The Last Days of Taliban Head Mullah Omar

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Its not about vindication, its about facts.
There are people that say HItler was a child molester but there is no evidence to support it.


Also many Members of Afghan Parliament are paid by ISI so they are already there not to mention that the Durand line is now an actual border where before it was just imaginary on a paper map. You dont even understand the dynamics and interests for the people. You just want to be right and care about feeding your own ego.

I see more narrative than "fact" here. As for your remark many members of Parliament are paid by ISI, I believe it's quite possible that's true.

But the Taliban being a proxy force of Pakistan isn't the "interests of the people". They probably would have done the same as the parliament members and recruit Afghan kids to die in Kashmir so they don't have to.

[khushal]

I see more narrative than "fact" here. As for your remark many members of Parliament are paid by ISI, I believe it's quite possible that's true.

But the Taliban being a proxy force of Pakistan isn't the "interests of the people". They probably would have done the same as the parliament members and recruit Afghan kids to die in Kashmir so they don't have to.

When I say the interests of the people, I am talking about free borders.

Pashtun kids still die in Kashmir and they were dying before anyone had heard of the Taliban. Like I said we are talking about facts not vindication.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

When I say the interests of the people, I am talking about free borders.

Pashtun kids still die in Kashmir and they were dying before anyone had heard of the Taliban. Like I said we are talking about facts not vindication.

The Taliban wouldn't permit a porous border if Pakistan opted not to, I mean regulating the border can be just as easily co-opted to their interests if Taliban were in power.

[maneatinglizard]

The Taliban wouldn't permit a porous border if Pakistan opted not to, I mean regulating the border can be just as easily co-opted to their interests if Taliban were in power.

I don't think the Taliban would accept a secured border when they don't even recognize the border in the first place.

I think you're overestimating the influence of Pakistan on the Taliban. While Pakistan is definitely an ally of the Taliban, it's also clear that the two sides are not as close as they were before 9/11. Why would the Taliban seek contacts with Iran and Russia, aid (or at least tolerate) the Pakistani Taliban that are fighting the Pakistani state, insist on their political office being in Qatar instead of Pakistan, and avoid negotiating with the US in Pakistan, if they trusted Pakistan or considered it a real ally?

On the other hand, why would Pakistan have Mullah Mansour assassinated by the US on their soil if they trusted the Taliban or considered it a real ally?

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

I don't think the Taliban would accept a secured border when they don't even recognize the border in the first place.

I think you're overestimating the influence of Pakistan on the Taliban. While Pakistan is definitely an ally of the Taliban, it's also clear that the two sides are not as close as they were before 9/11. Why would the Taliban seek contacts with Iran and Russia, aid (or at least tolerate) the Pakistani Taliban that are fighting the Pakistani state, insist on their political office being in Qatar instead of Pakistan, and avoid negotiating with the US in Pakistan, if they trusted Pakistan or considered it a real ally?

On the other hand, why would Pakistan have Mullah Mansour assassinated by the US on their soil if they trusted the Taliban or considered it a real ally?

The point you made is exactly a large symptom of what's wrong with the The Taliban

Sure no, denying that Pakistan will sell out Taliban leaders in a heart beat, BUT that is exactly what begs the question, why does Taliban still collude or have alliance with such a treacherous government but decries the Afghan government as corrupt? Sure it's true the Afghan government has corruption, it comes with the territory of being in a third world country where everyone is competing for limited resources., but how much more corrupt would a government that's willing to kill you off to appease Western interests? That suggests that Taliban are just "expendible" proxies where Taliban members themselves are complicit with the assasinations/arrests of their leaders or Taliban are so internally dysfunctional and aimless that they'll embrace anyone, no matter how corrupt to get at their rivals. Which means the corruption jargon is just lingo to feign legitimacy but really they don't care much about it, this is really about power grabbing. Either way we get to more or less the same outcome.

The border was porous so long as it allowed Pakistani establishment agendas to be fulfilled. But now factor in that India uses Afghanistan as a transport hub. Pakistan would NOT have that. So if they have a proxy force reinstituted, attempting to lock the border and having Taliban as highway men throughout Afghanistan would be a feasible strategy. Pakistan is also worried about BLA infiltration as well.

This claim it coincides with "people's interests" is just narrative, that doesn't mean people won't be affected, but that isn't even a secondary concern.

[Insight]

The point you made is exactly a large symptom of what's wrong with the The Taliban

Sure no, denying that Pakistan will sell out Taliban leaders in a heart beat, BUT that is exactly what begs the question, why does Taliban still collude or have alliance with such a treacherous government but decries the Afghan government as corrupt? Sure it's true the Afghan government has corruption, it comes with the territory of being in a third world country where everyone is competing for limited resources., but how much more corrupt would a government that's willing to kill you off to appease Western interests? That suggests that Taliban are just "expendible" proxies where Taliban members themselves are complicit with the assasinations/arrests of their leaders or Taliban are so internally dysfunctional and aimless that they'll embrace anyone, no matter how corrupt to get at their rivals. Which means the corruption jargon is just lingo to feign legitimacy but really they don't care much about it, this is really about power grabbing. Either way we get to more or less the same outcome.

The border was porous so long as it allowed Pakistani establishment agendas to be fulfilled. But now factor in that India uses Afghanistan as a transport hub. Pakistan would NOT have that. So if they have a proxy force reinstituted, attempting to lock the border and having Taliban as highway men throughout Afghanistan would be a feasible strategy. Pakistan is also worried about BLA infiltration as well.

This claim it coincides with "people's interests" is just narrative, that doesn't mean people won't be affected, but that isn't even a secondary concern.

Do you then believe the Taliban/Afghan insurgents are an extension of the Pakistani military ? Their plans are to raise the Pakistani flag over Kandahar? Place a Jinnah statue in the heart of Kabul? They have no interests of their own and are perfectly ok with Pakistan allowing US drone strikes to target them, permit NATO supplies to prop up US war and Kabul regime?

Yes or no answer will be sufficient

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Do you then believe the Taliban/Afghan insurgents are an extension of the Pakistani military ? Their plans are to raise the Pakistani flag over Kandahar? Place a Jinnah statue in the heart of Kabul? They have no interests of their own and are perfectly ok with Pakistan allowing US drone strikes to target them, permit NATO supplies to prop up US war and Kabul regime?

Yes or no answer will be sufficient

Not necessarily, they're proxies, so they're cannon fodder, at least the rank and file, The Top brass are really just opportunists. I don't think they necessarily "want" Pakistan to win, but Pakistan has been their primary benefactor so they'll embrace them as long as that's being done.

Sadly, it stems from the adage about "you can rent an Afghan, but you can never own him" blah blah.

I don't think Pakistan cares about a Jinnah statue in the heart of Kabul, they just care that Afghanistan is a platform against India and they have an ample of supply of poor Afghans available to fight their wars exploiting religion to guilt trip them into it. Pakistan isn't this unstoppable power, they know the U.S. would **** all over Islamabad if they were that "bold", they have to "pull with the punches" and be "coy". Even Armitage told Musharraf, they'd blow Pakistan "back to the stone ages", Pakistan will cower as much as they need so that doesn't happen. That however, won't "stop" them from their end-game,.

As long as Afghanistan is coopertaing with India, Pakistan won't rest.

[Insight]

Not necessarily, they're proxies, so they're cannon fodder, at least the rank and file, The Top brass are really just opportunists. I don't think they necessarily "want" Pakistan to win, but Pakistan has been their primary benefactor so they'll embrace them as long as that's being done.

Sadly, it stems from the adage about "you can rent an Afghan, but you can never own him" blah blah.

I don't think Pakistan cares about a Jinnah statue in the heart of Kabul, they just care that Afghanistan is a platform against India and they have an ample of supply of poor Afghans available to fight their wars exploiting religion to guilt trip them into it. Pakistan isn't this unstoppable power, they know the U.S. would **** all over Islamabad if they were that "bold", they have to "pull with the punches" and be "coy". Even Armitage told Musharraf, they'd blow Pakistan "back to the stone ages", Pakistan will cower as much as they need so that doesn't happen. That however, won't "stop" them from their end-game,.

As long as Afghanistan is coopertaing with India, Pakistan won't rest.

So Pakistan backs the Taliban for their own reasons,mostly to not give India a foothold in Afghanistan.

Taliban want to return to power and for the US to withdraw.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

So Pakistan backs the Taliban for their own reasons,mostly to not give India a foothold in Afghanistan.

Taliban want to return to power and for the US to withdraw.

It's probably less noble than even that. Taliban brass want benefactors and power. Remember in the 90s they were open to courting American Enterprises. (UNOCAL)

Pakistan wanted a group like the Taliban as a platform against India, both a regional support, a source of militants and an Achilles' heel against India economically.

[Insight]

It's probably less noble than even that. Taliban brass want benefactors and power. Remember in the 90s they were open to courting American Enterprises. (UNOCAL)

Pakistan wanted a group like the Taliban as a platform against India, both a regional support, a source of militants and an Achilles' heel against India economically.

So then I take you agree that Taliban have their own interests?

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

So then I take you agree that Taliban have their own interests?

You can say that about even Karzai or Ghani. Doesn't change that the Taliban are endorsing and furthering Pakistani interests, and thus are Stooges.

[Insight]

You can say that about even Karzai or Ghani. Doesn't change that the Taliban are endorsing and furthering Pakistani interests, and thus are Stooges.

We are discussing facts not opinions.

US/NATO troops are in Afghanistan fighting for a Kabul regime.

There are no Pakistani troops/Iranian troops propping up the Taliban. Taliban are an Afghan insurgency drawn from Afghans.

There is a clear difference.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

We are discussing facts not opinions.

US/NATO troops are in Afghanistan fighting for a Kabul regime.

There are no Pakistani troops/Iranian troops propping up the Taliban. Taliban are an Afghan insurgency drawn from Afghans.

There is a clear difference.

By that argument, you're essentially saying the U.S./NATO are stooges of the Kabul regime....Where as Taliban are fighting in Afghanistan essentially to further the interests of Pakistan .....which makes them Stooges of Pakistan...

The whole "drawn from Afghans" stuff has been falsified by Ahmad Rashid and Pakistani Ministers themselves. What am I missing here? This is exactly why you're not "simply stating facts" ...you ignored and outrightly evaded these facts.

[Insight]

By that argument, you're essentially saying the U.S./NATO are stooges of the Kabul regime....Where as Taliban are fighting in Afghanistan essentially to further the interests of Pakistan .....which makes them Stooges of Pakistan...

The whole "drawn from Afghans" stuff has been falsified by Ahmad Rashid and Pakistani Ministers themselves. What am I missing here? This is exactly why you're not "simply stating facts" ...you ignored and outrightly evaded these facts.

Show me your sources stating that Pakistani troops are in Afghanistan.

Show me your sources that Taliban are not drawn from Afghans, but from foreingers, namely Pakistanis.

Give me peer reviewed sources lol. I need several sources too, not one.

[Iblis_Efreetzai]

Show me your sources stating that Pakistani troops are in Afghanistan.

Show me your sources that Taliban are not drawn from Afghans, but from foreingers, namely Pakistanis.

Give me peer reviewed sources lol. I need several sources too, not one.

I already did that earlier, read the Ahmad Rashid quote, and that should suffice as evidence since you take journalists that "lived there" as research. i didn't say that "no Afghans" are in the Taliban, I said Taliban definitely have had Pakistani military personnel and were engineered by Pakistan, by Pakistani minister's own admission. Go back to the Naseerullah Babar quote. No better source than the SOURCE ITSELF.

No need for Peer Reviewed sources for you, since you accept journalists that "lived there" I MET YOUR standard of evidence, you have yet to meet mine.