What annoyed Obama about Mullah Omar

[unknownprince]

Well, I am not here to lecture you about the things that putschists, murderers and rapists who have taken the seat of Afghan president by force have said or not.

Just google some speeches of the mentioned people or watch some youtube videos. There are alot of criminal worshippers online like you.

Ahmadzai himself was second in command of Ittihad-e Mili....Sayyaf´s group.
He was allied to the Northern Alliance untill 2001.
That group has changed it´s name and calls itself "Islamic Dawah Organisation".

Und this benamoos´ command many atrocities were committed.
http://www.kas.de/db_files/dokumente...pdf_9674_2.pdf


You know Ashraf, once again:
you are not just allowed to educate yourself, I encourage you to do so!

Nice try. You are changing the goal post. The article is about Mullah Omar and his and the Taliban's refusal to accept US permanent bases. This is the part which frustrates you.

But lets get back to previous requests of mine you have not responded to.

Please tell me and show me evidence indicating that the Taliban fight for Pakistan. Show me evidence that indicates that the Taliban are Pakistanis who just happen to look Pashtun, and speak pashto.

Show me that it was Pakistanis, dressed up as Pashtuns who were ruling Afghanistan for 4 years.

Show me that there is no support for the Taliban in Afghanistan. Contradict this evidence here.

US report shows Taliban support in Afghanistan, blames Karzai | America-Canada | World Bulletin

Taliban support rising in Afghanistan: study - CTV News

Taliban Getting Stronger, As US Public Support for Afghanistan War Collapses | Informed Comment

Kindly, I ask you for evidence to back up your claims like I asked before in the previous threads (which you did not answer). Till you can provide me evidence, your words are all meaningless.

Regards

[unknownprince]

Lastly again, oh enlightened and educated one, Mustafa,

I present you facts, not opinions here.

Are you actually suggesting that it is not "Afghan" to oppose US occupation?

Are you saying that it is "Afghan" to support a US occupation.

These words are very Afghan - as Afghan as Kandahar- He apparently took the stance that “not one metre” of Afghan soil could come under foreign occupation.

[unknownprince]

What annoyed Obama about Mullah Omar

What annoyed Obama about Mullah Omar - Indian Punchline


By M K Bhadrakumar – July 31, 2011




What really prompted US president Barack Obama to change his mind and to allow himself at the last minute to be persuaded by his military commanders to opt for the ’surge’ in Afghanistan in end-2009 is crucial to understanding the current status of the war and its likely future trajectory. Among Obama’s inner circle, Vice-president Joe Biden was reportedly pitching against the ’surge’ at that time. The former Afghan PM Ahmad Shah Ahmadzai has now revealed what prompted the US ’surge’. ASA is a credible source, having been close to Burhanuddin Rabbani, Rasul Sayyaf in the Mujahideen government (where he served as PM along with Ahmed Shah Massoud as Defence Minister before fleeing for Turkey where he lived in exile during the Taliban regime.)
That ASA was the intermediary between the Americans and the Taliban in 2009 shows the wheels-within-wheels, as it were. (ASA did his graduate studies in the US; he lived in exile in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey.) According to ASA, the main sticking point between the US and Taliban in the 2009 talks was that Mullah Omar was stubbornly opposed to the US request to allow permanent military bases in Afghanistan in a post-settlement era. Taliban was willing to compromise on other issues but when it came to the US bases, Omar was tough as nail. He apparently took the stance that “not one metre” of Afghan soil could come under foreign occupation. Interestingly, Omar was willing to negotiate the date of US withdrawal from Afghanistan and was prepared to be flexible on the actual date of withdrawal, but the US troops simply had to vacate at some point.
What emerges is that the Pentagon top brass decided to bleed the Taliban for its ‘obduracy’ apropos the US military bases, based on a strategy to weaken them and somehow compel them to compromise on the question of the permanent US military bases. Thus was born the ’surge’ strategy — make one big push to degrade the Taliban militarily before negotiating. So, looking back, when the Anglo-American thesis of the ‘good Taliban-bad-Taliban’ was shoved down the throat of countries like India at the the London conference in January 2010, Richard Holbrooke and Hillary Clinton indeed had a wholesome game plan. Alas, Indian diplomacy has been naive and continued to be enthusiastic about the ’surge’.
It stands to reason that there was some major intelligence failure and Delhi had no clue to what was really going on. Maybe it isn’t late even today for someone to talk with interlocutors like ASA and try to piece it all together. Unless we know reliably well what transpired between the US and the Taliban, how would we comprehend what is going to unfold in the coming period? Unsurprisingly, the US continues to keep us ‘briefed’ selectively on a need-to-know basis. Special Representative Marc Grossman visited Delhi just once. He is setting out again on a regional tour that will take him to Pakistan and the Central Asian region (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan). India remains a bystander. All this happened primarily because our diplomats chose to work as the ‘B Team’ of the American embassy in Kabul through the past decade since the ouster of the Taliban regime in 2001 and we didn’t diversify our contacts with the Afghan political elites and other regional powers.


Posted in Military, Politics.
Tagged with Ahmad Shah Ahmadzai, Marc Grossman, Richard Holbrooke, Taliban, US 'surge' in Afghanistan.
By M K Bhadrakumar – July 31, 2011

Again, this article speaks volumes, and is written by a former Indian diplomat, MK Bhadrakumar. Note the name please.

Please read

[MostafaM]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/fp_uploaded_documents/100613_20106138531279734lse-isi-taliban.pdf

I assume you can read.
Assuming that you understand would be a little risky.....but that´s your problem.

[Afghanistan2010]

To All the haters of the Hero and Legend Mullah Umar : There are three things why you hate him :

you were raped by someone.
you were raped by AhmadShah Spay Massod and his men.
you have sold your ass already to the americans.

and to those who think he is ISI proxy...ask ISI what Sheikh Haqqani did to them and their people in Pakistan.

TTP are soldiers of Sheikh Haqqani and Mullah Umar.

[unknownprince]

http://www.foreignpolicy.com/files/f...si-taliban.pdf


I assume you can read.
Assuming that you understand would be a little risky.....but that´s your problem.

it proves nothing. Everyone knows Pakistan and Iran have their own interests. Pakistan plays a double-game. Many Gulf states are also supporting the Taliban too as is Saudi Arabia, but this does not mean anything. It does not take away from the fact that this is a national resistance. On that basis of who supports who, the Vietnamese resistance was also not legit due to Chinese and Russian support, but we all know such a claim is ludicrous, and hence this too is.

Whether the Taliban receives support from Pakistan, Iran, China, or aliens from Mars, it doesn't negate the premises on which they stand at all.

[MostafaM]

it proves nothing. Everyone knows Pakistan and Iran have their own interests.

Whether the Taliban receives support from Pakistan, Iran, China, or aliens from Mars, it doesn't negate the premises on which they stand at all.

It proves the point that people who help you today want something in return tomorrow.

And even a lunatic like you may well know what that might be.

[unknownprince]

It proves the point that people who help you today want something in return tomorrow.

And even a lunatic like you may well know what that might be.

Calm down mate, don't go off a tangent. I haven't thrown a tantrum around.

Ok, so should the Vietnamese have not accepted arms and support from Russia and China, and in turn just bled to death, and get massacred by the Americans?

Should the Anti-British American colonialists not have accepted French aid because France may want something in return? If someone is breaking into my house, do I worry about the future thief who is helping me and plans to take my house in the future, or I deal with the person who is breaking into my house right NOW?

Do you know that you are pushing forward something that makes no sense at all?

Why shouldn't the Taliban take support from whichever country that gives it?

Why is the ANA and Karzai getting support from the US?

The fact that it is a proxy war is not news, but it is not relevant to the average Afghan who wants to see his country free from a US occupation.

Again, the fact that China, Russia, Pakistan, and Iran want the US out of Afghanistan is not relevant to the Afghans resistance to a US occupation.

Whether they support or oppose the occupation, the Afghan is opposed no matter what.

Do you want me to talk in baby language to you, now?

[MostafaM]

Two scenarios:

Scenario A
Americans and NATO end their occupation. Help Afghanistan to become a viable state that can defend itself against it´s regional threats. Develop a pluralistic political system where all segments of political life have a place.

Scenario B
Afghanistan is thrown back into a civil-war that is ultimatly won by Saudi, Gulf states and Pakistani backed islamist movements like the Taliban.
A weak, Sunni-led, theocratic and anti-pluralistic, Pakistan and Gulf States friendly regime is installed while the interests of the common Afghans are not met.

I go with Scenario A!
The US are leaving, defeated (not on the battle field but economically and morally). There is not need to spew your dumb-ass propaganda anymore.

I am pretty sure that 99% of the ordinary Afghans don´t wish Scenario B to become reality.

[unknownprince]

[QUOTE]

Two scenarios:

Scenario A
Americans and NATO end their occupation. Help Afghanistan to become a viable state that can defend itself against it´s regional threats. Develop a pluralistic political system where all segments of political life have a place.

This is the most absurd thing you have said, that US and NATO wants to create an Afghanistan that is not threatened by regional neighbors. The only people right now who are killing, murdering, imprisoning, and torturing Afghans are the US and NATO. Airstrikes are up, night raids too. The original article just proves that they are desperately trying to impose an occupation on the Afghan people. They do not care about Afghan people. They want to kill them until they stop fighting. This will never happen, and is the reason the Taliban have the upper hand and are effectively winning this war.

You are touting Saleh/Karzai' line- that US nato is here to help. Well, maybe that would make sense if they weren't killing, bombing, and torturing Afghans every day.

Scenario B
Afghanistan is thrown back into a civil-war that is ultimatly won by Saudi, Gulf states and Pakistani backed islamist movements like the Taliban.
A weak, Sunni-led, theocratic and anti-pluralistic, Pakistan and Gulf States friendly regime is installed while the interests of the common Afghans are not met.

The Taliban were a response to the civil war, not a cause. The rest of your stuff is the often most repeated BS that a pro-occupation person repeats like a parrot. See, now your coming out with your true feelings.

I go with Scenario A!
The US are leaving, defeated (not on the battle field but economically and morally). There is not need to spew your dumb-ass propaganda anymore.

I am pretty sure that 99% of the ordinary Afghans don´t wish Scenario B to become reality

5 US led soldiers died today. The Taliban control the majority of Afghanistan. The news reports can spin anything, but the truth is there.

Obviously, you go with that. You still have not proved to me that the Taliban have no support in Afghanistan. I showed you reports. You can not contradict them. Untill you do that, your selling of an occupation here will continue to land on deaf's ears. No Afghan will tolerate it, and that is exactly why Karzai is playing with fire. His brother's demise should be a big sign to him. Instead of trying to impose an occupation on his people, he should be more concerned that he doesn't end up strung up in the city of Kandahar for all to see. That should be his main concern because he is not a brave man, but a coward, and a failure. This also shows you are very much a supporter of the occupation , and of Karzai

See, I knew you would admit it finally.

[unknownprince]

I present you facts. You present wishes. Keep on doing it.

[salam]

Two scenarios:

Scenario A
Americans and NATO end their occupation. Help Afghanistan to become a viable state that can defend itself against it´s regional threats. Develop a pluralistic political system where all segments of political life have a place.

Scenario B
Afghanistan is thrown back into a civil-war that is ultimatly won by Saudi, Gulf states and Pakistani backed islamist movements like the Taliban.
A weak, Sunni-led, theocratic and anti-pluralistic, Pakistan and Gulf States friendly regime is installed while the interests of the common Afghans are not met.

I go with Scenario A!
The US are leaving, defeated (not on the battle field but economically and morally). There is not need to spew your dumb-ass propaganda anymore.

I am pretty sure that 99% of the ordinary Afghans don´t wish Scenario B to become reality.

Mostafa wants to say that Afghans are so weak, incapable and incompetent that they can not stand on their own feet and can not run their country according to their own wishes.

[salam]

The future of Afghanistan should Islamic system of justice and not the secular thuggery.

[unknownprince]

If one is to hold Mostafa's words as golden truths, then in that case, the Vietnamese resistance to the US was not legit since they received support from Russia and China.

The Koreans resistance to the US was not legit since they too received direct support from China.

All resistances are not legit since they receive support from X, Y, and Z.

this is the most absurd viewpoint, and most ridiculous one.

[salam]

Even the US is getting help from about 40 countries in this war...