Welcome To Pakistan

S2 · 19 Oct 09,, 21:42

Over 150 posts as I understand on the afghan side.

Eight are being presently closed. Four of which are well to the north in the Nuristan/Konar areas-adjacent to malakand/Bajaur. Even beyond the Islamic Emirate of NORTH Waziristan.

As to this operation that the Pakistanis have FINALLY chosen to undergo, it is centered on S. Waziristan and America has faced a very modest threat to the provinces directly adjacent to this area.

Pakistan, however, is under direct assault from this region.

This is, as usual, all about Pakistan.

Call me when they undergo any ops that directly benefit us. You'll know that's the case when N. Waziristan and the Quetta region of Baluchistan are finally attacked-if ever. Doing so would hurt their objectives, though, so don't hold your breath.

Until then, Pakistan continues to serve only Pakistan. Here they do so by their complaints that appear groundless given the prior schedule and McChrystal's announced intent to reallocate our forces to protect people...

...not sand, rocks, and scorpions.

**Parihaka** · 19 Oct 09,, 22:14

Originally Posted by diplomaticview

Mr S-2, i surprised with your comments

this operation didn't conduct before as it must be and in Musharaf period Pakistani government suggested US to close Pak-Afgh boarder but US pressured not to do so, US & NATO's aim to fight against extremists and if you can explain me than tell me why only time of operation inside Pakistan US came to know that they must have to remove these posts, as US repeating many times that Pakistan is reliable partner in WOT than how to help reliable partner if in case of operation Afghan extremists can find open way to cross boarder and can make more difficulties for partner?

Meanwhile explain me please what US want to show his partner removing these posts?

Just to reinforce S-2's comments, the areas where the operations are being undertaken by the PA do not border Afghanistan.

**Kernow** · 19 Oct 09,, 22:32

Originally Posted by Parihaka

Just to reinforce S-2's comments, the areas where the operations are being undertaken by the PA do not border Afghanistan.

Here is the Map of the PA thrust into Taliban Territory.

**~~diplomaticview~~** · 19 Oct 09,, 23:08

As to this operation that the Pakistanis have FINALLY chosen to undergo, it is centered on S. Waziristan and America has faced a very modest threat to the provinces directly adjacent to this area.

It means that US fought 9 years but couldn't hold situations in control in Afghanistan, same as USSR.

Until then, Pakistan continues to serve only Pakistan.

I think you have not to forget that Pakistan is your so called ally in WOT.

Here they do so by their complaints that appear groundless given the prior schedule and McChrystal's announced intent to reallocate our forces to protect people...

...not sand, rocks, and scorpions

When i am looking at the statistics where it stated how many simple people are dead within 9 years of war than it forcing not to trust your statement.

To protect people

S2 · 19 Oct 09,, 23:33

"When i am looking at the statistics where it stated how many simple people are dead within 9 years of war than it forcing not to trust your statement."

Really. Count the dead, then, after nine years of war in Afghanistan. Determine the relative culpability of each actor. If honest, you'll see that the taliban carry the far greater burden but that, sir, is only a part of the picture. If needing assistance doing so, please refer to data offered by UNAMA and HRW about the slaughter, such as it is...

Consider the manner that many there have died by THEIR hand- as human shields and as direct and intended targets of taliban mayhem and violence.

Further, as a modest comparison, consider the blood that Afghans and Pakistanis share from the Afghan civil war- about 200,000-250,000. Brother on brother. Muslim on muslim.

Finally, consider the blood on Russian hands for it remains, by far, the worst. No less than 900,000 and as many as 3,000,000 depending on who you care to believe. Evidently, everybody tired of counting the corpses there.

You can trust my statement about protecting people just fine, sir, if you hold a grain of moral accountability relative to the very recent and all too bloody past.

We're not there to conquer and our altruism is sadly out-of-place among the beastial preying of afghan upon afghan.

I've drawn my conclusions.

Thanks.

**Tronic** · 19 Oct 09,, 23:44

Originally Posted by diplomaticview

It means that US fought 9 years but couldn't hold situations in control in Afghanistan, same as USSR.

Errr.. Thats not what that sentence meant. It meant that the people you are fighting for control of PAKISTANI land, are the people who concentrate less on launching attacks into Afghanistan than they concentrate on attacking Pakistan. So really you should be the last one to be laying down comparisons at a time when the US has far more control of the situation in Afghanistan than the Pakistanis have control of the situation in Pakistan.

When i am looking at the statistics where it stated how many simple people are dead within 9 years of war than it forcing not to trust your statement.

Thats because this reallocation of troops and change of priority to protect population centres is a new strategy still in the phase of being implemented. Its not a 9 year old strategy.

**subba** · 20 Oct 09,, 01:14

Parihaka sir and OOE sir (specifically)..not exactly a new take here, but:

India Wants To Fight in Afghanistan Until the Last American | Haqeeqat.Org

**Tronic** · 20 Oct 09,, 01:48

Originally Posted by subba

Parihaka sir and OOE sir (specifically)..not exactly a new take here, but:

India Wants To Fight in Afghanistan Until the Last American | Haqeeqat.Org

India has been involved in Afghanistan long before the Americans arrived.

**Parihaka** · 20 Oct 09,, 02:17

Originally Posted by subba

Parihaka sir and OOE sir (specifically)..not exactly a new take here, but:

India Wants To Fight in Afghanistan Until the Last American | Haqeeqat.Org

) Nice to see you back Subba

**subba** · 21 Oct 09,, 01:17

Parihaka sir, thanks for remembering. I remember Tankie and Dave lukins sirs and their great sense of humor. I don't know if they remember me though..

)

I still am at an age where my harmones get the better of me at times, but i'll look to you guiding me through the minefield of WAB just in case...

Ok that (above para) was in jest Sir, but frankly i do have some fond memories.. and you all are a part of it.

Meanwhile, i like the heading of this thread.."welcome to Pak"...

**~~diplomaticview~~** · 21 Oct 09,, 22:34

Originally Posted by Tronic

Errr.. Thats not what that sentence meant. It meant that the people you are fighting for control of PAKISTANI land, are the people who concentrate less on launching attacks into Afghanistan than they concentrate on attacking Pakistan. So really you should be the last one to be laying down comparisons at a time when the US has far more control of the situation in Afghanistan than the Pakistanis have control of the situation in Pakistan.

Appreciating the US efforts against WOT but facts showing a different view and America's control over Afghanistan is not so good because if they have good control over situation than their army commander in Afghanistan didn't call for more troops, and even more & more, US has control over several meters beyond their camps or stations or bases in Afghanistan and we can't say, it is success or control.

Current situation in between Pakistan & India:

ISLAMABAD: Interior Minister Rehman Malik has said that there is clear evidence of Indian involvement in Balochistan and that New Delhi should not be pointing fingers at Islamabad.

The interior minister said that India must be prepared to come to the table and discuss their concerns. He added that Pakistan is well aware of the Indian involvement in Balochistan and if given the opportunity, they will present officials in New Delhi with concrete evidence.

He was responding to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s statements, when the federal minister warned that India should not hurl accusations at Pakistan as it is fighting a war on terror and is also holding trials of the Mumbai attack suspects. He said that India should respect Pakistan’s judicial system.

Commenting upon the Indian allegations, Malik warned against them, saying Indian Home Minister should see about their home first, as it is beset with flaws and failings, adding criticizing Pakistan would not set their issues right.

Condemning the twin bombings at the International Islamic University in Islamabad yesterday, the federal interior minister stressed that militants are now aiming to create panic in the country and that innocent civilians are being targeted.

Pakistan is not weak; it knows how to defend itself, said Malik. He assured that security zones will be set up in the federal capital.

So in my view India & Pakistan are both in same situation but both countries doesn't like to solve problems appropriately.

**Mihais** · 21 Oct 09,, 23:04

Pakistan is not weak; it knows how to defend itself, said Malik. He assured that security zones will be set up in the federal capital.

I'm noticing a contradiction here

.

**Tronic** · 21 Oct 09,, 23:56

Originally Posted by diplomaticview

Appreciating the US efforts against WOT but facts showing a different view and America's control over Afghanistan is not so good because if they have good control over situation than their army commander in Afghanistan didn't call for more troops, and even more & more, US has control over several meters beyond their camps or stations or bases in Afghanistan and we can't say, it is success or control.

If you feel the need to start screaming out, "you're loosing!", try Islamabad first; because whatever control the US has in Afghanistan, it is still far greater than the control Pakistan has on its own territory.

Current situation in between Pakistan & India:

So in my view India & Pakistan are both in same situation but both countries doesn't like to solve problems appropriately.

That is only for Pakistani domestic consumption. The day Pakistan brings that evidence to the international community, that's the day people outside Pakistan will start to take those claims seriously. But so far, it is nothing but an old Pakistani trait, deception, even if it has to be against your own people; blame India for all of Pakistan's own f*ck ups and deflect all anger away from the Pakistani leadership and unto India. It is unfortunate for the Pakistani citizens that they actually buy all that bull; and has been a big reason why since 1947 Pakistan has been going downhill into the gutters. Had Pakistan accepted its flaws from the start, maybe it could've ironed them out by now. It didn't, so now you have a state on the brink of failure. And, yet again, it is all India's fault.

S2 · 22 Oct 09,, 00:54

"And, yet again, it is all India's fault."

Ummm...no. It's OUR fault too, remember?

We ABANDONED them.

Of course, had we stayed in Afghanistan following the Soviet departure, EVERYBODY would have been screaming about our neo-colonial ambitions in a place to which we'd held no historical interests. Further had we expressed our intention to stay, I highly doubt the Soviets would have even agreeed to leave at all.

More likely they'd have doubled-down themselves in 1988 and so much for glasnost and peristroika.

CAR didn't exist then. Those were SOVIET republics and there's no way that Gorbachev could have survived THAT abdication of their near empire.

**Tronic** · 22 Oct 09,, 21:47

Originally Posted by S-2

"And, yet again, it is all India's fault."

Ummm...no. It's OUR fault too, remember?

We ABANDONED them.

Of course, had we stayed in Afghanistan following the Soviet departure, EVERYBODY would have been screaming about our neo-colonial ambitions in a place to which we'd held no historical interests. Further had we expressed our intention to stay, I highly doubt the Soviets would have even agreeed to leave at all.

More likely they'd have doubled-down themselves in 1988 and so much for glasnost and peristroika.

CAR didn't exist then. Those were SOVIET republics and there's no way that Gorbachev could have survived THAT abdication of their near empire.

Ai, it must be true. How can a Pakistani ever make a bad decision?

They are a very confused lot. I don't interact on political issues with most Pakistanis now. No discussion can be carried out without it being filled with some sort of conspiracy against Pak. There are some good chaps out there who can call a spade a spade, but for the vast majority of them; god help them!