Documentary = Afghanistan: The Price of Revenge

[Agnostic Muslim]

My Goodness. Are you really that naïve?

What do you think the Indian public wanted after Mumbai? That the American leaders had the stomach and resources for going to war and their Indian counterparts didn't, doesn't change the fact, that responding with war to such attacks on soft civilian targets, is a very legit military goal.

Lashing out to merely 'extract revenge' without understanding the consequences of 'lashing out', and what the long term impact will be, is an irrational act borne out of an irrational emotional response.

[Agnostic Muslim]

Why? The Taliban already chosen sides well before Africa.

Because the Taliban's public position after the 9/11 attacks clearly indicated a desire to assist the US.

''We would be ready to hand him over to a third country,'' said Maulvi Abdul Kabir, the second in command to the Taliban's supreme leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar. ''It can be negotiated provided the U.S. gives us evidence and the Taliban are assured that the country is neutral and will not be influenced by the United States.''

We're not Pakistani cowards.

No, you are just irrational war-mongering tyrants.

Your point is to allow OBL time and effort to set up his defences or at the very least makes his escape. Taliban apologists.

What defenses? Were you afraid he would buy the S-300/S-400 from the Russians and deploy it around his hideouts? Again, pointing out how irrational and flawed US policy was in invading Afghanistan and refusing to exhaust the opportunity for negotiations provided by the Taliban does not make one a 'Taliban apologist'.

[TopHatter]

Because the Taliban's public position after the 9/11 attacks clearly indicated a desire to assist the US.

''We would be ready to hand him over to a third country,'' said Maulvi Abdul Kabir, the second in command to the Taliban's supreme leader, Mullah Muhammad Omar. ''It can be negotiated provided the U.S. gives us evidence and the Taliban are assured that the country is neutral and will not be influenced by the United States.''

"...a desire to assist the U.S."? "Clearly"? Wow...


"We would be ready to hand him over to a third country" - Which would've assisted the U.S. how? Which third country?

"It can be negotiated..." - A polite euphemism for massive bribes

"...provided the U.S. gives us evidence" - The evidence was there, starting with al-Qa'ida declaration of war against the U.S. in 1998 and subsequent terrorist operations. The Taliban wasn't looking for evidence. They were stalling for time and bribes. They knew damn good and well he'd done it. Why else was he in Afghanistan? Vacation? He was on camera nonchalantly acknowledging the news when the story broke.

"and the Taliban are assured that the country is neutral and will not be influenced by the United States" - Ah, the other shoe drops. In other words, "after you bribe the shit out of us, we'll hand him off to another country of our own choosing and then the U.S. can start this farce all over again."



"clearly indicated a desire to assist the US."

That has got to be the most fucked up claim I've seen in years. I don't know if it's naïve , willfully obtuse, just plain stupid or all of the above. And I'm dumber for having read it.

[Agnostic Muslim]

"...a desire to assist the U.S."? "Clearly"? Wow...


"We would be ready to hand him over to a third country" - Which would've assisted the U.S. how? Which third country?

"It can be negotiated..." - A polite euphemism for massive bribes

And how much has the US alone spent on the war and occupation of Afghanistan so far? What were all those 'suitcases of money' the CIA was delivering to Karzai, his cronies and various other crooks in the Afghan government?

"...provided the U.S. gives us evidence" - The evidence was there, starting with al-Qa'ida declaration of war against the U.S. in 1998 and subsequent terrorist operations. The Taliban wasn't looking for evidence. They were stalling for time and bribes. They knew damn good and well he'd done it. Why else was he in Afghanistan? Vacation? He was on camera nonchalantly acknowledging the news when the story broke.

If the evidence was 'there', then what was wrong with officially providing it to the Taliban and putting OBL on trial?

"and the Taliban are assured that the country is neutral and will not be influenced by the United States" - Ah, the other shoe drops. In other words, "after you bribe the shit out of us, we'll hand him off to another country of our own choosing and then the U.S. can start this farce all over again."

With respect to the bribes, see my response above, and a see nothing wrong with choosing a country for the trial of OBL that would have been 'neutral and not influenced by the US'.

"clearly indicated a desire to assist the US."

That has got to be the most fucked up claim I've seen in years. I don't know if it's naïve , willfully obtuse, just plain stupid or all of the above. And I'm dumber for having read it.

A fail to see any justification for your criticism other than paranoia and a desire to cling to the official US narrative to avoid accepting that the US direction taken in Afghanistan in 2001 was flawed and created a cluster f***.

[TopHatter]

And how much has the US alone spent on the war and occupation of Afghanistan so far? What were all those 'suitcases of money' the CIA was delivering to Karzai, his cronies and various other crooks in the Afghan government?

I'm not saying I'm not disgusted by the massive amounts of blood and treasure spent in Afghanistan. I am, thoroughly.

However, the last time I checked, Karzai was fighting al-Qaida, not sheltering them.

Small difference.

If the evidence was 'there', then what was wrong with officially providing it to the Taliban and putting OBL on trial?

As I said, the Taliban were no more interested in evidence of OBL's guilt than a conspiracy theorist is interested in proof that he's wrong.

And how was OBL supposed to be put on trial? Where was the trial to take place? Afghanistan? Pakistan? That unnamed third-country?

With respect to the bribes, see my response above, and a see nothing wrong with choosing a country for the trial of OBL that would have been 'neutral and not influenced by the US'.

Of course you don't see anything wrong with it. You have utterly failed to read or comprehend what I wrote. A third-country was unacceptable to the United States because, as I said, it would've meant starting all over again. Suppose that third country would've been North Korea? Or Cuba?

Assuming they actually turned OBL over to a third-country in the first place!

A fail to see any justification for your criticism other than paranoia and a desire to cling to the official US narrative to avoid accepting that the US direction taken in Afghanistan in 2001 was flawed and created a cluster f***.

I've already freely acknowledged that the long-term US war plans for Afghanistan were flawed. But keep flogging that dead horse if you want.

[Officer of Engineers]

Assuming they actually turned OBL over to a third-country in the first place!

Oh, they would. Translation: allow OBL to escape.

[Firestorm]

AM is talking as if the Taliban and AQ are separate mutually exclusive entities. That is simply not true. AQ fighters were being trained in the same camps in Afghanistan as the Taliban fighters. The two organizations were joined at the hip. Taliban giving assurances that they will kick out OBL and AQ is ridiculous.

If the evidence was 'there', then what was wrong with officially providing it to the Taliban and putting OBL on trial?

Yeah, India tried that with Hafeez Saeed. His grandson will probably die of old age before the "trial" gets over.

[TopHatter]

Taliban giving assurances that they will kick out OBL and AQ is ridiculous.

Nonsense! The Taliban were completely trustworthy and reasonable...especially when it came to assisting the West with known Islamic terrorists in their midst.


(According to AgnosticMuslim, that is)

[Mihais]

For anyone to do anything with the Taliban,means recognizing the Taliban as the legitimate government of A-stan.Which couldn't be done,unless you're Pakistani or wahhabi.
AM,you tried to pull a lawyerish trick earlier.The US demands on the Taliban may have been in the wake of 9/11.But Bin Laden declared war on US before 9/11 and the Taliban hosted him before that,as well.The US responded with cruise missiles,initially.The war started before 9/11,it only got more intense after that.
That the Western nations are prepared to negociate today with the enemy means only abject surrender and is a testament to the sorry state of our countries.The war did not managed to forge a real internal harmony,not even in US.As for the rest of the Western nations,there was no case of such a dedicated effort from the start.That the war was carried this way is only a symptom.We need to cure the internal disease before carrying the fight to the outside enemy.Tyrants and warmongers you said.I can deal with words like that.But I'd like to see how many will deal with those words becoming reality.

[n21]

Indian whining about the US doing that which they (India) cannot accomplish is nothing new ...

Oh, Believe me India has managed to achieve something which it would have never got with invading Pakistan. All by staying out of Pakistan.

US, the greatest supporter of Pakistan , is now the most hated in Pakistan!

Till today it was US that saved Pakistan's bacon.

Post 2014.....no one is helping Pakistan.

[Firestorm]

Oh, Believe me India has managed to achieve something which it would have never got with invading Pakistan. All by staying out of Pakistan.

US, the greatest supporter of Pakistan , is now the most hated in Pakistan!

India achieved jackshit! Regardless of who is hated more, Pakistan can only hurt India not the US.

Post 2014.....no one is helping Pakistan.

You would be naive to believe that. All that hate for the US conveniently disappears when they accept all the US aid. It also doesn't seem to stop the US from providing it.

[notorious_eagle]

Does this mean the Pak army has sidelined itself in the eyes of your public ?

Was thinking the other day the best thing the Pak army can do is not make too much noise right now, given all the protests going on in the muslim world.

Democratic and peaceful transition of power is the right thing to do.

PA after the elections in 2008 have largely left the governance and policy making to the political institutions. Although the political institutions have failed miserably to provide any governance or design important policies, PA hasn't stepped in. PA has no reason to fear because they still enjoy overwhelming support of the masses. If my memory serves me right, the last poll conducted suggested that the PA had an approval rating of 80%, far more compared to any politician. PA would be more than happy to stay in the barracks if the politicians do their jobs.

[notorious_eagle]

[ATTACH]33141[/ATTACH]

Goodness me :slap:

The economy largely took off Post 2002 because of Musharraf's economic policies. Economic liberalization, fiscal/monetary discipline, deregulation, loosening of private credit, privatization, sound macro-economic policies, removal of international sanctions and most importantly placing experienced technocrats in important positions. These were the major factors that helped Pakistan's economy became more productive and grow at an average rate of 6.3%.

The $20 billion aid you are talking about, around $14 billion was expensed to the Army for the cost of the operations conducted in FATAville and only around $6 billion was invested in the economy. Do you honestly believe $6 billion spread out over a timeframe of 10 years can make a country like Pakistan grow at a rate of 6.3%? The removal of sanctions played a much bigger role in kick starting the economy compared to the puny aid that was doled out. If aid alone could drive sustainable economic growth, Afghanistan would be Malaysia by now. Anyways, don't want to derail the topic further. If you want to further read up on Pakistan's economy during that time frame, read this article written by a very renowned Economist. Hope it helps

The economy under Pervez Musharraf -DAWN - Business; October 17, 2007

[Doktor]

You asked what was the benefit.

I showed it to you.

You really think Mushi's miracle would take place if US was not siding with him? Are you deliberately forgetting to add World Bank, Japan, UK, IMF...

What about foreign investments? What about those lifted sanctions you mentioned?

Yes, you'd fare much better without US backing.

[antimony]

PA after the elections in 2008 have largely left the governance and policy making to the political institutions. Although the political institutions have failed miserably to provide any governance or design important policies, PA hasn't stepped in. PA has no reason to fear because they still enjoy overwhelming support of the masses. If my memory serves me right, the last poll conducted suggested that the PA had an approval rating of 80%, far more compared to any politician.

Just recently they snatched away their old boy Mushy from the judicial system. You got to be kidding me.

PA would be more than happy to stay in the barracks if the politicians do their jobs.

In a democracy, that is not their choice to make. Indian poltis are as much scumbag as Pakistani poltis are, the IA and the rest of the defense establishment does not peep in, that is a good thing