Page 6 of 15 FirstFirst 123456789101112131415 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 218

Thread: US plan to improve Afghan intelligence operations branded a $457m failure

  1. #76
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,390
    Pakistan and Trump: Ready for a bargain? | IE | Oct 10 2017

    The Obama and Bush administrations were aware but unwilling to acknowledge that the Pakistan army had undermined America in Afghanistan. The Trump administration has stated the truth and wants to mount pressure on Pakistan to alter its course in Afghanistan.

    Breaking from the well-trodden path, the Trump administration is trying “one last time” to get the Pakistan army’s cooperation. It is opening up a negotiation this time with a variety of threats — new sanctions, withdrawing Pakistan’s status as a “major non-NATO ally”, declaring Islamabad as a state sponsor of terrorism and urging India to play a larger role in Afghanistan.

    Pakistan’s initial reaction to Trump’s new regional policy — made in a speech at the end of August — was anger and outrage. It also rejected Trump’s demand that Pakistan should immediately shut down the terror sanctuaries on its soil. Islamabad also ostentatiously cancelled talks with US officials last month. After the bluster, comes the inevitable dialogue. Pakistan is now ready to talk to the Trump administration following high-level meetings in recent weeks. Pakistan Prime Minister Shahid Khaqan Abbasi met US Vice President Mike Pence on the margins of the UNGA last month and the foreign minister, Khawaja Asif, was in Washington last week.

    It is one thing for Pakistan to posture for the benefit of domestic audiences and entirely another to to deliberately choose confrontation with the United States. As the US and Pakistan begin negotiations, India will inevitably be part of the discussion — call it “re-hyphenation” or what you will. After all, India and Pakistan have multiple problems, and Islamabad has never stopped trying to mobilise the great powers to blunt India’s natural preponderance in the region. In its conversation with US officials, Pakistan is likely to insist on a big say in shaping the future political order in Kabul, object to any role for India in Afghanistan and would want the US to get Delhi to talk Kashmir to Islamabad.

    India, therefore, has a real interest in these talks, for they involve the future of the South Asian regional order — including Islamabad’s relations with Kabul and Delhi, the Pakistan army’s dominance over the domestic polity and Rawalpindi’s use of terror as an instrument of regional policy. Instead of worrying about “re-hyphenation”, India should focus on shaping the outcomes from the US-Pak negotiations. Whatever the eventual give and take between Washington and Rawalpindi, Delhi has enough room to respond with vigour and confidence to a potentially historic shift in the Subcontinent’s geopolitics.

  2. #77
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,547
    DE, your optimism is misplaced. There will be a lot of American body bags in the days to come, until US realises breaking down Pakistan into 4 pieces is the only solution.

  3. #78
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,547
    Days of Pakistan depending on US are over: PM Abbasi

    Indian forces martyr Kashmiri freedom leader

    It's a Pakistani terrorist from Terroristan and not a martyr.

  4. #79
    Contributor anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Sep 12
    Location
    Mumbai
    Posts
    748
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    But can't you see two blocs forming

    Pakistan, China & Russia in opposition to India drawing closer to the US, Japan & Australia
    That is a correct observation if we discount the basics in geopolitics.

    Before we talk further, why don't you give a quick summary each on the roles of Pakistan, Afghanistan and China in western geopolitics, so that I can better understand your geopolitical worldview

  5. #80
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,390
    Pakistan, military outpost since independence to serve as a staging area in the upcoming cold war. Good location. Entry into heart of asia and vice versa

    Afghanistan, nothing until the late 70s when the soviet backed govt started to wobble

    China, former communist bloc country that got peeled away from the rest of the communist bloc due to their own arrogance

    Your previous comments assume a fixed view, as in what was true of the cold war endures but things are changing all the time

    Consider the arab world, until 2003 it was not advisable to topple any arab dictator, but after 2003 with Saddam it became ok as the cold war was over. Then we saw Mubarak, Gaddafi and Saleh biting the dust. Not to mention the most recent but unsuccessful attempt to unseat Assad. Five leaders already, pretty big shift.The gulf regimes are safe for now.

    Letting Mubarak go was unimaginable until it happened, oh how could the americans be this blase, wanted to be on right side of history they said
    Last edited by Double Edge; 10 Oct 17, at 13:55.

  6. #81
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Oracle View Post
    DE, your optimism is misplaced. There will be a lot of American body bags in the days to come, until US realises breaking down Pakistan into 4 pieces is the only solution.
    How so, you who can see into the future : ) Last thing the Paks need is to give the americans more reasons to go after them.

    Thinking back to how Trump dealt with China just over a year back and there are similarities.

    Questions one china policy and then talks to Taiwanese PM Ing Wen

    Here he questions sanctuary and says he will talk to India.

    India & Taiwan here are just pressure tactics
    Last edited by Double Edge; 10 Oct 17, at 13:55.

  7. #82
    Contributor anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Sep 12
    Location
    Mumbai
    Posts
    748
    Nice. I have another question:

    Wrt china, what do you think about Nixon's visit to China and how do you think that went.

  8. #83
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,390
    Before Nixon's visit ? Red china

    After the visit ? not so red china

    How the visit went i don't know, but actions thereafter were a u turn from previous

    The booting out of the UN of ROC in favour of the PRC

    There was a split among two major powers and Kissinger had the foresight to exploit it.

    Everything Mack accomplished in the far east became just that bit safer with China no longer an adversary or so it seemed at the time

  9. #84
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,390
    Paks trying to shift the Quetta Shura to Helmand ?

    Serious Concerns Raised Over Taliban Leader's Visit To Helmand


    Kandahar's police chief General Abdul Raziq said that Taliban leader Mullah Haibatullah Akhundzada visited Helmand a week and a half ago where he met with Taliban members.

    Raziq said that the visit had been at the request of Pakistan’s intelligence services, ISI. According to him, the Taliban leader visited Mosa Qala in Helmand after entering the country from Pakistan through Baluchistan.

    According to Raziq, the reason for his visit was to discuss their plans for resistance against increased airstrikes and to agree to a ceasefire with Daesh in the country.
    Last edited by Double Edge; 10 Oct 17, at 23:10.

  10. #85
    Contributor anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Sep 12
    Location
    Mumbai
    Posts
    748
    DE,

    Your worldview is offbeat. Not entirely opposite but almost parallel and every different.

    -----

    Operation searchlight started in early 1971. Kissenger was also introduced to China by the Pakistanis during this time which was followed by a visit. Also around this time, New Delhi understood that US was not a spectator and the war plans originated here. The indo-soviet treaty was signed. Geography was changed in Dec 1971 regardless of Chinese and nuclear threat. Less than 2 months later, in Feb 1972, Nixon visited China, because it had become a strategic imperative and it led to its industrialization.

    The arrival of the USS enterprise near the bay of begal, the revelation of the secret kennedy letter to Pakistan and the US assisted development of China's industrial sector would eventually culminate into smiling Buddha. The birth of the NSG was a big step but it was meant to show India that they knew.

    ------

    Those roles you mentioned(for China, afghanistan Pakistan) are not roles.

    I honestly do not know what to say when you reply to Nixon's visit with statements like "red China" and "not so red China". For now, I know you see and interpret things differently.
    Last edited by anil; 11 Oct 17, at 10:13.

  11. #86
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Location
    Bangalore
    Posts
    6,390
    haha, that was just a simple way of describing the change in popular american perceptions of China pre Nixon visit vs post visit. Noticeable in tv serials of the period. China was portrayed a villain prior and then no longer the bad guy

    What changed in China in the few years pre Nixon visit vs post visit ? Nothing

    Mao had been signaling for a meeting a few years prior but it took some more time for the Americans to actually twig to it.

    What i want to do now is reconcile the emergence or apparent emergence of two new blocs forming with what you said about roles. Roles that you defined from a western pov and date to the cold war

    Was looking for some change that could influence the previous equations and this looks most promising

    The question is do the old equations still work, vis a vis india and pakistan or not. Going by your previous replies the answer i presume is still yes
    Last edited by Double Edge; 11 Oct 17, at 13:42.

  12. #87
    Contributor anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    20 Sep 12
    Location
    Mumbai
    Posts
    748
    When India and Russia formed an alliance and changed geography, the US had no choice but to balance out the equation. The Chinese knew that the formation of Bangladesh had compelled Nixon(see balance of power) to propose co-operation with a communist state but the Chinese were smart enough to use this gesture to facilitate technology transfer and industrialise both their consumer assembly lines and military complexes.

    Both the questions I asked you were actually about the practice of balancing one power against the other(see "balance of power") in geopolitics. I wanted to know how well you understood it. Later I wanted to know whether you had even heard about it.

    ------

    The chinese are not an American card but co-incidently, both their interests converge in south Asia.
    Last edited by anil; 11 Oct 17, at 14:20.

  13. #88
    Military Professional 667medic's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Jul 05
    Posts
    954
    Quote Originally Posted by anil View Post
    When India and Russia formed an alliance and changed geography, the US had no choice but to balance out the equation. The Chinese knew that the formation of Bangladesh had compelled Nixon(see balance of power) to propose co-operation with a communist state but the Chinese were smart enough to use this gesture to facilitate technology transfer and industrialise both their consumer assembly lines and military complexes.

    Both the questions I asked you were actually about the practice of balancing one power against the other(see "balance of power") in geopolitics. I wanted to know how well you understood it. Later I wanted to know whether you had even heard about it.

    ------

    The chinese are not an American card but co-incidently, both their interests converge in south Asia.
    India had no role to play in US-China relationship. China and Soviets had come to blows over the Zhen Bao/Damanski island incident in 1969. Brezhnev wanted to nuke Beijing in retaliation and said so to Nixon. Nixon and Kissinger decided to exploit the Sino-Soviet split and leaned towards China. The Fulda Gap was more important to US and USSR than any other place on earth. The net effect of all this was that USSR had to substantially increase the deployment of assets in the China-Soviet border, which in turn took away deployable assets from Europe...
    Seek Save Serve Medic

  14. #89
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,547
    We're back to the Cold war because someone is stuck in Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Fuck USSR and fuck Russia. These Russians are having military drills with Pakistan and are selling them military technology. Get your head out from your ass. Go live in Russia you stupid madrasi.

    Pakistan Receives 4 Advanced Attack Helicopters From Russia

    DE, why fall for bait from a troll? Taking geo-political lessons from an idiot who thinks a woman is fit to only breed and do household chores?
    Last edited by Oracle; 11 Oct 17, at 17:27.

  15. #90
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Location
    Bangalore, India
    Posts
    2,547
    Quote Originally Posted by Double Edge View Post
    How so, you who can see into the future : ) Last thing the Paks need is to give the americans more reasons to go after them.

    Thinking back to how Trump dealt with China just over a year back and there are similarities.

    Questions one china policy and then talks to Taiwanese PM Ing Wen

    Here he questions sanctuary and says he will talk to India.

    India & Taiwan here are just pressure tactics
    You don't see it, do you? When has pressure worked on the Paks? After 9/11, the Paks promised full co-operation. Then we had the Kunduz Airlift and the attack on the Indian parliament. What did those incidents tell you?

    You talked about mainstreaming Jihadi organistaions like the LeT. But what are the reasons behind it?

    Khawaza Asif says if US gives proof about the Haqqanis, then Pak will act. Pak Army chief Bajwa says Haqqanis have relocated to Afghanistan. Can't you see the correlation?

    Trying to mainstream the LeT is a Pak mil ploy to tell the US/India that Jihadis are following the constitution (which means kill Shias, Hazaras and continuing terrorism) and they have the right to do so. I am also thinking of the Pak terrorist mentaliy of giving up the Haqqanis in lieu of saving terrorist organisations facing Kashmir. But mind you, LeT has gone global.

    Paks think China will shield them forever and pay their bills. History is proof that such is not the case. Pak will continue with their state policy of terrorism and there is nothing any country, even the US, can do about it. The simple reason is because, in US there are still people in the US administration who get an erection thinking about Pakistan. Donald Trumph alone can't change that.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 15 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 15 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Oregon Stimulus plan miserable failure
    By highsea in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 17 Mar 10,, 05:13
  2. Afghan and U.S. Officials Plan to Recruit Local Militias
    By 1980s in forum Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation New Dawn
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 24 Dec 08,, 16:16
  3. Bush's Intelligence Overhaul a `Failure
    By Ray in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02 Feb 07,, 06:20
  4. Reid branded 'an enemy of Islam' during speech
    By Parihaka in forum International Politics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21 Sep 06,, 06:34
  5. 15 year old boy branded by employer
    By platinum786 in forum International Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 04 Jun 06,, 02:26

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •