have stepped out of it on several instances, especially in regards to Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat...ion_of_ant.php

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...e-Taliban.html

Also, in regards to Syria, read this report.

http://complex.foreignpolicy.com/pos..._syrian_rebels
there is a difference between willing to do business with anyone and favoring one side against the other. just look at why china felt confortable with signing multi billion dollar mining contracts with the the karzai regime vs the only contact with the taliban regime being chinese diplomats meeting taliban officials over worries about anti china elements operating in afghanistan. china doesn't look at nations based on ideology, they look at nations based on economic risk. as for the links on chinese weapons, there simply haven't been enough choppers being shot down to see a trend based on chinese tactical support unlike the stringer missiles and the obvious american support in the 80s.

Quote:
The point being made is that Israel does not support the US/NATO war in Afghanistan, but several Muslim nations do, and have sent their own troops there (Turkey, Egypt, UAE, Jordan to name just a few).
the thing is that these muslim nations troops are already a part of established international contingents. the war in afg happened but these nations didn't say hey let me join that! there were already agreements in place. its why pakistan is in african countries, does it make sense? no, but it is what it is. israel is not a part of any UN or NATO peacekeeping force anywhere in the world, as for the question of them supporting the war? of course they do, not that the taliban or afghanistan was ever any threat to them but from a zionist jew prescpective why wouldn't they support intervention morally?

their active participation would be as strange as mexico joining the war but even worse because it would alienate muslim allies, be a pr nightmare for the allies and the puppet govt, and based on geography and history they simply have nothing to offer in the war effort.


There are people today who think that admitting Godís absolute greatness decreases the value and importance of humans in the creation, as if God and mankind are rivals competing in greatness and power. Meanwhile I feel that whenever our perception of Godís greatness increases, with it we become greater, because we are the creation of a great God.

Sayyid Qutb

Last edited by randolph85; 01-24-2014 at 11:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
(#12)
Old
Shah-i-Kot Shah-i-Kot is offline
PF senior
Shah-i-Kot is on a distinguished road
 
Posts: 2,735
Thanks: 121
Thanked 292 Times in 265 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default 01-25-2014, 12:51 AM

[QUOTE]
Quote:
Originally Posted by randolph85 View Post
there is a difference between willing to do business with anyone and favoring one side against the other. just look at why china felt confortable with signing multi billion dollar mining contracts with the the karzai regime vs the only contact with the taliban regime being chinese diplomats meeting taliban officials over worries about anti china elements operating in afghanistan. china doesn't look at nations based on ideology, they look at nations based on economic risk.
If you read the articles that I sourced, you would see that between China and the Taliban insurgency, there is an understanding as the Taliban do not attack Chinese businesses or investments. The majority of Afghanistan is under the control of the Afghan insurgency, and Chinese investments in these areas have been kept intact. China does business with whomever is in power.

Quote:
as for the links on chinese weapons, there simply haven't been enough choppers being shot down to see a trend based on chinese tactical support unlike the stringer missiles and the obvious american support in the 80s.
That is not accurate. Wikileaks confirms that US/NATO conduct cover ups when their choppers are shot down by the insurgents.

In regards to trends, several choppers have been shot down in Afghanistan by the Afghan insurgency this year and since as early as 2002- more so than chopper take downs in Iraq by the Iraqi insurgency. There is a trend, and it simply is brushed aside as "crashes" by both NATO, the Western press. It is simply bad publicity for an already unpopular war that the majority of Americans are opposed to.

The articles I sourced refer to the HN-7 antiaircraft. This is covered by the LongWarJournal.

The most recent NATO chopper which was shot down was in December. First, ISAF said there was no enemy activity in the area, and then a week later only after being forced for a proper explanation by the relatives of the US deceased did they retract, and then confirm that the NATO chopper was shot down by Afghan insurgents.






Quote:
the thing is that these muslim nations troops are already a part of established international contingents. the war in afg happened but these nations didn't say hey let me join that!
Actually, it was their choice to join it. China did not join the "international coalition" and were also not more powerful than the US at that time.

Quote:
there were already agreements in place. its why pakistan is in african countries, does it make sense?
Actually, there no agreements in place. Musharaf simply turned over after supposedly receiving a threat from **** Armitage that Pakistan will be put back into the stone age.

Quote:
no, but it is what it is. israel is not a part of any UN or NATO peacekeeping force anywhere in the world, as for the question of them supporting the war? of course they do
Israel will only do what serves their own interest and security. They have no concern for the problems of the US/West.
Quote:
, not that the taliban or afghanistan was ever any threat to them but from a zionist jew prescpective why wouldn't they support intervention morally?
Israel did not support the US war in Iraq because they said it would bring a Shiite theocracy to power (which it did). They preferred Saddam in power. Same with Afghanistan. There is no basis to the claim that Israel supports the war in Afghanistan other than to believe the cliched mantra that the Jews are behind all the ills of the Muslim world. They are at most indifferent to the war.

The Israeli lobby has almost total control of the US Senate/Congress whereas the Arab lobby has zero clout in the US Senate/Congress (no one cares about their concerns or votes). If Israel wanted to be a part of the US/NATO war in Afghanistan,they would have, and no Arab ally in the Middle East could have stopped them- not Saudi, UAE, Jordan, etc.

Quote:
their active participation would be as strange as mexico joining the war but even worse because it would alienate muslim allies
So Israel's participation in a US war in Afghanistan would alienate the Muslim nations who are participating in a US war in Afghanistan? That implies that Muslim nations find US wars in the Middle East to be acceptable, but not Israeli ones. Again, as aforementioned, these Middle Eastern nations could do nothing if Israel chose to be a part of the US war strategy. Sure, they would complain, but at the end of the day they would fall in line because the US Senate/Congress answer to the Israeli AIPAC lobby over the petrodollar.

You are overestimating US concern for its Middle Eastern allies.

Last edited by Shah-i-Kot; 01-25-2014 at 01:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
(#13)
Old
Shah-i-Kot Shah-i-Kot is offline
PF senior
Shah-i-Kot is on a distinguished road
 
Posts: 2,735
Thanks: 121
Thanked 292 Times in 265 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default 01-25-2014, 01:14 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kushan Prince View Post
So this is your opinion then huh, well i guess you don't know that Isreal is america's lap dog and will do anything in their favour. Whatever America does, Isreal will agree with wether its killing innocent Palestinians or supporting the prolonged war in Afghanistan. Jews are happy that muslims are dying and your here telling me that isreal doesn't support the nato war.

Very laughable to say the least.
You are missing the point. I am pointing out that Pakistan is supporting a US/NATO war in neighboring Afghanistan openly with NATO supplies whereas the other nations I listed (China, Israel,etc) are not.

As for your other words, it is the other way around- the US and much of the West will do what is in Israel's favor so long as Jewish financial clout in these nations remains. This can be seen with the Iran sanctions.

Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians due to Western penance for the Holocaust (which remember happened in Europe).
Reply With Quote
(#14)
Old
randolph85's Avatar
randolph85 randolph85 is offline
PF senior
randolph85 is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 7,728
Thanks: 891
Thanked 2,719 Times in 2,012 Posts
My Mood: Blah
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Default 01-25-2014, 01:19 AM

Quote:
If you read the articles that I sourced, you would see that between China and the Taliban insurgency, there is an understanding as the Taliban do not attack Chinese businesses or investments. The majority of Afghanistan is under the control of the Afghan insurgency, and Chinese investments in these areas have been kept intact. China will does business with whomever is in power.
thats not true as china as gone back on its commitments based on security issues.

Quote:
That is not accurate. Wikileaks confirms that US/NATO conduct cover ups when their choppers are shot down by the insurgents.

In regards to trends, several choppers have been shot down in Afghanistan by the Afghan insurgency this year and since as early as 2002- more so than chopper take downs in Iraq by the Iraqi insurgency. There is a trend, and it simply is brushed aside as "crashes" by both NATO, the Western press, and obviously those Western Karzai regime officials who support the NATO war- and the supporting pro-war expatriates living in the West who wish to live in denial.
one chopper shot down every few months does not count as a trend considering the amount of foreign aircraft flying in the air every day not to mention take offs and landings in what is considered enemy territory.

Quote:
Actually, it was their choice to join it. China did not join the "international coalition" and were also not more powerful than the US unlike today.
these nations already had commitments to the west, this was no new alliance based on the occupation of afg. china was never a part of this party and never needed to be considering that unlike these small nations, it didn't need to maintain the good favor of the US based in aid, alliance commitments or military protection.

Quote:
Actually, there no agreements in place. Musharaf simply turned over after supposedly receiving a threat from **** Armitage that Pakistan will be put back into the stone age.
pakistan has been a part of UN peace keeping missions since the 60s or 70s. surely there are agreements in place for such an arrangement considering that paki troops have been involved in african nations under UN mandate since before we were alive.

Quote:
Israel did no support the US war in Iraq because they said it would bring a Shiite theocracy to power (which it did). They preferred Saddam in power.

There is no basis at all to claim that Israel supports the war in Afghanistan other than to believe the cliched Zionist mantra that the Jews are behind all the ills of the Muslim world. They are at most indifferent to the war. Israeli interests are not the same as US/Western interests , and never will be. Israel sole interest is to prevent another Holocaust from happening. They could care less about Western strategic objectives. That is the reason they dont participate in US/Western wars.

If you have not realized yet, the Israeli lobby has almost total control of the US Senate/Congress whereas the Arab/Muslim lobby has zero clout in the US Senate/Congress (no one cares about their concerns or votes). If Israel wanted to be a part of the US/NATO war in Afghanistan,they would have, and no Arab/Muslim allies in the Middle East could have stopped them- not Saudi, UAE, Turkey, etc.
it was the aipac hawks sponsered by israel that lobbied the hardest for the iraq war thinking it would bring upon an a western friendly democracy that would spread through the entire middle east.

as for the rest of your comment, that was what i was saying. israel has no strategic relationship to afghanistan, therefore it doesn't care about it, i feel you are flip flopping here. i don't know.

Quote:
I have heard this before, and it is the same old Zionist mantra? So Israel's participation in a US war in Afghanistan would alienate the Muslim nations who are participating in a US war in Afghanistan? That implies that Muslim nations find US wars in the Middle East to be acceptable, but not Israeli ones. Again, as aforementioned, these Middle Eastern nations could do nothing if Israel chose to be a part of the US war strategy. Sure, they would complain, but at the end of the day they would fall in line because the US Senate/Congress answer to the Israeli AIPAC lobby over the petrodollar.
you are assuming all people of muslim nations are smart and in tune with political reality. karzai was surrounded by white american kafir bodyguards for years and legitimate but misguided muslims supported him, they would of never supported him if he was supported by mossad. to us it sounds ridiculous but this is the reality of muslims today, the saudi regime could rationalize the american presence on their land enough to survive but if they were israeli troops? get outta here, it would never fly.

basically, many muslims are not very bright and will support an evil they can rationalize but not another evil which they can't rationalize. then again, this doesn't only go for the pro america types but the taliban who have relations with iran despite its anti sunni stance domestically and its support of assad and his secularists abroad.


There are people today who think that admitting Godís absolute greatness decreases the value and importance of humans in the creation, as if God and mankind are rivals competing in greatness and power. Meanwhile I feel that whenever our perception of Godís greatness increases, with it we become greater, because we are the creation of a great God.

Sayyid Qutb
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to randolph85 For This Useful Post:
(#15)
Old
Da Bannu Mazdigar Da Bannu Mazdigar is offline
PF senior
Da Bannu Mazdigar is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 3,623
Thanks: 243
Thanked 484 Times in 430 Posts
My Mood: Cheerful
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Default 01-25-2014, 01:24 AM

What other choices Pakistan had?

I mean Pakistan was ally of USA ever since 60's,hell USA even prepared to attack India in 1971 before Russia entered into the scene.

NOTE:I don't suppor the Supply to go through Pakistan be it for NATO and even the Afghanistan govt civilian supply since they already has Iran route now open.


"Seer Speen Wazeer"
Reply With Quote
(#16)
Old
randolph85's Avatar
randolph85 randolph85 is offline
PF senior
randolph85 is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 7,728
Thanks: 891
Thanked 2,719 Times in 2,012 Posts
My Mood: Blah
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Default 01-25-2014, 01:28 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da Bannu Mazdigar View Post
What other choices Pakistan had?

I mean Pakistan was ally of USA ever since 60's,hell USA even prepared to attack India in 1971 before Russia entered into the scene.

NOTE:I don't suppor the Supply to go through Pakistan be it for NATO and even the Afghanistan govt civilian supply since they already has Iran route now open.
the point of being a nuclear power is that you can't be bullied around, i guess pakistan forgot this?


There are people today who think that admitting Godís absolute greatness decreases the value and importance of humans in the creation, as if God and mankind are rivals competing in greatness and power. Meanwhile I feel that whenever our perception of Godís greatness increases, with it we become greater, because we are the creation of a great God.

Sayyid Qutb
Reply With Quote
(#17)
Old
Da Bannu Mazdigar Da Bannu Mazdigar is offline
PF senior
Da Bannu Mazdigar is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 3,623
Thanks: 243
Thanked 484 Times in 430 Posts
My Mood: Cheerful
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Default 01-25-2014, 01:33 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by randolph85 View Post
the point of being a nuclear power is that you can't be bullied around, i guess pakistan forgot this?
Nukes card doesnt work against USA even if we had the missiles with range upto USA.

Beside this Pakistan and especially the musharaf govt was very close to USA.in the mean time Pakistan 2 decades old sanctions were removed after 2001.


"Seer Speen Wazeer"
Reply With Quote
(#18)
Old
randolph85's Avatar
randolph85 randolph85 is offline
PF senior
randolph85 is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 7,728
Thanks: 891
Thanked 2,719 Times in 2,012 Posts
My Mood: Blah
Mentioned: 35 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Dec 2010
Default 01-25-2014, 02:18 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Da Bannu Mazdigar View Post
Nukes card doesnt work against USA even if we had the missiles with range upto USA.

Beside this Pakistan and especially the musharaf govt was very close to USA.in the mean time Pakistan 2 decades old sanctions were removed after 2001.
the point of being a nuclear power is that you don't need cards. why can the US bully an ally in pakistan but can't bully a non nuclear ally like iran? this defeats the entire purpose of being a nuclear power.


There are people today who think that admitting Godís absolute greatness decreases the value and importance of humans in the creation, as if God and mankind are rivals competing in greatness and power. Meanwhile I feel that whenever our perception of Godís greatness increases, with it we become greater, because we are the creation of a great God.

Sayyid Qutb
Reply With Quote
(#19)
Old
Da Bannu Mazdigar Da Bannu Mazdigar is offline
PF senior
Da Bannu Mazdigar is an unknown quantity at this point
 
Posts: 3,623
Thanks: 243
Thanked 484 Times in 430 Posts
My Mood: Cheerful
Mentioned: 55 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Mar 2013
Default 01-25-2014, 02:27 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by randolph85 View Post
the point of being a nuclear power is that you don't need cards. why can the US bully an ally in pakistan but can't bully a non nuclear ally like iran? this defeats the entire purpose of being a nuclear power.
Pakistan cannot threaten USA with nukes,they are meant for India only and to be used against any other state only when they are invading Pakistan.

Pakistan cannot threaten even Israel with nukes.

Iranian case is different.They can hold sanctions for decades and still survive because of petro dollars.Similar cannot be said about Pakistan.

Pakistan in 1984 was ahead of Indonesia and only 2nd to turkey and iran in the muslim world.Today indonesia which never had serious sanction is a trillion dollars GDP.We had 2 and half decades of sanctions and if applied now,Pakistan will collapse.

It is not about just threatening USA,They will suspend all the Loan agreement from IMF and WB.They will isolate us from international world and put sanctions on us.We won't be able to even trade with China in dollars.and no one would trade with us in Rupees.

Pakistan will eventually collapse.Though by 2020 when our Partner CHina has alot of say in World.we can only than try to bully with USA.

USA will never invade a country with 180million population.they just invade smaller population countries.But they can put sanctions on us which will indirectly lead pakistan to a complete collapse.

Beside this USA has proved to be a better ally in the past than even china or turkey to pakistan


"Seer Speen Wazeer"
Reply With Quote
(#20)
Old
Shah-i-Kot Shah-i-Kot is offline
PF senior
Shah-i-Kot is on a distinguished road
 
Posts: 2,735
Thanks: 121
Thanked 292 Times in 265 Posts
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Join Date: Apr 2012
Default 01-25-2014, 01:43 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by randolph85 View Post
thats not true as china as gone back on its commitments based on security issues.
I am providing you with facts, and you simply giving your opinion without. The Chinese-Afghan insurgency deals are in place in most areas controlled by the Afghan insurgency. This is the reason China continues to invest in Afghanistan. Its plans are for the long term, and are mostly economic. This information was in the articles I originally sourced, and in new FP article I have sourced here for your knowledge.

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...to_the_taliban
"It also wants its multi-billion dollar investments in Afghanistan protected from Taliban attacks. Beijing's largest economic project, the Aynak copper mine, is in territory with a strong presence of the Haqqani network, an insurgent group that is closely allied with the Taliban. "

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article..._afghan_moment

"Beijing's unusually healthy relationships with all sides to the conflict underpin its greatest contribution: long-term investments that have a better chance of being left in peace. The company operating the $3 billion Aynak copper deal, Metallurgical Corporation of China (MCC), has been understandably skittish about the occasional rocket attack, even though its facility has never been subjected to a major assault. Accounts from Chinese officials suggest that MCC's reluctance to move ahead with the contract -- like the reluctance of other Chinese companies to sink money into Afghanistan -- has been as much about not wanting to be identified with the U.S. war effort as direct security concerns. But that political context is changing. "

Quote:
one chopper shot down every few months does not count as a trend considering the amount of foreign aircraft flying in the air every day not to mention take offs and landings in what is considered enemy territory.
You are giving a statement that is not backed by any evidence.

The statistics reveal it is not one chopper shot down every few months.

Wikileaks revealed that US/NATO cover up chopper downings in Afghanistan. Even these statistics here have to be taken with a grain of salt since it is now a proven case that US/NATO do not disclose the actual losses, neither troop casualties or aircraft downings.

In regards to the terminology used such as "crashes," the ISAF first reported a December 17 NATO chopper incident as a crash, and said there was no enemy activity in the area. Only after the Pentagon was pushed by families of the 6 deceased US troops, was there a retraction and confirmation that the NATO chopper was shot down by insurgents. In other words, the ISAF public relations has a history of covering up fatal air incidents (Wikileaks and now the common media).

Bottom line is that NATO/ISAF have a verified history of distorting the facts.

2013, there were far few chopper "crashes" and in 2014, these incidents will continue to decrease as the US/NATO exit approaches, and there is less aircraft missions over Afghanistan.

About your one chopper shot down every few months..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...ghanistan#2013
2012

  • October 1 CH-47 Chinook military transport helicopter crashed in Zabul province in southern Afghanistan.[21]
  • September 15 Six USMC VMA-211 McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II fighter jets were destroyed and two damaged beyond repair while parked on the ground during an attack on Camp Bastion. This became the worst U.S. aircraft loss in one day since the Vietnam War. The loss represented 1/15th of the whole US Harrier fleet.[22][23][24][25] Two Marines of the VMA-211, one of them a Lieutenant Colonel, were killed in the action.[26]
  • September 11 A NATO official said that three members of the Afghan National Security Forces have been killed after a CH-47 Chinook helicopter was hit by munitions fired into Bagram Airfield. An investigation was under way to establish the details of what happened.[27]
  • September 5: A US Bell OH-58 Kiowa helicopter came down in eastern Afghanistan on Wednesday, killing two U.S. Army personnel, the military said. NATO said the cause of the crash is under investigation.[28]
  • August 29: A USMC Bell UH-1Y Venom helicopter crashed in Helmand province.Two Australian diggers have been killed in a helicopter crash.[29]
  • August 27: A US CH-47 Chinook helicopter made a hard landing in the eastern province of Logar. The aircraft was heavily damaged, so the crew destroyed it before they were evacuated from the scene.[30]
  • August 16: A US Army Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter went down during a firefight in Shah Wali Kot District, Khandahar province. Seven American servicemen and four Afghan nationals died in the crash.[31] A Taliban spokesman claimed they shot down the helicopter with a rocket propelled grenade.[32]
  • July 18: A NATO helicopter crashed Wednesday in western Afghanistan, injuring two troops serving with the U.S.-led military coalition, NATO said. No other information was disclosed about the crash in the relatively peaceful west. The crash is under investigation.[33]
  • June 21: A US CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopter (s/n 157135) has crashed in Khost province in southeast Afghanistan and burst into flames.[34][35]
  • June 6: The shootdown of an US Bell OH-58 Kiowa killed both servicemen onboard: First Lt. Mathew (Mat) Fazzari of Walla Walla, Wa, and Captain Scott P. Pace of Brawley, California. The incident happened in Ghazni province.[36]
  • May 28: A second NATO helicopter shot down in a separate incident.[37][38][39]
  • May 28: A US Army AH-64 Apache crashed in Wardak Province during a routine patrol. No enemy activity was reported in the area. Both crew members were killed in the crash.[40]
  • April 19: A US Army Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter shot down in Helmand province.[41] At least four US troops have been killed after the helicopter crashed in southern Afghanistan.[42]
  • April 3: According to a statement released by NATO-led International Security Assistance Force on Monday, an International Security Assistance Force helicopter made a forced landing in eastern Afghanistan today. (Please update when more information is available)
  • March 29: A US Air Force F-15E from the 366th Fighter Wing crashes in southwest Asia. The pilot was killed and the crew member was injured in Wednesday's crash and treated for minor injuries.[43]
  • March 26: A NATO aircraft made a hard landing in southern Afghanistan on Sunday, the military alliance confirmed in a press release on Monday. "An International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) aircraft made a hard landing in southern Afghanistan yesterday," the NATO- led ISAF said in the press release. (Please update when more information is available)
  • March 16: A Turkish Army Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter crashed in Kabul, killing all 12 Turkish soldiers and 2 Afghan interpreters on board and 3 civilians on the ground.[44] It was the deadliest single incident for Turkish forces since the start of the war in Afghanistan in 2001. With total fatalities at 17, the crash is also the second deadliest single incident since the start of the current war in Afghanistan in 2001, covering all countries military who are participating.
  • February 6: A US Army AH-64 Apache helicopter crashed with no casualties. A video of the incident was released six weeks later on internet.[45][46]
  • January 19: A US CH-53 Sea Stallion helicopter crashed in southern Afghanistan. 6 ISAF officers died.[47]
2011

  • September 28: A US AH-1W helicopter crashed on take-off in Helmand province killing one Marine.[48][49]
  • August 8: CH-47 helicopter hard landed in Paktia province. There were no fatalities but the aircraft was unrecoverable.[50]
  • August 7: AH-64D helicopter crashed in Khowst Province at 11,000 ft on the side of a mountain. There were no fatalities and the aircraft was unrecoverable due to the altitude and subsequently destroyed after a week of recovery attempts.
  • August 6: A NATO CH-47 Chinook helicopter being flown by the 7th Battalion, 158th Aviation Regiment and 2nd Battalion, 135th Aviation Regiment[51][52][53] was shot down by the Taliban using an RPG with 30 American and eight Afghan casualties,[54] as well as a dog. It was the deadliest single incident for American forces since the start of the war in Afghanistan in 2001, surpassing the downing of a Chinook on June 28, 2005, in Kunar province.[55] A reported 22 from the United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group (SEAL Team Six) died.[55]
  • July 25: A CH-47F Chinook was shot down by an RPG near Camp Nangalam in Kunar Province. Two coalition service members were injured.[56][57]
  • July 7: A NATO helicopter crashed in eastern Afghanistan, no victims were reported[58]
  • June 24: A NATO helicopter made a hard landing in Helmand.[59]
.

  • June 15: An Afghan army Mil Mi-17 crashed in the Kunar province injuring six.[60]
  • June 12: A Polish Land Forces Mil Mi-24V was severely damaged at the Warrior base in Ghazni province. Helicopter written off.[61]
  • June 10: French Army Gazelle Viviane crashed about 20 kilometres (12 mi) from Bagram in the north of the country in difficult weather conditions. One person died, the pilot was seriously injured.[62]
  • June 5: A US Bell OH-58 Kiowa helicopter crashed in the Sabari district of the eastern province of Khost, the coalition said, with the Taliban claiming to have shot the aircraft down. Two service members were killed.[63][64]
  • May 30: An Australian Army CH-47D Chinook helicopter crashed in Zabul Province 90 km east of Tarin Kowt. The Chinook caught fire after impact, and one of the passengers on board the aircraft later died from injuries sustained in the crash. Five other Australians on board the chopper suffered minor injuries.[65]
  • May 26: A US Boeing AH-64 Apache helicopter crashed in Paktika Province. One crew member killed in the incident.[66]
  • May 24: NATO chopper crashes in western Afghanistan, no victims were reported.[67]
  • May 24: French Air Force Dassault Mirage 2000D crashed 100 kilometers west of Farah. Both crew members successfully ejected and were rescued.[68]
  • May 15: A Canadian CH-47D Chinook turned on its side as it landed. Four Canadian soldiers were injured during a "hard landing" on a river bed in Afghanistan. The accident occurred during night operations by the Quebec-based Royal 22e Rťgiment in the Horn of Panjwaii.[69][70]
  • May 11 : An Afghan army Mi-17 crashed in the Nuristan province after hitting a tree, injuring nine soldiers.[71]
  • April 23: A US OH-58 Kiowa helicopter went down after apparently hitting a cable between two mountains in Kapisa province, northeast of the capital Kabul. One crew member was killed.[72]
  • February 5 a French Army Eurocopter Tiger crashed in Afghanistan's eastern district of Lateh Band near the capital Kabul.[73][74]
  • January 26: A Polish Land Forces Mil Mi-24V rolled over on its side after experiencing mechanical trouble during takeoff from a military base in Ghazni district of Ghazni province.[75]
2010

  • November 28: French Navy Dassault Rafale fighter crashed off Pakistan after its pilot parachuted to safety. The Rafale was operating from the aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle, which at the time was supporting NATO operations in Afghanistan.[76]
  • November 3: French Army Gazelle Viviane crashed in Nijrab province. Both pilots escaped unhurt.[77]
  • October 12: A US Army CH-47 Chinook helicopter had just landed and had been off-loading when an RPG was fired into the cargo bay. An Afghan interpreter was killed and seven ISAF servicemembers and an Afghan Border Police officer were injured.[78]
  • September 21: A US Army UH-60 Blackhawk crashed in Zabul province, killing 9 soldiers on board.[79][80][81]
  • August 19: Eight service members belonging to the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) were injured on Thursday when their helicopter made a hard landing in southern Afghanistan, officials said.[82]
  • August 10: A British RAF CH-47D Chinook crashed in Helmand province in southern Afghanistan. "The helicopter due to technical problems crashed in Gereshk district at 04:00 a.m. local time, as a result one soldier sustained injury," spokesman for provincial administration Daud Ahmadi told Xinhua. Meanwhile, a NATO source with press department in southern region confirmed the incident, saying it was a hard landing and all four aboard were rescued safe and sound.[83][84]
  • August 5: A Canadian CH-47D Chinook was shot down in Kandahar Province, Afghanistan. It made a hard landing and burned out on the ground, wounding eight soldiers.[85]
  • July 31: A US helicopter crashed in province of Kunar.[86]
  • July 26: A US CH-47 Chinook helicopter crashed in Pul-e-Charkhi area east of capital city Kabul. Two NATO troops were killed.[87][88]
  • July 22: A US AH-1W SuperCobra was shotdown in Helmand province, killing two US servicemen.[89][90][91][92]
  • June 25: An ISAF helicopter made a hard landing caused by mechanical problems on June 25 in Kunar Province in eastern Afghanistan. All aboard were evacuated to a nearby ISAF medical treatment facilities. No fatalities were reported. The incident is under investigation.[93]
  • June 23: A British RAF Mk3 Merlin made a heavy landing at a forward operating base in the Lashkar Gar area of Helmand province. No-one was seriously injured and the incident was determined to be a non-hostile event.[94] A U.S. Marine Corps CH-53E from HMH-466 was used to recover the aircraft and transport it to Camp Bastion.[95]
  • June 21: A US Army UH-60 Blackhawk crashed in northern Kandahar Province, killing three Australian Commandos and the US crew chief, and injuring another seven Australians and a US crewman.[96][97][98]
  • June 9: A Sikorsky HH-60 Pave Hawk CSAR helicopter was shot down in Helmand province, killing 5 American airmen.[99][100][101][102]
  • May 21: A Westland Sea King carrying five troops was hit by an RPG and crash-landed in Nad-e Ali, Helmand Province. The five were injured but not seriously.[103]
  • May 14 An UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter made a hard landing in Kandahar Province causing injuries to several coalition and Afghan military personnel. It was destroyed on the site by ISAF members, apparently to prevent it from falling into insurgentsí hands.[104]
  • May 10 An MH-60 Black Hawk helicopter made a controlled landing after being hit by enemy fire in Helmand Province. All crewmembers have been safely returned to base. Helicopter was destroyed by international forces.[105]
  • April 9 A US Air Force CV-22 Osprey crashed near Qalat, Zabul Province, killing three US service members and one government contractor.[106] This is the first combat loss of an Osprey.[107]
  • March 31: US Navy E-2 Hawkeye surveillance plane stationed with the USS Dwight D. Eisenhower crashed in the Arabian sea at approximately 2 p.m. local time while returning from an operational flight conducted as part of Operation Enduring Freedom. The one U.S. crew member presumed missing was declared dead and three were rescued.[108]
  • March 28: A US Army UH-60 Black Hawk crashed in Zabul province in southern Afghanistan. 14 ISAF and Afghan service members were injured.[109]
  • March 23: A Turkish Army UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter experienced technical problems as it tried to land at a base in Maidan Shar, the capital of Wardak province. It hit a hill as it was coming down and rolled over.[110]



The 1980s and today are two completely different eras in time, and while comparisons can be made to both the US and Soviet wars- there are great differences. Firstly, the US has the most sophisticated fighter jets and combat helicopters in the world. Neither Russia nor China has been able to meet the superior technology of the US military, and it remains the most technologically advanced. It is irrelevant comparison.


Quote:
these nations already had commitments to the west, this was no new alliance based on the occupation of afg.
Not true. Before 2001, Pakistan was under heavy US sanctions for conducting the nuclear missile tests in 1998. There was no US aid going to Pakistan after Musharaf ousted Nawaz Sharif in a coup in 1999. Musharaf supported the US war in Afghanistan out of choice.

As for the Gulf Arab nations, they are very wealthy and provide the US with cheap oil. There are no financial commitments to the US. Rather, it has been a purely security relationship (US protection) at the price of cheap oil. They dont need money.


Quote:
it was the aipac hawks sponsered by israel that lobbied the hardest for the iraq war thinking it would bring upon an a western friendly democracy that would spread through the entire middle east.
Not accurate. It was the Big Oil lobbies that pushed for the 2003 Iraq war. AIPAC answers to Israeli government and security apparatus. The top Israeli general at the time warned the US against starting the Iraq war, saying it would change the power dynamic of the region, and this would not be in Israel's interest. Israel knew that a Shiite theocracy would rise in Iraq. They preferred Sadaam.

Quote:
as for the rest of your comment, that was what i was saying. israel has no strategic relationship to afghanistan, therefore it doesn't care about it, i feel you are flip flopping here. i don't know.
No, I have stated that Israel does not support the US/NATO war in Afghanistan (the title of the thread?). You are the one disputing that again without evidence, and it look like you are now "flip flopping" from previously stating they do morally support the US/NATO war (no proof).

Last edited by Shah-i-Kot; 01-25-2014 at 01:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Shah-i-Kot For This Useful Post:
Loy Afghanistan (01-25-2014)
Reply

Tags
china or israel or india, give, nato, pakistan, supplies

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off




History of Pashtuns| Learn Pashto Online| Afghan Wiki| TheHujra.com| Pukhtoogle| Afghan MP3| Khyber.org| Pukhto.net| Tor_Khan's blog| Abdul Rahman Karim's blog| Voices of the Pashtun land| Pashto TV

Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.0.6 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. Runs best on HiVelocity Hosting.
No part of this site may be copied without permission of the administration. The views, posts, opinions and threads expressed by members of the community here are not necessarily those of the staff and management of Pashtun Forums.