Retroactive Post: Taliban admit to Iranian Support and Supplying

[randolph85]

this should common knowledge to anyone who doesnt have their head in the sand.

as for the taliban getting money and weapons from outside sources, it doesn't make the jihad any less legitimate. what it does do though is make them look stupid for claiming to be so independent and their supporters denying then admitting then denying again that the taliban receives state sponsored help.

the difference between the mujahadin of the 80s and the taliban today is that the muj openly admitted to US support, how could they not when it was plain as day? but they basically said they have no allegiance to the US and that they only had common interests then and there. the taliban on the other hand dont even admit to foreign support when its plain as day.

[unknownprince]

So what?

randolph, I present facts. Posting up an article that is factual, and is about the Taliban or anyone else is simply a factual article.

It does not matter to the rural Afghan who supports them, whether its Harry Potter or Voldemort, or both. Likewise, it matters not who does not support them. No one can dictate anything to the Pashtuns, and I am not talking about rats like Karzai.

I will say it one last time for all the retards here.

AFGHANS will not accept foreign occupation, and they resent if in all ways.

Nothing else matters.


Let ME ask this.

Why is Karzai a US puppet? Why is the Kabul government backed by the US? Why is the ANA backed by the US? Why do they join the US, and fight other Afghans?

Why oh why?

[faye]

ashraf, not everyone in afghanistan supports the taliban. why would proud people want to be controlled by them when they are so oppressive? the hazaras that are coming to australia claim to be attacked, abused and insecure in afghanistan because of the taliban, so i am sure they don't want them ruling the country.

[khushal]

this should common knowledge to anyone who doesnt have their head in the sand.

as for the taliban getting money and weapons from outside sources, it doesn't make the jihad any less legitimate. what it does do though is make them look stupid for claiming to be so independent and their supporters denying then admitting then denying again that the taliban receives state sponsored help.

the difference between the mujahadin of the 80s and the taliban today is that the muj openly admitted to US support, how could they not when it was plain as day? but they basically said they have no allegiance to the US and that they only had common interests then and there. the taliban on the other hand dont even admit to foreign support when its plain as day.

This is a different game from the 80's. While you are right the majahadeen from the 80's admitted support from the west and Arabs, there was no real liability for the west or the arabs for such a connection since the Soviets couldn't really do anything about it, also during the time the West and Arab states made no secrete about it.
While the Taliban of today gets support from the ISI and the Sunni Arab states, a connection would have some ramifications for the ISI and the Arab states so its mostly done in secrete and no one admits anything while at the same time everyone knows about it. As long as mutual interests exist between two or more groups, support can not be stopped. If the US finds a way to somehow break the mutual interests and convince the Arabs and the ISI they are better off with Karzai, then the support will stop but doing that is like convincing Pakistan that India is not its enemy and convincing the Sunnis Arabs that Shia Iran is not its enemy. So its harder than it looks.

I have a hard time believing the Iranian state would aid the Taliban in any way since there is no mutual interests involved. Iranian interests lies completely with the Karzai administration. Its like saying that the US supports the Taliban since US made weapons have been found in Taliban hands, but since there is no mutual interests we reject such a connection.
Arms Given by U.S. to Afghan Forces May Be Leaking to Taliban - NYTimes.com

There are so many ways to get weapons in Afghanistan. If the US cant stop the ANA from giving weapons to the Taliban, how can the Iranians stop its army officers from selling weapons to the Taliban, how can the Pakistanis stop its army officers from selling its weapons to the Taliban. Its a free market and people are poor.

I believe the US and the Brits are desperate and trying hard to make a connection with Iran and the Taliban to create legal recourse on further sanction to limit Irans ambition for its nuclear program just like they were trying to make a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda to create legal grounds on an invasion back in the days and we all know that was absurd.

Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed (washingtonpost.com)
The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq......................

[khushal]

Just like a beggar does not have a say over his state of being, you lot does not have a say over the state of your affairs. Iran or Pakistan will feed and rule you, with weapon and $ comes influences and control…Mark my word. After US, Afghanistan would be controlled by a combination of Iran and Pakistan. Either that or it would be back at square one like it was in 90s—Saudi/Pakistan vs. Iran/Russia. Wake up before you wet your bet, ignorance should have a limit.

In the current structure, you have minorities ruling the majority. How is that supposed to work.

[randolph85]

This is a different game from the 80's. While you are right the majahadeen from the 80's admitted support from the west and Arabs, there was no real liability for the west or the arabs for such a connection since the Soviets couldn't really do anything about it, also during the time the West and Arab states made no secrete about it.
While the Taliban of today gets support from the ISI and the Sunni Arab states, a connection would have some ramifications for the ISI and the Arab states so its mostly done in secrete and no one admits anything while at the same time everyone knows about it. As long as mutual interests exist between two or more groups, support can not be stopped. If the US finds a way to somehow break the mutual interests and convince the Arabs and the ISI they are better off with Karzai, then the support will stop but doing that is like convincing Pakistan that India is not its enemy and convincing the Sunnis Arabs that Shia Iran is not its enemy. So its harder than it looks.

I have a hard time believing the Iranian state would aid the Taliban in any way since there is no mutual interests involved. Iranian interests lies completely with the Karzai administration. Its like saying that the US supports the Taliban since US made weapons have been found in Taliban hands, but since there is no mutual interests we reject such a connection.
Arms Given by U.S. to Afghan Forces May Be Leaking to Taliban - NYTimes.com

There are so many ways to get weapons in Afghanistan. If the US cant stop the ANA from giving weapons to the Taliban, how can the Iranians stop its army officers from selling weapons to the Taliban, how can the Pakistanis stop its army officers from selling its weapons to the Taliban. Its a free market and people are poor.

I believe the US and the Brits are desperate and trying hard to make a connection with Iran and the Taliban to create legal recourse on further sanction to limit Irans ambition for its nuclear program just like they were trying to make a connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda to create legal grounds on an invasion back in the days and we all know that was absurd.

Al Qaeda-Hussein Link Is Dismissed (washingtonpost.com)
The Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq......................

we know that things are not black and white. iran is buddy buddy with the karzai regime but are also enemies of america which has the karzai regime on life support.

its not exactly hard to believe that the iranians would want to hurt the americans in afg.

[khushal]

we know that things are not black and white. iran is buddy buddy with the karzai regime but are also enemies of america which has the karzai regime on life support.

its not exactly hard to believe that the iranians would want to hurt the americans in afg.

Why are they not hurting them in Iraq. The iranians are much smarter they can go about it much smarter than how you describe. The Chinese, Russians, Cubans, North Koreans, Venezuelans and many more would want to hurt the Americans but there is no support from those countries either. Russia and Irans interests lie completely with Karzai and the NA and that is who they will support for better or for worse til death do them part.

Iran directly supporting the Taliban sounds as crazy as America directly supporting the Taliban.
U.S. weapons fall into Taliban's hands - YouTube

[randolph85]

Why are they not hurting them in Iraq. The iranians are much smarter they can go about it much smarter than how you describe. The Chinese, Russians, Cubans, North Koreans, Venezuelans and many more would want to hurt the Americans but there is no support from those countries either. Russia and Irans interests lie completely with Karzai and the NA and that is who they will support for better or for worse til death do them part.

Iran directly supporting the Taliban sounds as crazy as America directly supporting the Taliban.
U.S. weapons fall into Taliban's hands - YouTube

u saying that iran supporting the taliban being crazy sounds about as crazy as iran supporting an american made/installed/supported government.

it may sound crazy, but in both cases its true.

like pakistan, they are playing both sides of the card. its not exactly unheard of.

[khushal]

u saying that iran supporting the taliban being crazy sounds about as crazy as iran supporting an american made/installed/supported government.

it may sound crazy, but in both cases its true.

like pakistan, they are playing both sides of the card. its not exactly unheard of.

Are you saying that the NA/Karzai administration is more loyal to America than Iran or Russia? Pakistan has no choice but to play both sides of the game since the NA are counter to their interests and security. The Taliban are counter to Irans interests and security. Iran supporting the Taliban is as crazy as the ISI supporting the NA/Karzai administration.

[randolph85]

they did the same thing in iraq also. supporting shia fighters while trying to court the government.

[randolph85]

Are you saying that the NA/Karzai administration is more loyal to America than Iran or Russia? Pakistan has no choice but to play both sides of the game since the NA are counter to their interests and security. The Taliban are counter to Irans interests and security. Iran supporting the Taliban is as crazy as the ISI supporting the NA/Karzai administration.

supporting the taliban does not mean wanting the taliban to topple the government. it means giving nato a hard time while using the taliban, who they dont care about.

[randolph85]

much like iran allowing hekmatyar to live in the country didnt mean they wanted hekmatyar to take control of the country but to use him if they could for their own purpose.

[khushal]

they did the same thing in iraq also. supporting shia fighters while trying to court the government.

In Iraq, Iran supported the Shia fighters against the Sunni's not against the Iraqi government or America. They actually put a leash on Al Sadr's militia because he wanted to fight the Americans.
Iran has so much leverage in Iraq that its pathetic for America. America has no choice but to work with the Shais because they toppled the Sunni Baathist. If America was smart, they should have worked with the Baathists from the beginning because the current government is more loyal to Iran than the US. It was good old fashion American arrogance that prevented America to see logic. Its too late now.

[khushal]

much like iran allowing hekmatyar to live in the country didnt mean they wanted hekmatyar to take control of the country but to use him if they could for their own purpose.

Hekmatyar went to Iran when the Taliban came to power in Kabul. The reason Iran kept Hekmatyar safe was to actually keep him and his supporters from joining the Taliban. From Irans point of view, as long as he had hope and a safe haven which Iran provided, he and his supporters would be prevented from joining the Taliban and also away from the ISI utilizing him.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Hekmatyar went to Iran when the Taliban came to power in Kabul. The reason Iran kept Hekmatyar safe was to actually keep him and his supporters from joining the Taliban. From Irans point of view, as long as he had hope and a safe haven which Iran provided, he and his supporters would be prevented from joining the Taliban and also away from the ISI utilizing him.

and thus Randolph's assessment of using the Taliban to solidify their influence and dissuade America who they see as their bigger enemy, makes perfect sense.