Legality/legitimacy of drones

[ghundal]

Flase arguement, ghundak khan. I disagree.

The border between the countries are delintated and demarcated. The rest is Pakistan's job. You as Pakistani ghundak khan know this.

The U.S. because of Al-Qaida's attacked Afghanistan and is now under the U.N. santion and partnership and with the consent of Afghans stabilising Afghanistan. That you should leave to Afghans as a matter of concern.

The U.S. is not in war with Pashtuns and I completely disagree with the notion. On the other hand Pakistan has literally destroyed large portion of Pashtunkhwa by supporting all sorts of monsters and terrorists so for its strategic depth in Afghanistan. Swat, Wazisitan etc. Pakistan has done more disservice to Pashtuns that U.S. But you're ghundak khan.. so you wouldn't know.

this is a fools talk. The US is at war with Pashtuns, but fortunately are losing

They are attacking Pashtuns in mostly the rural areas of Afghanistan where the resistance is strong. Then they are conducting drone attacks against Pashtuns in the tribal areas.

Are you actually attributing a nation wide resistance to a few people in Waziristan? Are you saying that Afghans are pro-invader?

Are you meaning to say that a Kandahari boy whose family is killed will not pick up arms and fight?

Lastly, have any of your relatives been killed by US forces in Kabul?

[ghundal]

Please remain consistent with the topic at hand. No derailing. That can be discussed in a another thread.

Why is Pakistan allowing non-state Afghan actors to use its soil for launching attacks on Afghanistan?

No, this is related to the topic. Have any of your relatives been killed by US forces in Kabul? I hope you answer this question. Thanks

Pakistan has nothing to do with the nationwide resistance. I am sure the resistance organization in Afghanistan have logistical support from several regional countries whose interest are against the US, and most importantly, they have the support of the Afghan people (check the polls-not the fake ones)

Why is US and ANA fighting against the Afghan civilians? Why do they have bases in Afghanistan?

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Aptly put bro, from another angle though. So it is just the disgraceful Paki politics... sad, only our people are the ones who pay the price.

Unfortunately we have been paying for this for a very long time. I think the drones and the whole FATA issue has to be resolved, but not by initially eliminating drones. It is a smokescreen. The first issue is resolving Afghanistan's issue of governance and that can only be done by stability and promoting reconciliation. Second the FCR has to be revoked, and it should be granted a special status within Pashtunkhwa (ideally the two Pashtun belts unified and given more measures of autonomy). If these are not resolved then our areas are stuck between their typical ddaz ddoz ghairath brigade, and NATO's own interest (lets add the regional powers in as well).

What really bothers me is the narrative is being hijacked by this type of disgraceful politics (as you put it). That is an issue. If you looked at the media in Pakistan, they have hijacked the narrative to the extent that the real issues are ignored (in the first paragraph) and the other stuff is being put forward. Look at the PTI rally in Hayatabad. They are at best a tiny party and have almost little relevance in Pashtunkhwa, but this joint rally will be hyped up as a major thing. That is worrisome.

[ComradePashtun]

ghundak khan Pakistani,

No playing around with sentiments and I am no gulleble. Leave it, seriously.

You need to define what "losing" means for you and the U.S. If you ask me, I would say U.S. has achieved its MAIN strategic objective/goal in Afghanistan and now ending the war, in which obliterating Taliban never was the goal and nor it remains, is a little shilly shally depending what would happen regionally. You wouldn't know, or may be you exactly do..

Yes, there are innocents who are killed which in turn fuels the insurgency, this is a valid point.

Pashtuns, most of them, majority of them are better of now than they were before. I am aware of the dark side of this war, which I was never in favour of, but I am with choice of facing the reality in which the best way of survival and politics is the art of the possible.

U.S. is not in war with Pashtuns, I DISAGREE!

[ComradePashtun]

Unfortunately we have been paying for this for a very long time. I think the drones and the whole FATA issue has to be resolved, but not by initially eliminating drones. It is a smokescreen. The first issue is resolving Afghanistan's issue of governance and that can only be done by stability and promoting reconciliation. Second the FCR has to be revoked, and it should be granted a special status within Pashtunkhwa (ideally the two Pashtun belts unified and given more measures of autonomy). If these are not resolved then our areas are stuck between their typical ddaz ddoz ghairath brigade, and NATO's own interest (lets add the regional powers in as well).

What really bothers me is the narrative is being hijacked by this type of disgraceful politics (as you put it). That is an issue. If you looked at the media in Pakistan, they have hijacked the narrative to the extent that the real issues are ignored (in the first paragraph) and the other stuff is being put forward. Look at the PTI rally in Hayatabad. They are at best a tiny party and have almost little relevance in Pashtunkhwa, but this joint rally will be hyped up as a major thing. That is worrisome.

You are so damn right bro. Nicely put, thank you.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

Manana wrora. At the end of the day, time will tell how everything turns out. Although I think Pakistan has shown its cards a little too early and a little too often. I don't see how their policy is beneficial to any of its neighbours, let alone itself. It should re-formulate its policy to the ground realities, not to what it perceives it can get away with.

[ComradePashtun]

BLS,

Can you put the too "early and often" in to perspective a little.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

BLS,

Can you put the too "early and often" in to perspective a little.

I can give you two examples. The first is the strategic depth...the policy is one that America knows too well and one they (Pakistan) have used by spreading it (directly or indirectly) east and west of the durand line. Now they started this double-dealing way back in the early 2000s and there was talk of this even then. To me that was too early from Pakistan. Too often is the whole NATO supply issue. It seems on the forefront (I could be wrong) that whenever there is a grievance, you see attacks on the supply line. Not just once but quite a few times throughout this war. To me that is too often. Again if an average joe like me says these things, US and the others are probably well aware and have a different perspective and endgame in mind. I hope that makes sense.

[ComradePashtun]

BLS,

I think it makes perfect sense and my thinking is along the same line.

I was thinking of a new thread on the subject, but I will ask you to open one on my request if you don't mind.

It would be a breather for the politics section and educating in general and stimulating for those interested. A topic of its worth and must discuss indeed.

[BLS_1919v2.0]

What do you have in mind? Pm the title and we can start it wrora. I am up for any new topic here.

[ComradePashtun]

Ok, then!

I wanted you to do it and take a start anywhere and with any title of relevance.. you know what I am busy with and I could contribute my thining when I would get the chance from what I am doing.