Tweet
PN Reply
"Baradar is behind bars, and far as know, he didn't mention anything that indicates Quetta as Taliban HQ."
You would have access to his interrogation logs how?
"Your various claims, especially the Quetta Shura one are very doubtable".
Not my claim. It was your Minister of Defense Ahmed Mukhtar. It was a classically oblique and vague statement in every respect but for one-the admittance that the so-called Quetta Shura exists. What actually happened and to whom was assiduously avoided. Naturally. How could he know? He's ostensibly only the civilian head of your armed forces...but we understand what that actually entails.
He was told to say very little. And so he did. But he DID acknowledge the existance of the leadership council of the afghan taliban in the Quetta area. Proof positive among even skeptics. You fall somewhere beyond legitimate skepticism.
"Especially after that Quettvi "taliban commander" tricked your intelligence and made his way to a fortune fixing amount of money."
Irrelevant as a red herring to the discussion at hand. War produces many players-large and small.
"What you knew was a top military leadership, what Mukhtar mentioned includes nothing like that. What he said most probably means; we have searched the city found nothing that confirms your claims, but eradicated the taliban structure there.(the like of which exists in every single Afghan city including Kabul)"
You are, of course, welcome to your speculation regarding what lay behind his words. It is his words, however, and they used the same code-words commonly accepted by the west-Quetta Shura-theretofore unuttered by any in your government.
The GoP denied the existance of such and did so thoroughly from 2002 until, one day...VOILA! The Quetta Shura existed but, ummm.....we took care of it and it's all better now. Who cares what's been done (or not)? What's relevant is that such existed for so long and was so commonly known-
In The Land Of The Taliban-NYT Oct. 22, 2006 Elizabeth Rubin
Please note the date. This article, btw, is very worthy reading to some. Maybe you too.
"This nascent government is run by the most advanced nations of the world who have deployed most advanced armies to expand and establish the capability of this nascent government..."
"...Run..."? Were it only so. The GoA has no right to exist but that's a separate issue.
"...which doesn't seem to be working even after a decade's time"
Fascinating what an externally-directed insurgency might accomplish when safely enscounced in sanctuary behind an adjacent nation's border. We know that well from both Vietnam and the Soviet-Afghan war. The sanctuary provided to the mujahideen between 1980 and 1989 required the careful coordination and concerted efforts of the Pakistani military. No reason to think otherwise now over your ostensibly "sovereign" lands.
"So first search them under your own noses, where their strongholds and sanctuaries exist."
There may or may not be afghan territorial strongholds but they differ markedly from sanctuary. It's clear you're either unknowingly confusing or intentionally obfuscating the terms of each.
"Our forces went there when they were given some credible information..which is exactly how we allies should be working like."
You might find this an interesting story-
Obama's Worst Pakistan Nightmare-NYT Jan. 8, 2009 David E. Sangar
"IN BUSH’S LAST YEAR in office, Pakistan’s downward spiral came to dominate the meetings of the principals down in the Situation Room of the White House. First came the assassination in late December 2007 of Benazir Bhutto, which resulted in a secret trip by McConnell, the intelligence chief, and the director of the C.I.A., Michael V. Hayden, to Islamabad. It was the first of a series of secret missions to convince Musharraf and his handpicked successor as the chief of the army, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, that the militants in the tribal areas were now aiming to bring down the government in Islamabad. The message was simple and direct: The Pakistani leadership needed to forget about India and focus on the threat from within.
But with each successive trip it became clearer and clearer, particularly to McConnell, that the gap between how Washington viewed the threat and how the Pakistanis viewed it was as yawning as ever. Even worse, suspicions grew that Inter-Services Intelligence was directly aiding the Taliban and other jihadist militants, seeing them as a useful counterweight to India’s influence in the region.
Washington’s sanguinity was not increased when Pakistan’s new prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, arrived in Washington over the summer for what turned out to be a disastrous first visit. Gilani, as the country’s first civilian leader in more than a decade, was under huge pressure to show he could bring the intelligence agency, and the country, under control. He couldn’t — a brief effort to force the ISI to report to the civilian leadership was quashed — but he thought he had better show up with a gift for President Bush.
PakistanGilani wanted to tell Bush that he had sent forces into the tribal areas to clean out a major madrassa where hard-line ideology and intolerance were part of the daily curriculum. There were roughly 25,000 such private Islamic schools around Pakistan, though only a small number of them regularly bred young terrorists. The one he decided to target was run by the Haqqani faction of Islamic militants, one of the most powerful in the tribal areas.
Though Gilani never knew it, Bush was aware of this gift in advance. The National Security Agency had picked up intercepts indicating that a Pakistani unit warned the leadership of the school about what was coming before carrying out its raid. “They must have called 1-800-HAQQANI,” said one person who was familiar with the intercepted conversation. According to another, the account of the warning sent to the school was almost comic. “It was something like, ‘Hey, we’re going to hit your place in a few days, so if anyone important is there, you might want to tell them to scram.’ ”
When the “attack” on the madrassa came, the Pakistani forces grabbed a few guns and hauled away a few teenagers. Sure enough, a few days later Gilani showed up in the Oval Office and conveyed the wonderful news to Bush: the great crackdown on the madrassas had begun. The officials in the room — Bush; his national security adviser, Stephen Hadley; and others — did not want to confront Gilani with the evidence that the school had been warned. That would have required revealing sensitive intercepts, and they judged, according to participants in the discussion, that Gilani was both incapable of keeping a secret and incapable of cracking down on his military and intelligence units. Indeed, Gilani may not even have been aware that his gift was a charade: Bush and Hadley may well have known more about the military’s actions than the prime minister himself."
Pakistan has been given credible information before. Against some, it'll act. Others? Pakistan is more circumspect.
"Haqqani and his sons have been camped out in MIRAN SHAH for nine years. And US drones have also been flying right over Miran Shah all these nine years, still got nothing...except multiplying the number of terrorists there."
Perhaps you missed this tidbit of news from your neighborhood-
Jalaluddin Haqqani's Son Killed In Drone Attack-DAWN Feb. 20, 2010
"At last, a big fat confession."
Enjoy. I'm not in the business of providing proof-positif. Open admissions by your own Defense Minister adequately serve my purpose.
"What if I claim right now that a UBL is sitting in your wild west after a plastic surgery or is enjoyin his winter in Siberia, and then ask for counter proof?"
Your rapidly diminishing credibility as any serious observer would plummet entirely off the radar. You would, however, confirm your status as an unofficial spokesman for the ISPR.
"This statement is very insulting for an ally who provided you safety."
I made that statement and it was Rohde who found his way to your cantonment. Would you care to read one of many statements made by some of your citizens about the American soldiers killed daily in Afghanistan? If so, read here.
Those soldiers die, by my estimation, at the direction of insurgent leaders securely encamped on your lands.
"What excuse do you have for not capturing the areas in Afghanistan that are still under taliban control...?"
Pakistan.
No single factor so influences this war as safe harbor of NATO's enemies on your lands. My government views the GoP and P.A. too, too kindly. In my view, sanctuary means the aborgation of sovereign authority over those lands ceded to the ousted foreign afghan taliban government and their associates. Our use of drones is an incredibly precise and humane response to your less-than-open subterfuge. Some of your countrymen and women are sufficiently wise to see who are the real culprits and ask for MORE, not less drone strikes to free them from taliban enslavement.
"Baradar is behind bars, and far as know, he didn't mention anything that indicates Quetta as Taliban HQ."
You would have access to his interrogation logs how?
"Your various claims, especially the Quetta Shura one are very doubtable".
Not my claim. It was your Minister of Defense Ahmed Mukhtar. It was a classically oblique and vague statement in every respect but for one-the admittance that the so-called Quetta Shura exists. What actually happened and to whom was assiduously avoided. Naturally. How could he know? He's ostensibly only the civilian head of your armed forces...but we understand what that actually entails.
He was told to say very little. And so he did. But he DID acknowledge the existance of the leadership council of the afghan taliban in the Quetta area. Proof positive among even skeptics. You fall somewhere beyond legitimate skepticism.
"Especially after that Quettvi "taliban commander" tricked your intelligence and made his way to a fortune fixing amount of money."
Irrelevant as a red herring to the discussion at hand. War produces many players-large and small.
"What you knew was a top military leadership, what Mukhtar mentioned includes nothing like that. What he said most probably means; we have searched the city found nothing that confirms your claims, but eradicated the taliban structure there.(the like of which exists in every single Afghan city including Kabul)"
You are, of course, welcome to your speculation regarding what lay behind his words. It is his words, however, and they used the same code-words commonly accepted by the west-Quetta Shura-theretofore unuttered by any in your government.
The GoP denied the existance of such and did so thoroughly from 2002 until, one day...VOILA! The Quetta Shura existed but, ummm.....we took care of it and it's all better now. Who cares what's been done (or not)? What's relevant is that such existed for so long and was so commonly known-
In The Land Of The Taliban-NYT Oct. 22, 2006 Elizabeth Rubin
Please note the date. This article, btw, is very worthy reading to some. Maybe you too.
"This nascent government is run by the most advanced nations of the world who have deployed most advanced armies to expand and establish the capability of this nascent government..."
"...Run..."? Were it only so. The GoA has no right to exist but that's a separate issue.
"...which doesn't seem to be working even after a decade's time"
Fascinating what an externally-directed insurgency might accomplish when safely enscounced in sanctuary behind an adjacent nation's border. We know that well from both Vietnam and the Soviet-Afghan war. The sanctuary provided to the mujahideen between 1980 and 1989 required the careful coordination and concerted efforts of the Pakistani military. No reason to think otherwise now over your ostensibly "sovereign" lands.
"So first search them under your own noses, where their strongholds and sanctuaries exist."
There may or may not be afghan territorial strongholds but they differ markedly from sanctuary. It's clear you're either unknowingly confusing or intentionally obfuscating the terms of each.
"Our forces went there when they were given some credible information..which is exactly how we allies should be working like."
You might find this an interesting story-
Obama's Worst Pakistan Nightmare-NYT Jan. 8, 2009 David E. Sangar
"IN BUSH’S LAST YEAR in office, Pakistan’s downward spiral came to dominate the meetings of the principals down in the Situation Room of the White House. First came the assassination in late December 2007 of Benazir Bhutto, which resulted in a secret trip by McConnell, the intelligence chief, and the director of the C.I.A., Michael V. Hayden, to Islamabad. It was the first of a series of secret missions to convince Musharraf and his handpicked successor as the chief of the army, Gen. Ashfaq Kayani, that the militants in the tribal areas were now aiming to bring down the government in Islamabad. The message was simple and direct: The Pakistani leadership needed to forget about India and focus on the threat from within.
But with each successive trip it became clearer and clearer, particularly to McConnell, that the gap between how Washington viewed the threat and how the Pakistanis viewed it was as yawning as ever. Even worse, suspicions grew that Inter-Services Intelligence was directly aiding the Taliban and other jihadist militants, seeing them as a useful counterweight to India’s influence in the region.
Washington’s sanguinity was not increased when Pakistan’s new prime minister, Yousaf Raza Gilani, arrived in Washington over the summer for what turned out to be a disastrous first visit. Gilani, as the country’s first civilian leader in more than a decade, was under huge pressure to show he could bring the intelligence agency, and the country, under control. He couldn’t — a brief effort to force the ISI to report to the civilian leadership was quashed — but he thought he had better show up with a gift for President Bush.
PakistanGilani wanted to tell Bush that he had sent forces into the tribal areas to clean out a major madrassa where hard-line ideology and intolerance were part of the daily curriculum. There were roughly 25,000 such private Islamic schools around Pakistan, though only a small number of them regularly bred young terrorists. The one he decided to target was run by the Haqqani faction of Islamic militants, one of the most powerful in the tribal areas.
Though Gilani never knew it, Bush was aware of this gift in advance. The National Security Agency had picked up intercepts indicating that a Pakistani unit warned the leadership of the school about what was coming before carrying out its raid. “They must have called 1-800-HAQQANI,” said one person who was familiar with the intercepted conversation. According to another, the account of the warning sent to the school was almost comic. “It was something like, ‘Hey, we’re going to hit your place in a few days, so if anyone important is there, you might want to tell them to scram.’ ”
When the “attack” on the madrassa came, the Pakistani forces grabbed a few guns and hauled away a few teenagers. Sure enough, a few days later Gilani showed up in the Oval Office and conveyed the wonderful news to Bush: the great crackdown on the madrassas had begun. The officials in the room — Bush; his national security adviser, Stephen Hadley; and others — did not want to confront Gilani with the evidence that the school had been warned. That would have required revealing sensitive intercepts, and they judged, according to participants in the discussion, that Gilani was both incapable of keeping a secret and incapable of cracking down on his military and intelligence units. Indeed, Gilani may not even have been aware that his gift was a charade: Bush and Hadley may well have known more about the military’s actions than the prime minister himself."
Pakistan has been given credible information before. Against some, it'll act. Others? Pakistan is more circumspect.
"Haqqani and his sons have been camped out in MIRAN SHAH for nine years. And US drones have also been flying right over Miran Shah all these nine years, still got nothing...except multiplying the number of terrorists there."
Perhaps you missed this tidbit of news from your neighborhood-
Jalaluddin Haqqani's Son Killed In Drone Attack-DAWN Feb. 20, 2010
"At last, a big fat confession."
Enjoy. I'm not in the business of providing proof-positif. Open admissions by your own Defense Minister adequately serve my purpose.
"What if I claim right now that a UBL is sitting in your wild west after a plastic surgery or is enjoyin his winter in Siberia, and then ask for counter proof?"
Your rapidly diminishing credibility as any serious observer would plummet entirely off the radar. You would, however, confirm your status as an unofficial spokesman for the ISPR.
"This statement is very insulting for an ally who provided you safety."
I made that statement and it was Rohde who found his way to your cantonment. Would you care to read one of many statements made by some of your citizens about the American soldiers killed daily in Afghanistan? If so, read here.
Those soldiers die, by my estimation, at the direction of insurgent leaders securely encamped on your lands.
"What excuse do you have for not capturing the areas in Afghanistan that are still under taliban control...?"
Pakistan.
No single factor so influences this war as safe harbor of NATO's enemies on your lands. My government views the GoP and P.A. too, too kindly. In my view, sanctuary means the aborgation of sovereign authority over those lands ceded to the ousted foreign afghan taliban government and their associates. Our use of drones is an incredibly precise and humane response to your less-than-open subterfuge. Some of your countrymen and women are sufficiently wise to see who are the real culprits and ask for MORE, not less drone strikes to free them from taliban enslavement.
Sure. If you say so. What were you saying about "...half a dozen innocent people including cops and child."? How's Bajaur going? Rah-i-Nijat? Swat? No on-going operations? Bajaur began when? September, 2008? Long time.
Comment