Afghan Soldiers to be Trained in India

[RevolutionThroughReason]

No,our soldiers never trained in India. We have officers attending various courses in various countries like China, Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, S Korea, Turkey, France, Canada, USA, Australia, UK, Germany and others. Similarly all these nations send officers to train in our institutions which are world class. Officer cadets from Bosnia, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Malaysia, Palestine and others attend our Military Academy. Bangladesh should be Afghanistan's first choice for defence cooperation.

You are a horrible liar and forget we have the internet

http://www.india-defence.com/reports-4149

Bangladesh, India to Conduct Joint Military Training Exercise in Assam
Focus
»
2009-01-14 In order to combat growing terrorist activities and insurgency problems, the armies of India and Bangladesh will jointly conduct a counter terrorism exercise in the northeastern state of Assam this year, officials said here Wednesday. The training would be held from Feb 22 to Mar 7 at Jorhat in Assam.

"The joint exercise would be held as part of confidence building measures between both the neighbouring nations threatened by terrorism. Five officers and 15 other personnel from Bangladesh will be taking part in the exercise and will train with the special para-commandos of the Indian Army," Group Captain R.K. Das, spokesperson of the ministry of defence (MoD), told IANS Wednesday.

Jorhat is located on the fringes of dense forests and riverine plains of Assam.

"The exercise by Indian and Bangladeshi special forces will comprise of airborne operations. The modalities of the combat manoeuvres were finalised during a military conference held in Kolkata December last year," a press statement issued by the MoD said.

India has been training and also conducting counter terrorism exercises with various countries in Mizoram.

"With India keen on securing Bangladesh’s firm cooperation in fighting anti-Indian terror and insurgent outfits operating from its soil, the armies from the two countries will come together to hold their first-ever counter terrorism exercise," Das said.

The Indian army and the security forces have been fighting the United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) cadres in the state.

You clearly are a ISI supported 5th column in Bangladesh; stay out of our issues please, you're an outsider, and please take ISI tools like Bread-Mold with you

[RevolutionThroughReason]

First help the Burmese muslims idiot, then talk. lol at the so called brotherhood

exactly

we'll seek help from anyone who has genuine intentions.

[MostafaM]

No,our soldiers never trained in India. We have officers attending various courses in various countries like China, Indonesia, Malaysia, India, Pakistan, S Korea, Turkey, France, Canada, USA, Australia, UK, Germany and others. Similarly all these nations send officers to train in our institutions which are world class. Officer cadets from Bosnia, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Malaysia, Palestine and others attend our Military Academy. Bangladesh should be Afghanistan's first choice for defence cooperation.

...sounds like the creme-de-la-creme of the armies of the world get trained in Bangladesh.



Palestine doesn´t even have a standing army.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

600 Afghan troops to be trained in India and over 100 in Indian Army’s jung

SOURCE: NDTV

LINK

India has agreed to train upto 600 Afghan Army officers every year in India under a pact that President Hamid Karzai is expected to sign with India early next week, highly placed sources have told NDTV.

The program is the first concrete follow-up on military-to-military cooperation under the umbrella of the Strategic Partnership Agreement that was signed between Kabul and New Delhi in 2011 when Afghan President Hamid Karzai was given a grand reception in India.

Under the agreement, India, which has the world’s third-largest army, agreed to train, equip and build the capacity of the Afghan forces.

Sources in the Indian security establishment familiar with the contours of the detailed schedule say Kabul and New Delhi have identified three areas to focus on, namely increasing the intake of officers in India’s premier training institutes; providing specialized training to middle and higher level officers already operating in the Afghan National Army (ANA); and training soldiers in counter-insurgency and counter-terrorist operations.

Over 200 Afghan cadets will be training at the National Defence Academy, the Officers’ Training Academies and the Indian Military Academy every year. This is over and above the 600 serving Afghan National Army (ANA) officers who will undergo a variety of courses.

In addition, company level (100-strong) contingents of ANA will be trained for four weeks at the Counter Insurgency and Jungle Warfare School located at Vairangte in Mizoram.

NDTV had reported on these plans in December 2011. It has taken almost a year for New Delhi and Kabul to firm up the details.

India however has no plans to send or deploy its troops in Afghanistan as of now.

President Karzai is also likely to sign a pact on allowing India and Indian companies to mine that country’s vast natural resources. Indian companies are planning to invest over 11 bn dollars in the mining sector over the long term in Afghanistan.

New Delhi has also decided to supply vehicles, information technology and sports equipment, a move seen as a paradigm shift in India’s approach to Afghanistan.

So far, India has concentrated on using “soft power” in the development sector, such as helping with the building of roads, hospitals and even the parliament building in Afghanistan. But by offering extensive training facilities for ANA, India has decided to ramp up its involvement, although it’s currently stopping short of supplying any military hardware. New Delhi has also decided not to send training teams to Afghanistan in view of the two attacks on its embassy in Kabul.

The Indian security and strategic establishment has been wary of discussing the Indo-Afghan military-to-military relationship, not least because of Islamabad’s sensitivities. Pakistan sees the growing relationship between New Delhi and Kabul as denying “strategic depth” to its army, and as an Indian attempt to encircle Pakistan.

President Karzai will arrive in Mumbai on Friday and will later travels to Delhi.

Asad,

Irrespective of who trains Afghan Soldiers, people have forgotten one the most important precepts of life. Farmers know this precept pretty well since they understand that no one tills your soil for free: People cannot do for you what you are unwilling to do for yourself. An additional precept should be: Stupid leadership kills. Period.

What is term used for people that committ the same error repeatedly and expect different results? I think that behavior has been likened to insanity. If you examine history in that region, all these abject failures including the 'Iron' Amir thought themselves impervious to the outcome of this sort of "strategic balancing." I use this term because if Pakistan's foolish self destructive policy is to be called strategic depth, there has to be a term for what bone headed Afghan puppets have used. Amin tried it, Daud tried it, etc etc etc etc Zahir Shah tried it and all failed to get the result that they expected. Let me tell you what result they expect:

1) Country X, Y, and Z train Afghan soldiers ---> 2) Afghan leadership adeptly brings these young men who are now creme dela creme home
---> 3) Kabul buys weaponry ---> 4) No one notices but sneaky Karzai or his Post 2014 equivalent does a master stroke of genius and develops nukes ---> 5) Sneaky Karzai or equivalent pulls an Ahmad Shah Abdali and makes a clean break and lifts Afghanistan York (its new name because somehow they also in the mean time turned the whole country into New Yorn) into the G8 era; he is able to do this because he has strategically balanced the great powers at such a fine tuned level that they all focus on destroying one another and he can dust off his hands and feel great that he fills the void.

Here is the reality:

Here is an article in the post today. It is entited: For Afghan Troops, Donkeys are the New Helicopter.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/for-afghan-troops-donkeys-are-the-new-helicopters/2012/11/08/d221c2de-28bd-11e2-aaa5-ac786110c486_story.html

Here is a snippet from the article: "But as the U.S. military drawdown continues, the sky is emptying of the foreign aircraft that have kept remote outposts stocked with food, water and weaponry. Afghan troops are being handed the outposts, but not the sleek helicopters that have soared overhead, delivering supplies. More than anything, Afghan soldiers want helicopters. As of now, they have 31, a far cry from the vast fleet maintained by the U.S. forces. Without any assurance that the Americans will give them more, a frustrated President Hamid Karzai threatened to acquire aircraft from non-NATO countries. With the U.S. choppers on their way out, the donkey trade has risen steadily. The animals, many of which have been redirected from farm labor to military duty, transport everything that soldiers need, from rice to ammunition."

Now for the India relationship. Kabul's long term goal has been to get Pakistan to abandon its "Strategic Depth" Policy. This for two reasons, one of which probably would be a concedable goal the other is self defeating:

1) Secure Afghan self determination and autonomy without having any leadership beholden to making decisions that suit Pakistan or Saudi's interests. (A good goal)

2) Take back territory for Afghanistan that is historically Afghan land.
^The problem with 2) Is that a large swathe of other ethnic groups do not see this at all in their self interest. Why would Hazara, Tajiks, and Uzbeks ever really want anything other than the fracturing of Pakistan but not necessarily the addition of KP to Afghanistan proper? After all, the latter would pretty much re-enforce their minority status.

The other issue with 2) is that nothing holds the Pakistani federation together like whispers of Indian influence and outside threats whether they are substantiated or not. That is what makes simulataneously trying to accomplish 1) and 2) untenable.

We know one thing for sure and that is that Pakistan will do just about anything to ensure India does not get it in a pincer hold. To date, neither the death of OBL nor the Malala incident have forced Pakistan's hand in augmenting it doing other people's bidding. Sure it has pissed off a number of its own denizens since Musharraf's time by conducting internal raids etc., but it has not yet taken enough action to thoroughly destabilize itself. Generally, even when Pakistan does take on that role, it announces its operation weeks in advance giving its opponent a lot of time to disperse to live another day.

The common refrain from Kabul and the Karzai acolytes is: Afghanistan is a sovereign nation and can have anyone it so pleases on its soil. I hardly think American warplanes in its skies and the inability to access Soldier Bale of the Panjwai massacre validates that view point. But even if it were, it doesnt absolve the fact that other supposedly sovereign states (i.e. Pakistan) are going to react to what they see as mortal threats. If one has a problem with this they just need to resurrect John Kennedy and ask him why he nearly bought the world to the brink of nuclear warfare over some silos in Cuba, after all Geuvara and Co had rendered Cuba a sovereign nation. Why does this matter? Well, because Pakistan will play that game indefinitly and has the capacity to do so when public perception is taken into account and via the same American treasury coffers that the puppet Kabul regime lives off.

So then the question remains, does Pakistan have any validity for the high level of paranoia? I have addressed this previously and will cut and paste. Here is a discussion that indicates this paranoia is not without evidence based merit:

"This is an excellent article from the editor of the famed Indian Defence Review Journal. Let me repeat that; Indian Defence Review Journal.
http://www.sify.com/news/stable-paki...gxe3iggei.html
It articles reflect the thought processes of India's military elite; who like most military elites act on a sense of paranoia and forboding and pretty much want to bulk up defense.

This title is called:
Stable Pakistan Not in India's Interest.

dispelling thoroughly the myth that Indian elites sit back cool as cucumbers, singing ohm with the cosmic note of the universe, while Pakistanis are vengeance laced, uncouth, hairy, dark beasts scaling the walls. Rather, both sides are nearly equally paranoid per a simple reading of this article. Here are some choice quotes:

"At the height of the recent disturbances in the Valley, when a general asked me for a suggestion to resolve the issue, I said: “ Remove Pakistan. The threat will disappear permanently.” Today the collapse of Pakistan as a state is almost certain. All the King’s men cannot save it from itself.
Looking ahead, New Delhi should formulate an appropriate strategy for ‘post-Pakistan scenario’ to secure India’s interests in Central Asia."

He says earlier inthe article, with intentions toward Central Asia: "To defend this key threat to the Union, New Delhi should extend its influence through export of both soft and hard power towards Central Asia, from where invasions have been mounted over centuries. The cessation of Pakistan as a state facilitates furtherance of this pivotal national objective."

It gets BIGGER than Pakistan though and Verma write another article in which he lets it slip that the dance, seemingly between Pakistan and India is actually a switch up dance in which the real adversary is China:

http://news.rediff.com/column/2009/n...ese-threat.htm

Some more paranoia from Verma: "Hence, it is in India's national interest to synergise with the West in Af-Pak to benefit from resource rich Central Asia and deny the centuries's old route of invasion to the adversary."

^^^^^
What does this translate to? India, in its own Hawk's words, has its own objectives. The above almost gaurantees that India, like the other Afghan ethnic group, also sees NO BENEFIT in KP joining back up with Afghanistan. Rather, a strengthened Afghanistan from that vantage point is against India's now stated interests in "energy rich" central asia.

The Karzai crowd will chime in at this point as say "well what if our interests over lap?"

My response? Did you read any of what Verma wrote? Are you illiterate? Can you reconcile the Loy Afghanistan logic with Verma's? Can you reconcile the logic of a strong Loy Afghanistan with Verma's logic? If not, then please sew your lips together and quit wasting my time. A practical illustration of India seeking her own interests were her of times even aerial support of Russian MiGs that killed Afghan's in that other great war.

So the summary?

1) We have an Afghan President who is utterly delusional corrupt incompetent kleptocrat and meets the public definition of insanity (according to reports some private psych issues too) expecting that repeating the same mistake over as Daud, the Iron Amir, Zahir Shah committed will yield different results
2) That mistake is the idiotic concept of strategic balancing (i.e believing that balancing the forced vectors of Iran, America, Pakistan, China, etc will yield a sum Force of Zero.
3) We have an Afghan Army with Helicopter Donkeys who have not been able to match gun to gun with their adversaries, showing high attrition rates and poor performance.
4) India has her own goals as does Pakistan and there is no valid proof that India and Afghanistan's long term strategic goals overlap
5) One of those strategic goals of India is certainly NOT Loy Afghanistan; in fact per Verma that would undo long term Indian goals
6) Knowing 5 is true, how can Afghan Millet pro Pashtun ascendency folks even validate this dependency relationship?
7) Afghanistan by every definition is NOT an autonomous nation state (otherwise American drones like the Beast of kandahar would not be flying off Afghan soil to instigate Iran).
8) These policies that Karzai adopts only foments and gaurantees that the forces he is attempting to stragetically balance all continue to intervene endelessly in Afghanistan to create low level inflammation limiting development and progress.
9) True autonomy from all groups is possible and will have the best long term outcome despite the long hard road.

- And Azmal you are still a sorry piece of feces that needs to be flushed. But you are a "invented" descendent of Telai so being a product of fecal matter is in your DNA and you have no choice.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

The india having left Bengladesh example is also absurd if anyone decides to offer this as India's main goal with Bengladesh was to eliminate a Pakistan straddling its sides and it gains nothing from sustained involvement there.

[Khostai]

^so your whole argument is based on what this guy Verma says and you think that is what the whole goverment of India want??
And why do you insult Azmal in every singel post??? What's up whith that?

[BarakzaiAbdali]

^so your whole argument is based on what this guy Verma says and you think that is what the whole goverment of India want??
And why do you insult Azmal in every singel post??? What's up whith that?

No Indian defense has multiple articles by former RAW directors and BJP party officials to the same effect. India's hard power policy during the Russo Afghan conflict is well known.

Azmal is the belle of the bacha bazi ball and that Persian poser and I have history. Let us leave it at that.

Also, the Afghan Installed Polity is generally made up of lazy good for nothings who think that they are there to teach their "rural brown brothers" how to live like, eat, speak, and think like the rest of the world. This is in stark contrast to the Vietnemese. Sure they may have had Chinese and Russian help in taking on the Americans and expelling them. But irrespective of this, they were willing to deal with the consequences of being a nation with no foreign troops stationed on their soil - i.e complete autonomy. Despite the difficult years and half century or so that has followed, the Vietnemese, through their poverty, are now establishing trade ties and economically beneficial deals on their own terms. The Karzai crowd, on the other hand, operates like Dheim, thinking that they can somehow New Yorkize Afghanistan over the next 2 decades. And worse, they think they can do this from a position of weakness.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

^so your whole argument is based on what this guy Verma says and you think that is what the whole goverment of India want??
And why do you insult Azmal in every singel post??? What's up whith that?

http://atlanticsentinel.com/2011/06/...isintegration/

Here is another article from the American vantage point describing how India is perfectly willing and even has an implicit fighting that the destabilization will spread into Afghanistan and the Central Asian states but that India is more than willing to let that happen since it augments their internal stability and ability to reposition and diminish troop numbers dealing with Pakistan. The exact quote is:

"The balkanization of Pakistan could result in years of guerrilla warfare in the tribal areas, with significant internal displacement as happened in former Yugoslavia during the 1990s. India has prepared against that eventuality with an electrified border fence (PDF) so refugees would likely seek safe haven in western and northern parts of Afghanistan and Central Asia as fighting concentrates on the border between the North West Frontier Province and the Punjab. Balochistan and Sindh, which contain vast natural riches and have access to the sea respectively, would not be able to escape violence spilling over into their territories."

Which is interesting since Hamid Zardarzai is already getting dairrhea over the fact that Iran and Pakistan are sending refugees back due to the inability of the state to handle this influx.

Here is the CIA agent, Michael Scheuer's argument against continued Indian involvement:

http://thediplomat.com/2010/08/30/th...ar-flashpoint/

http://orientalreview.org/2010/06/21...n-of-pakistan/

The above is a regular contributer to the Oriental Review, an Indian Professor in Canada, who describes in detail what India is thinking. Contrary to what the idiots in the Clownzai camp who think that KP and Balochistan would be handed over or forcibly taken by the nonfunctional ANA, he describes artfully how Balochistan and its resources would remain independent and accessible to India.

Pakistan is obviously no white dress virgin in all of this either. The same Michael Scheuer wrote this artful article below about Pakistan and India's escalating idiocy:

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/JI20Df02.html

The whole point here is that India is a power in and of itself. It does not play benevolent rewarding games where if Clownzai bows down far enough and opens his legs wide enough that they will defer their self interest in lieu of his.

At the end of the day, he can do whatever he wants. It doesnt effect me in the least. But as I said before, he is playing a losing game that has been played before. Worse than that, he is bad at playing it.

---------------------

Also Azmal is No pashtun and gets an itch in his anus whenever his father Saleh or his Lahori madame great grandmother is mentioned. He once tried to claim he was somehow simultaneously descendend from Mir Wais Neka, Ahmad Shah, Khushal Khan, Sher Shah, and finally Telai/Zikria, the Iron Amir etc. When his claims were processed and it was shown that the only way to make any of this true was to trace his roots to a tryst between Sultan Muhammad Telai and Lahori slave, he became enraged. This in turn resulted in him exposing the fact that he is no Pashtun, but rather a Saleh supporter die hard parsizubaan. He began to surface whenever Daddy (Saleh) was mentioned and/or insulted.

He finally blew his cover here:
http://www.pashtunforums.com/showthr...ighlight=spaag

Where it was shown that he had no grasp on even the basic Pashto vocabulary.

A long term member pmed me giving me some solid leads on Azmal indicating that he was, per documented history, a farsibaan and had actually even requested buying Pashto text books in order to learn Pashto long ago.

Like a cockroach he scurried under a brick and has yet to be seen, though I am hoping this India thread brings him back. I look forward to crushing him under my boot when he resurfaces.

[asad71]

Asad,

Irrespective of who trains Afghan Soldiers, people have forgotten one the most important precepts of life. Farmers know this precept pretty well since they understand that no one tills your soil for free: People cannot do for you what you are unwilling to do for yourself. An additional precept should be: Stupid leadership kills. Period.

What is term used for people that committ the same error repeatedly and expect different results? I think that behavior has been likened to insanity. If you examine history in that region, all these abject failures including the 'Iron' Amir thought themselves impervious to the outcome of this sort of "strategic balancing." I use this term because if Pakistan's foolish self destructive policy is to be called strategic depth, there has to be a term for what bone headed Afghan puppets have used. Amin tried it, Daud tried it, etc etc etc etc Zahir Shah tried it and all failed to get the result that they expected. Let me tell you what result they expect:

1) Country X, Y, and Z train Afghan soldiers ---> 2) Afghan leadership adeptly brings these young men who are now creme dela creme home
---> 3) Kabul buys weaponry ---> 4) No one notices but sneaky Karzai or his Post 2014 equivalent does a master stroke of genius and develops nukes ---> 5) Sneaky Karzai or equivalent pulls an Ahmad Shah Abdali and makes a clean break and lifts Afghanistan York (its new name because somehow they also in the mean time turned the whole country into New Yorn) into the G8 era; he is able to do this because he has strategically balanced the great powers at such a fine tuned level that they all focus on destroying one another and he can dust off his hands and feel great that he fills the void.

Here is the reality:

Here is an article in the post today. It is entited: For Afghan Troops, Donkeys are the New Helicopter.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/asia_pacific/for-afghan-troops-donkeys-are-the-new-helicopters/2012/11/08/d221c2de-28bd-11e2-aaa5-ac786110c486_story.html

Here is a snippet from the article: "But as the U.S. military drawdown continues, the sky is emptying of the foreign aircraft that have kept remote outposts stocked with food, water and weaponry. Afghan troops are being handed the outposts, but not the sleek helicopters that have soared overhead, delivering supplies. More than anything, Afghan soldiers want helicopters. As of now, they have 31, a far cry from the vast fleet maintained by the U.S. forces. Without any assurance that the Americans will give them more, a frustrated President Hamid Karzai threatened to acquire aircraft from non-NATO countries. With the U.S. choppers on their way out, the donkey trade has risen steadily. The animals, many of which have been redirected from farm labor to military duty, transport everything that soldiers need, from rice to ammunition."

Now for the India relationship. Kabul's long term goal has been to get Pakistan to abandon its "Strategic Depth" Policy. This for two reasons, one of which probably would be a concedable goal the other is self defeating:

1) Secure Afghan self determination and autonomy without having any leadership beholden to making decisions that suit Pakistan or Saudi's interests. (A good goal)

2) Take back territory for Afghanistan that is historically Afghan land.
^The problem with 2) Is that a large swathe of other ethnic groups do not see this at all in their self interest. Why would Hazara, Tajiks, and Uzbeks ever really want anything other than the fracturing of Pakistan but not necessarily the addition of KP to Afghanistan proper? After all, the latter would pretty much re-enforce their minority status.

The other issue with 2) is that nothing holds the Pakistani federation together like whispers of Indian influence and outside threats whether they are substantiated or not. That is what makes simulataneously trying to accomplish 1) and 2) untenable.

We know one thing for sure and that is that Pakistan will do just about anything to ensure India does not get it in a pincer hold. To date, neither the death of OBL nor the Malala incident have forced Pakistan's hand in augmenting it doing other people's bidding. Sure it has pissed off a number of its own denizens since Musharraf's time by conducting internal raids etc., but it has not yet taken enough action to thoroughly destabilize itself. Generally, even when Pakistan does take on that role, it announces its operation weeks in advance giving its opponent a lot of time to disperse to live another day.

The common refrain from Kabul and the Karzai acolytes is: Afghanistan is a sovereign nation and can have anyone it so pleases on its soil. I hardly think American warplanes in its skies and the inability to access Soldier Bale of the Panjwai massacre validates that view point. But even if it were, it doesnt absolve the fact that other supposedly sovereign states (i.e. Pakistan) are going to react to what they see as mortal threats. If one has a problem with this they just need to resurrect John Kennedy and ask him why he nearly bought the world to the brink of nuclear warfare over some silos in Cuba, after all Geuvara and Co had rendered Cuba a sovereign nation. Why does this matter? Well, because Pakistan will play that game indefinitly and has the capacity to do so when public perception is taken into account and via the same American treasury coffers that the puppet Kabul regime lives off.

So then the question remains, does Pakistan have any validity for the high level of paranoia? I have addressed this previously and will cut and paste. Here is a discussion that indicates this paranoia is not without evidence based merit:

"This is an excellent article from the editor of the famed Indian Defence Review Journal. Let me repeat that; Indian Defence Review Journal.
http://www.sify.com/news/stable-paki...gxe3iggei.html
It articles reflect the thought processes of India's military elite; who like most military elites act on a sense of paranoia and forboding and pretty much want to bulk up defense.

This title is called:
Stable Pakistan Not in India's Interest.

dispelling thoroughly the myth that Indian elites sit back cool as cucumbers, singing ohm with the cosmic note of the universe, while Pakistanis are vengeance laced, uncouth, hairy, dark beasts scaling the walls. Rather, both sides are nearly equally paranoid per a simple reading of this article. Here are some choice quotes:

"At the height of the recent disturbances in the Valley, when a general asked me for a suggestion to resolve the issue, I said: “ Remove Pakistan. The threat will disappear permanently.” Today the collapse of Pakistan as a state is almost certain. All the King’s men cannot save it from itself.
Looking ahead, New Delhi should formulate an appropriate strategy for ‘post-Pakistan scenario’ to secure India’s interests in Central Asia."

He says earlier inthe article, with intentions toward Central Asia: "To defend this key threat to the Union, New Delhi should extend its influence through export of both soft and hard power towards Central Asia, from where invasions have been mounted over centuries. The cessation of Pakistan as a state facilitates furtherance of this pivotal national objective."

It gets BIGGER than Pakistan though and Verma write another article in which he lets it slip that the dance, seemingly between Pakistan and India is actually a switch up dance in which the real adversary is China:

http://news.rediff.com/column/2009/n...ese-threat.htm

Some more paranoia from Verma: "Hence, it is in India's national interest to synergise with the West in Af-Pak to benefit from resource rich Central Asia and deny the centuries's old route of invasion to the adversary."

^^^^^
What does this translate to? India, in its own Hawk's words, has its own objectives. The above almost gaurantees that India, like the other Afghan ethnic group, also sees NO BENEFIT in KP joining back up with Afghanistan. Rather, a strengthened Afghanistan from that vantage point is against India's now stated interests in "energy rich" central asia.

The Karzai crowd will chime in at this point as say "well what if our interests over lap?"

My response? Did you read any of what Verma wrote? Are you illiterate? Can you reconcile the Loy Afghanistan logic with Verma's? Can you reconcile the logic of a strong Loy Afghanistan with Verma's logic? If not, then please sew your lips together and quit wasting my time. A practical illustration of India seeking her own interests were her of times even aerial support of Russian MiGs that killed Afghan's in that other great war.

So the summary?

1) We have an Afghan President who is utterly delusional corrupt incompetent kleptocrat and meets the public definition of insanity (according to reports some private psych issues too) expecting that repeating the same mistake over as Daud, the Iron Amir, Zahir Shah committed will yield different results
2) That mistake is the idiotic concept of strategic balancing (i.e believing that balancing the forced vectors of Iran, America, Pakistan, China, etc will yield a sum Force of Zero.
3) We have an Afghan Army with Helicopter Donkeys who have not been able to match gun to gun with their adversaries, showing high attrition rates and poor performance.
4) India has her own goals as does Pakistan and there is no valid proof that India and Afghanistan's long term strategic goals overlap
5) One of those strategic goals of India is certainly NOT Loy Afghanistan; in fact per Verma that would undo long term Indian goals
6) Knowing 5 is true, how can Afghan Millet pro Pashtun ascendency folks even validate this dependency relationship?
7) Afghanistan by every definition is NOT an autonomous nation state (otherwise American drones like the Beast of kandahar would not be flying off Afghan soil to instigate Iran).
8) These policies that Karzai adopts only foments and gaurantees that the forces he is attempting to stragetically balance all continue to intervene endelessly in Afghanistan to create low level inflammation limiting development and progress.
9) True autonomy from all groups is possible and will have the best long term outcome despite the long hard road.

- And Azmal you are still a sorry piece of feces that needs to be flushed. But you are a "invented" descendent of Telai so being a product of fecal matter is in your DNA and you have no choice.

1. Thank you for explaining the issue so nicely. Yes, what is to be done must be in Afghanistan's interest exclusively. You are absolutely on point in pointing out that India has an agenda here to promote. She will not get involved for any love of Afghans.

2. On the other hand we,BD, have no agenda of ours in Afghanistan. It is a historical truth that Afghans and the Bangladeshis have been friends always - from the time of the Afghan rule over Bengal preceeding the arrival of the Mughals. Being fellow Muslims is a binding factor that non-Muslims will not appreciate.

3. Regarding training. Trianing under and training with are different. We train with the armed forces of various nations - Chinese, Indonesian, Malaysian, S Korean, British, American and others regularly. Under the presnt India-friendly govt, two joint exercises of detchments of special forces have been held. Our special forces go as far as British Guyana, S America, to train with others.

4. The point I wish to stress is that we have an excellent Officer Corps. Our training institutions are world class. Afghanistan can benefit from our institutions like Staff College, Military Academy, Special Arms Courses, Tactical and Weapons Courses, NCOs' Training School, etc. We even have an institute that imparts training to officers from all over the world on UN Peace Missions. (For the last about 20 years, we have either been the largest or second largest contributor of troops to UN Missions).

[Khostai]

1. Thank you for explaining the issue so nicely. Yes, what is to be done must be in Afghanistan's interest exclusively. You are absolutely on point in pointing out that India has an agenda here to promote. She will not get involved for any love of Afghans.

2. On the other hand we,BD, have no agenda of ours in Afghanistan. It is a historical truth that Afghans and the Bangladeshis have been friends always - from the time of the Afghan rule over Bengal preceeding the arrival of the Mughals. Being fellow Muslims is a binding factor that non-Muslims will not appreciate.

3. Regarding training. Trianing under and training with are different. We train with the armed forces of various nations - Chinese, Indonesian, Malaysian, S Korean, British, American and others regularly. Under the presnt India-friendly govt, two joint exercises of detchments of special forces have been held. Our special forces go as far as British Guyana, S America, to train with others.

4. The point I wish to stress is that we have an excellent Officer Corps. Our training institutions are world class. Afghanistan can benefit from our institutions like Staff College, Military Academy, Special Arms Courses, Tactical and Weapons Courses, NCOs' Training School, etc. We even have an institute that imparts training to officers from all over the world on UN Peace Missions. (For the last about 20 years, we have either been the largest or second largest contributor of troops to UN Missions).

And how do we know for sure that you don't have any hiden agenda?
Pakistan is also a muslim nation so is Iran and they are not really friendly towards Afghanistan. what makes BD so difrent? You nation is secular you don't have an islamic goverment. Just becuase your peopel are muslims don't proof anything....

[RevolutionThroughReason]

every country has an agenda, no country helps another country without cost-benefit analysis of what that help will entail and vice versa for the ones receiving help.


Bangladesh is allies with India, so whatever Bangladesh's agenda is will naturally coincide with India, since India was largely responsible for the existence of Bangladesh, it never would have happened.

Calling upon some ancient friendship is ludicrous, since being ruled by Afghans, is not a relationship based on friendship but of subordination. So the plea for Islamic brotherhood in this instance , on such grounds is ludicrous and disingenuous.

BarakzaiAbdali, whiile I appreciate the informative post, unfortunately you're enabling Asad71 to evade/sidestep the issue of him blatantly lying about India-Bangladesh's military relationship and letting him reassert his fallacious and deceptive narrative.


Asad71 hardly represents Bangladesh's interests, he represents Pakistan's; he is the last remnant of the Bengali Razakars who has committed treason against other Bengali Muslims and joined Pakistani Paramilitary in murdering Bengali Muslims (and Hindus for that matter).

[khushal]

The ANA is not a real fighting force. It is a corrupt force with majority drug addicts. It will disband the minute the US leaves. Why else do you think that Ismail Khan is calling for the arming of the majahadeen. No competent person wants to join the ANA, most join to steal from it and to feed off of it. Their is no loyalty of any kind to it. Nobody knows this better than Ismail Khan and he is willing to say it even though he know he will get shyt for it.

[Soldat_Amir]

Afghanistan should maintain good relations with all countries, specifically India which can provide it strategic leverage. Obviously Afghanistan, with a proper administration, should always take into consideration it's own strategic interests. There is nothing wrong with ANA being trained in India, Bangladesh, or any other nation, provided that the top brass recognize Afghan national interest.

Admin Khan

It would be great of India to teach Afghan soldiers how they clean Kashmiri streets of Islamist vermin from Pakistan.

Indians have been battling Islamist fanatics from Pakistan for decades, they could teach and give tips to the ANA on how to dismantle Suicide bombing training camps and how to locate a bearded Jihadi on mischief from a couple of miles away.

[Soldat_Amir]

No Indian defense has multiple articles by former RAW directors and BJP party officials to the same effect. India's hard power policy during the Russo Afghan conflict is well known.

Azmal is the belle of the bacha bazi ball and that Persian poser and I have history. Let us leave it at that.

Also, the Afghan Installed Polity is generally made up of lazy good for nothings who think that they are there to teach their "rural brown brothers" how to live like, eat, speak, and think like the rest of the world. This is in stark contrast to the Vietnemese. Sure they may have had Chinese and Russian help in taking on the Americans and expelling them. But irrespective of this, they were willing to deal with the consequences of being a nation with no foreign troops stationed on their soil - i.e complete autonomy. Despite the difficult years and half century or so that has followed, the Vietnemese, through their poverty, are now establishing trade ties and economically beneficial deals on their own terms. The Karzai crowd, on the other hand, operates like Dheim, thinking that they can somehow New Yorkize Afghanistan over the next 2 decades. And worse, they think they can do this from a position of weakness.

Barakzai I understand you have a fetish for ISI drag dolls of the Soviet war era but India did good during the Soviet war and not get involved, unlike some here, not all of us are naive to believe the Soviet war benefitted Afghanistan because we saw your ISI brothers did to eachother after the Soviets left.

[BarakzaiAbdali]

Barakzai I understand you have a fetish for ISI drag dolls of the Soviet war era but India did good during the Soviet war and not get involved, unlike some here, not all of us are naive to believe the Soviet war benefitted Afghanistan because we saw your ISI brothers did to eachother after the Soviets left.

Oh really????

http://thediplomat.com/2010/08/30/th...ar-flashpoint/

"A good deal of the Indian media portrays India’s activities in Afghanistan as successfully winning Afghan hearts and minds and building a long-term welcome for India. This is unlikely. If the Afghans have little materially, they do possess a prodigious historical memory and recall that India fully backed the murderous Soviet occupation (1979-1989) and then the Afghan communist regime until it fell in April 1992. This knowledge will be especially fresh among all mujahedin who fought the Soviets—and believed Indian pilots flew combat missions against them—but most intense among the Taliban-led Afghan Pashtuns whose war against Ahmed Shah Masood and his Northern Alliance was prolonged and made more costly by generous Indian aid to Masood. The idea that India’s money-backed soft power is enough to negate such recollections and the vengefulness they fuel could only be believed by those trained at Harvard.'

Soldat you are growing more and more mentally unstable day by day. You have left a google train that wreaks. For instance; here Soldat actually took the time and effort to produce Putin head picture badges to be worn on the lapel.

http://www.picbadges.com/profile/?id=-56692915

Soldat, if its finances or other issues; I think you need to understand that you are not in the same intellectual league as Robert Spencer and Hirsi Ali (not that they are intellectuals as much as they are sensationalists).

Worse, if you advise NATO or the ANA in any capacity, which I doubt, you are leading them down the road of self destruction.

Regarding who did what during the Soviet Conflict; blame your heroes for injecting chaos and invading the place in the first place and taking the bait. This would subsequently lead to destablization of other istan states.

Your former heroes turned out to be the dumbest now defunct super power on the block.