Afghanistan belongs to Pakistan.

[Ghundal]

In regards to the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan, the start point remains the militant communist assassination of Daud Khan, and the subsequent communist revolution . This is the catalyst. Without it, the possibility of war was not there at all.

To somehow blame US/Pak spies for agitating the Soviets is ridiculous. Afghans on the whole did not welcome the Militant Communists, and not the subsequent Soviet war. Militant Communistd tried ever so hard to impose a foreign and unwanted ideology upon Afghans. I don't think US/Pak spies had that much work to do?

Now perhaps the US spies made the Militant Communists impose Communism upon the Afghan masses, resulting in the backlash?

That's taking conspiracy theory to never before seen levels. So I guess along the same reasoning, Russia and China lured the US to Vietnam simply to have a war and occupation that they would later oppose?

This is the historical record, and I don't how it is up for debate

It is comparable to the assassination of Ferdinand prior to World War I

[az4er]

No one is disputing that Pak Army are the slaves of the US and the rest of the West, what is inaccurate is that Pak willingly jumped to join and assist the US war just to make money.

again, Bush famously stated "with us or against us."

And Armitage further threatened to put Pakistan back into the stone age.

Keeping with the stereotypes, Pakistan bent down and joined the US war

It was a complete lack of leadership and spine

The money was meaningless. majority of it was never even disbursed, and Pakistan lost billions more due to its support for the US war which created unrest within.

Secondly, over 40,000 people died as a result of Pakistan support for the US war.

To say that Pakistan had a choice to make is partially correct. They could either have a full scale war with the US or do what they know best to do which was to fall in line and obey the US

The problem now is that their interests conflict with US interests, and this is the real reason there is a breakdown in ties

Musharraf was a puppet, there is no contention about that, but to assume Pak could peacefully not be a part of the US war betrays the open threats which were made at the top level.

The reason why the US got so used to kicking Pakistan around was because of the subservience Musharaf institutionalized

This is why the breakdown in ties is coming as a shock to US officials

The issue at hand is, Pak is not going to work against their own interests. This is not some discovery, but is understood. The recent events which go hand in hand with Imran's escalating candidacy appear to show a complete divestment out of the war

OK, I'm not even going to bother after this. You clearly are deluded and have an absolutely flawed if not totally incorrect reading of global affairs. Just because you say that something is the way it is, doesn't mean it is! Did you get that?! I wouldn't be surprised if you didn't!

First off, how do you know Musharraf was a puppet? Is it because he decided to partake in a war from which pakistan could benefit? That hardly means he's a puppet. Was Iran a US puppet after it willingly accepted American weapons to fight against Saddam?

I can tell you this much, as rotten as Musharraf may have been he was not a puppet. A duplicitous self-serving crook maybe, but not a puppet. How do I know that? Lets just say I've hung around enough former and sitting generals and intelligence chiefs to come to that conclusion. And what was Kargil then? Why would the pak army invade a nuclear armed rival for no reason? It may have been dumb, but it certainly doesn't illustrate a lack of courage. If you ask me it takes more cojones to invade an arch enemy than it does to say no to the US.

And pakistan did lose billions, ONLY when they decided to operate against AQ and other militants, who began attacking government installations and personalities, including Musharraf. Up until then they'd made tidy profit off of the US government, which he utilized a lot of it for development (mostly in lahor and Islamabad). Note: The US government invaded Afghanistan in 2001. pakistani military (not defense) spending began in NW 2004; it stopped in 2005 and picked up in 2006 (Bajaur), then 2007 (Red Mosque), then 2008 till today (WoT).

The US government would have never dreamed of attacking pakistan. They'd much rather have india do it. pakistan is a country with a large military with modern defense capabilities. Plus the fact they have nukes and the Chinese up North (who are pakistans closest allies), doesn't help either. Don't you think they would have done it already? Consider how pakistan was selective in allowing some members of AQ (the reason the US are even there) reside in its territory, and its constant financial and military support for the Afghan Taliban, which attacks the US army in Afghanistan. The TTP is a reactionary group, full of confused, angry young men who are hell-bent on getting revenge for the way the pakistan government has conducted its business in FATA. Their ranks have thinned because the people of FATA (and Swat too) realize how draconian and psychotic they were. Also, the US drone bombing played a major role in the creation of the TTP. Additionally the US its seen as a method which embarrasses pakistan because most of the people killed within its borders are innocent; their friends and family subsequently react against the pakistan government who've allowed this to go on. Why? "dallaray"!

There is a breakdown in ties because the US government sent spies inside pakistan and killed pakistani military personnel. Why? A reaction against the duplicity in the WoT. The US wanted ALL militants to be weeded out of FATA; the pakistan army operated against some and not others. The civilian government gave them the legal authority for drone strikes and to go after OBL (memo-gate) because the army wouldn't. I said this earlier, the civilian government acts as a lobby against the military, that's why you hear all this talk about a clash of institutions in pakistan.

Imran is no different than any other politician (if you paid attention to my earlier post you'd get it). The only difference is he hasn't been bought by the CIA (yet!), otherwise he's the same as the others. The MMA (ISI for US dollars); the PML-N (ISI for/through Saudi funds); ANP (ISI/CIA because they agreed to allow the US and pakarmy operate in FATA and vocally pay lip service to the WoT just as the army); the PPP (CIA/ISI, same as the ANP except on a federal level.). The ISI is sick of the current crop of political parties because they've been completely bought out by other interests, and are now focusing on Imran, who's always had good relations with people within the intelligence community (no surprise considering, they brought him into politics).

Clearly you're not paying attention to any of my previous posts. You keep harping the same things over and over again without giving a proper answer and without any sources. Again, just because you say something is the way you think it is, doesn't make it true! That's also true for the Soviet invasion.

[az4er]

In regards to the Soviet defeat in Afghanistan, the start point remains the militant communist assassination of Daud Khan, and the subsequent communist revolution . This is the catalyst. Without it, the possibility of war was not there at all.

To somehow blame US/Pak spies for agitating the Soviets is ridiculous. Afghans on the whole did not welcome the Militant Communists, and not the subsequent Soviet war. Militant Communistd tried ever so hard to impose a foreign and unwanted ideology upon Afghans. I don't think US/Pak spies had that much work to do?

Now perhaps the US spies made the Militant Communists impose Communism upon the Afghan masses, resulting in the backlash?

That's taking conspiracy theory to never before seen levels. So I guess along the same reasoning, Russia and China lured the US to Vietnam simply to have a war and occupation that they would later oppose?

This is the historical record, and I don't how it is up for debate

It is comparable to the assassination of Ferdinand prior to World War I

Listen Joe McCarthy, do yourself a favor and pick up Venturas and Brezinskis book. Then get back to me. And if Afghans didn't welcome "Militant Communists", why were they even there in first place? They must have had a support base otherwise they wouldn't have as much influence as they did in the government? And according to most historical sources, the pinkos revolted after the killing of a Parchami man Mir Akbar? That supposedly led to the killing of Daoud Khan. Brezinski says, Carter signed the order to lure the Soviets into the "Afghan trap" well before they invaded! To say the Soviets invaded because the commies were terrorists makes as much sense as a Kangaroo in Antarctica.

I'm not denying that the Soviets played a role in supporting Khalq, Parcham and the PDPA parties, but they did so due to the opposing presence of CIA and NATO intelligence. Brezhnev specifically stated to Daoud Khan that he'd quit supporting the PDPA if Daoud Khan would ban NATO from Afghanistan. He didn't. Instead he sided with them. That's why they keep blaming the Americans for the loss in Afghanistan because it was the US who LURED them in. First through NATO and then through the CIA-ISI tandem before the Soviet invasion. You can't shrug, be selective, and generalize certain FACTUAL historical events; it makes whatever flimsy narrative you have moot.

Regarding Nam former Sec'y of State Bob McNamara ADMITTED in 2004 (it was all over the news, but considering your selective reading of things, I wouldn't be surprised) that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was FAKE! (if you know your history, which I don't think you do, the GoT was the 9/11 for Vietnam)

[Ghundal]

So according to you Pakistan did not bend down and serve the US due to two public threats which were made?

This is black and white facts buddy

You should give up because you are arguing against the historical record

[az4er]

So according to you Pakistan did not bend down and serve the US due to two public threats which were made?

This is black and white facts buddy

You should give up because you are arguing against the historical record

LOL! Why do I even bother?! Listen, chump, the Bush doctrine was there for all to see. The "public threats" were PR stunts.(Read Musharraf's book In The Line of Fire; according to fact finding surveys done by various national and global publications and news media; half the stuff in there is falsified or exaggerated)

Musharraf acted like the victim so there wouldn't be a popular backlash against him and his illegitimate government, and he could extort as much funding from the US as was possible; in reality if he'd just said no, there wouldn't have been much else the US could do. pakistan was already facing crippling sanctions from the international community because of the nuclear tests it had conducted in 1998. But that didn't mean they were alienated outright, because of the Chinese, who had agreed in 1999 to start building a sea-port atGwadar, Balochistan. Work started in 2002. That represented a huge threat to the US because it gave the Chinese easier access to global markets and oil from the Gulf.

If the threats were meant to send a message to pakistan to stop supporting militants in Afghanistan, clearly they didn't work. Otherwise, there'd be no AQ, no Taliban, no LJ, no SSP,etc. The EVIDENCE points to the contrary.

[Ghundal]

Busharraf was not a puppet/stooge? That's news to me

I guess Karzai isn't a puppet either?

[Subhan]

Busharraf was not a puppet/stooge? That's news to me

I guess Karzai isn't a puppet either?

nice terminology.

[Ghundal]

That's a pretty famous term for him

[az4er]

Busharraf was not a puppet/stooge? That's news to me

I guess Karzai isn't a puppet either?

What's your tally now?

Quit generalizing. I already told you, it nullifies your arguments. And don't act so surprised, that's how politics works, especially in the global arena.

Although it is true Karzai was brought in by the US, his presidency is more of a matter of convenience and mutual interest than it is a logistical move. He was a protege of Hekmatyars at one point. He tried to negotiate a settlement between them and the NA to bring the Zahir Shah back. It didn't work, the NA was extremely hostile towards it. Then the Taliban popped up, he couldn't join them knowing the ISI was manipulating them in the backdrop. He joined forces with Massoud to take out the Taliban. Part of the reason was that the ISI gunned down his father in Quetta. When Massoud died (I don't know who took out Massoud) but it helped Karzai alot, who already had a few prior CIA contacts (via Hekmatyar) during the war and was now top of the totem pole to take control of Afghanistan, especially after 9/11. He's seen as convenient because he happens to be a Pashtun among a sea of Tajiks in the NA/UF, and most importantly he's had on the ground dealings with the CIA before in Quetta.

Also, Karzai doesn't encourage the US to stick around because he's their puppet. He encourages them to stay because he knows the US economy is tanking, they're going to lose and like Musharraf he can keep extorting money from them till they do. And once the US economy hits rock bottom, Karzai will be the first person on a US military aircraft on his way to Washington or someplace in Europe for a nice cushy life as a restaurant owner.

Like Musharraf, he can tell the Americans that he was on their side while actually seeking to serve his own interests. Why do you suppose the Americans are so sick of him? But they have to live with him because there's no one else in the NA/UF who brings the same credentials to the table that he does. He knows there's no way Afghans are going to accept another nation on their land, no matter what their intentions may be, and especially if the US can't keep bribing them to remain friendly. So he's just going to see it through to the end, and once the DOW hits zero, he'll be the first to leave Afghanistan. His hatred and rhetoric regarding the ISI is genuine though. He doesn't like them, but talks to them on behalf of the US to get the negotiation process going so this conflict can end once and for all.

However, having said that I'll admit there's not much I know about Karzai except for Quetta, and his frequent travels to Islamabad (where Hekmatyar was living) during the Soviet War.

[Ghundal]

Lol Karzai was no ones protege. He simply sat his behind in Quetta munching almonds and drinking tea while the rest of Afghanistan was fighting the Soviets.



You telling me that stated black and white threats made to Pakistan prior to the beginning of the war is meaningless does not refute it.
Their servitude was out of choice because they lacked the leadership to stand up to threats,


I really don't know how you feel you are somehow the decider of whether a threat was real or not.

Show me the evidence that Pakistans bending down in servitude to US interests was not due to threats.

[Ghundal]

Also

What are you getting at with this discussion ? I heard about Pakistans support for militants and the lip service to the US.

What I am curious to know is how come Karzai being backed by well armed alliance of over 100 nations has failed?

If Pakistan is truly the reason for this ( I don't think so) then damn, that would be historical don't you think. I mean wouldnt this already be considered a semi world war?

What the real issue is is that Afghans, primarily Pashtuns do not tolerate foreigners

That's really all it boils down to.

Now perhaps we should be curious as to why Karzai and his ANA stooges have failed?

I mean they have a high tech/well armed alliance backing them

Is Pakistan the reason?

[khushal]

which is true but so is my region which is part of thal desert...

Mr luffy,
Is there any government presence in thal. I heard it is pretty chaotic there with very little governmnet presence if at all. I ask because I spent a summer there when I was in my teens. It was very peaceful and quiet at the time.

[Michin Khel]

Mr luffy,
Is there any government presence in thal. I heard it is pretty chaotic there with very little governmnet presence if at all. I ask because I spent a summer there when I was in my teens. It was very peaceful and quiet at the time.

Interesting. Which part of thal did you spend a snummer? As it includes mianwali, khushab, bhakar, layyah , muzafargarh, lakki , FR bannu and some parts of karak. Governament is obviously there.
Thal in Punjab is now largely irrigated. But KP part is still desert.

[az4er]

Also

What are you getting at with this discussion ? I heard about Pakistans support for militants and the lip service to the US.

What I am curious to know is how come Karzai being backed by well armed alliance of over 100 nations has failed?

If Pakistan is truly the reason for this ( I don't think so) then damn, that would be historical don't you think. I mean wouldnt this already be considered a semi world war?

What the real issue is is that Afghans, primarily Pashtuns do not tolerate foreigners

That's really all it boils down to.

Now perhaps we should be curious as to why Karzai and his ANA stooges have failed?

I mean they have a high tech/well armed alliance backing them

Is Pakistan the reason?

They've failed because the PEOPLE don't want them! The people of Afghanistan see Karzai the same way you do, as a puppet. But they're waiting till the bribes run out, then the real war will probably begin. pakistans role is also pretty limited. The most they can do is provide a place for the Taliban to stay and train them, or sometimes they send in a few LJ or ISI members to carry out attacks, like the TTP have done in pakistan. The ISI doesn't have as great of a political leverage as some people perceive.

Afghanistan has no central authority, no defined institutions and is politically fractured. Its failed because there was no legitimate government to begin with. The people didn't vote for Karzai. The existing tribal systems were completely ignored and the dominant Pashtuns were marginalized.

After 9/11, AQ was gone and the Taliban disbanded. The Americans didn't pounce on the opportunity to go back to the system that existed during Daoud Khans reign (at the behest of the other "oppressed" ethnic groups), something most Pashtun leaders were content with. Instead they were duped by the NA and their own paranoia and brought an affiliate of Massoud's; Karzai into power. The US picked the NA and people like Dostum; they viewed the vast majority of Pashtuns as members of the Taliban and later-2004 and onward-as ISI friendly, which was a ridiculous distortion and misunderstanding on their part (But then again Neo-cons were in power).

That subsequently led to the resurgence of the Taliban. Note that there's no one Taliban, there are different factions who are united because of the US's policy towards Pashtuns. They shoud've appealed to the Pashtuns then and there; endorsed free and fair elections and if they were sincere stuck to nation building and reduce their combat mission to a policing role by 2002. Plus bringing the ANP (Wali Khan and Mollana Hassan Jan, who helped keep psycho-fundis at bay through reason, were alive then) to power in 2002 in Pakhtunkhwa would've also helped (Note: the ISI supported the MMA in 2002) counteracting the ISI's duplicity.

The militant groups who're friendly with the ISI share good relations with other groups who're not necessarily comfy with the ISI but appreciate benefiting off their support. pakistan rather they operate in Afghanistan instead of pakistan. pakistan wants to see a stagnant Afghanistan because a developed Afghanistan represents a bigger threat than india. Pashtunistan was almost a reality in the 1970s; the movement was curtailed (slightly) when Akbar Bugti filled ZAB in on the ground floor of the operations (Bugti became Governor of Balochistan and later Chief Minister). pakistan jumped into the Soviet invasion because it would divert Pashtuns attentions from wanting a united homeland (Bengalis seceded in 1971)

Basically its not just one reason that Karzai and NATO have failed. Its a combination of many.

1) Marginalizing Pashtuns.

2) Lack of free and fair elections.

3) NATO military presence.

4) Bribing tribes

5) pakistani and indian (one will always try to counteract the other) meddling in Afghan affairs.

Also, they could have brought the Chinese, russians, Brazilians, Japanese, iranians, indians, pakistanis,etc. under a UN mandate to help in the nation-building process. No military presence, simply humanitarian. Limit military training to UN peace-keeping forces. That way no group could promote its own interests over the other because the ramifications would be severe, and most importantly it wouldn't seem like an occupation, the job would've been done quicker and the Afghan people would've been left to take care of their own affairs. This scenario was suggest by Lakhdar Brahimi at one time, a few days before the US invasion, but it fell on deaf ears.

Finally, I wouldn't exactly call it a semi-World War. I'd say its more of a precursor to one. Greater Afghanistan lies at an extremely key juncture. It connects the far-east and Central Asia with the subcontinent and the Arabian Gulf. Not to mention the resources available in this area. Many commentators are referring to this conflict as the 2nd Great Game because the Chinese and Americans desperately need those mining contracts in Afghanistan, the oil-pipeline from both Afghanistan via Turkmenistan and pakistan via iran, and access to the Gwadar sea-port in pakistan; and the Pashtuns are caught in the middle of this mess, and because they refuse to compromise their freedom and independence in this battle for global domination, they're forced to fight. They did it against the british, against the Soviets and now they're doing it against the NATO.

[khushal]

Interesting. Which part of thal did you spend a snummer? As it includes mianwali, khushab, bhakar, layyah , muzafargarh, lakki , FR bannu and some parts of karak. Governament is obviously there.
Thal in Punjab is now largely irrigated. But KP part is still desert.

I was in the thal bazaar, i spent half the time there and the other time in Doaba, right next to the bridge before you go into the bazaar. Why are people telling me its chaotic and unsafe.