How much of Pakistan do the Taliban actually control

[rubyjackass]

Please read the post I was replying to


PS: I don't give a **** about the nuclear deal.

 

[jeypore]

Being from an economy of 1000th of a size of some of these western powers we still have the biggest army contributed to the Afghanistan war. I don't understand that after all the talk of an Afghanistan Surge all they could muster up was <20k soldiers? Why not send in like 100,000 of them to finish the job and not keep the whole matter on a nice simmer.
The US has that many forces. They shouldn't be left home as decoration pieces and be committed to the war.

A same argument can be made for pakistan moving there eastern division to the taliban theater in pakistan. Infact, aren't they not just a decoration piece to show of to the Indians.

 

[Xeric]

Please read the post I was replying to


PS: I don't give a **** about the nuclear deal.

Already read!

And both of them were usless

You don't give a *** to the deal, but does it matter?

 

[S-2]

Second, dude, if your artillery corps don't teach you tactical, operational, strategical and doctrinal level stuff, that's your fault, we know this sh!t very well, 12 years dont make you smart enough, believe me!"

DUDE, I started smart and have studied under some of our best nuclear deterrance thinkers in my country. Not for nothing, but a cold war in the early fifties will compel a NATION to develop such doctrine. We did so.

Moreover, i never knew captains in the US Army plan at the strategical level

Are not captains in the Pakistani army trained and briefed to understand your strategic intent? Your conflation of the terms "strategic" and "tactical" in the space of one paragraph without context leads me to believe you really don't grasp the term.

"Nice praises for you military, best of luck!"

Luck has nothing to do with it. We work very, very hard to improve as we're engaged with real enemies and not chasing windmills on your eastern border.

"Already 8 years and billions of $, let's see how far you take it."

Indeed! How time flies when you're denying strategic space. Karzai's been in power nearly twice as long as Omar? Says everything you need to know about the differences between our armies and yours. With sixty thousand soldiers we keep in power what 550,000 of yours couldn't do for the taliban.

"Probably you have forgotten that this was not a proxy war as from '79 to '89, and it has to end some day."

Oh, I'm fully aware what this war is. We shared a common enemy once. Now our enemy is your friend when he isn't your enemy too. In the mountains along your border our platoons manuever daily on their LPCs (leather personnel carriers) on 50 degree slope seeking these lads in a very personal fight.

Having conversed with you now a bit I'm dismayed by what it is that you do know. You seem in agreement with the Pakistani pursuit of strategic space in a neighboring country. You seem to diminish the importance of a state army's responsibility for securing it's lands from invasion and dismissive of the present threat that exists in your recently-lost western lands.

You of all people beg your unpreparedness for this war. I know that you shall never be prepared but no group of men bear more direct responsibilities than your company grade officers and their mentors/commanders. Primarily, though, you lack nothing but determination to begin the fight. As I've written, were they Indians you'd use any means at your disposal but with the taliban you seem content to acquiesce your lands.

enigma 947, if it's any solace, I can assure you that should your army ever attempt to recapture the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan you'll find a committed army prepared to defend it's lands from you and fully fortified to that end. As such, it'll seem very, very conventional at times.

"Lastly, you definitely have forgotten Nam!"

We'll see what you remember from your experiences in Bajaur. That's the relevant operational lesson as you may expect much more of the same on a far higher scale just to it's south.

To that end, what are you awaiting? A mid-intensity infantry-centric conventional battle awaits your forces. You'll need the full range of your conventional forces and you'll be wise take what lessons you can from who you may ASAP as it's clear you need to learn how to fight in your populous areas without leveling EVERY SINGLE BUILDING.

I understand the need in Loe Sam but that can't be replicated village after village in Waziristan. Your infantry, armor, engineers, air defense and artillery will play close and personal roles in these communities...I hope.

Given your representations here, young artillery officer, your army is the one whom is in need of luck.

Good luck.

Thanks.

 

[Elmo]

U didnt get!!

I was saying that u have some knowledge!!
And ur response!!


U disappointed me!!

Now thanks!!
Dont need ur clearification!!

Bachay that was my way of saying thanks! Ishtyle baba!

(I went on your profile and saw that you were born in 1990. You are such a baby doing big talk.)

Thanks for the compliment!

 

[Xeric]

Luck has nothing to do with it. We work very, very hard to improve as we're engaged with real enemies and not chasing windmills on your eastern border.

Hmmmm, ya right!

You think your military is the only professional fighting machine in the world.

This pride of your is already quite shaken as you find your way through afghanistan and iraq.

If war mean killing and destroying everybody, yes, then the US is the world leader, but if we take war as an instrument for the perusal of peace, then sorry sir you are a loser!

Why don't you try to narrate us your achievements, lets see what all grace have you earned, except killing babies inside the wombs.

Indeed! How time flies when you're denying strategic space. Karzai's been in power nearly twice as long as Omar? Says everything you need to know about the differences between our armies and yours. With sixty thousand soldiers we keep in power what 550,000 of yours couldn't do for the taliban.

lolzz.. i never knew our entire Army was fighting Batiula Mehsyd.

BTW 60,000 , try to commit some more it might yield some results.

Oh, I'm fully aware what this war is. We shared a common enemy once. Now our enemy is your friend when he isn't your enemy too. In the mountains along your border our platoons manuever daily on their LPCs (leather personnel carriers) on 50 degree slope seeking these lads in a very personal fight.

We still share a common enemy but we no more share the same strategy, so bye bye!

Having conversed with you now a bit I'm dismayed by what it is that you do know. You seem in agreement with the Pakistani pursuit of strategic space in a neighboring country. You seem to diminish the importance of a state army's responsibility for securing it's lands from invasion and dismissive of the present threat that exists in your recently-lost western lands.

Having discussed with you it seems to me that you are only in pursuit of a global hegemony, with all the oil reserves in your pocket, cheat the people on the name of freedom, and end up sucking the last drop of blood from every non-american.

i wonder why the US has the most enemies in the world, now i know you will rant about that people are jealous of your freedom and liberties, guess what, i don't know why people are not jealous of any other European country?

We fully take the responisbility of our task at hand and our duty, you are no one to judge us, how can you juge us, on what grounds, are we being employed by the amerucans? or is it you people are holding up our oxygen supplies.

Look in your kitty first what you have to prove?

Wastage of US $ and non-american blood, and the outcome zero!

i dont know how your military measures yourself, what are your measuring standards?
Let me quote a few:

#1 Cruise missile attacks ($4 billion - 0 dead)


#2 Carpet Bombing strikes ($6 billion - 4 dead)

.
#3 Ranger Raids ($2 billion - 50 dead)



#4 Send in helicopter brigades ($20 billion - 1000 dead)



#5 Land several divisions and overrun Afghanistan ($100 billion - 6000 dead)


#6 Partition Afghanistan ($10 billion - 10 dead)

If this you call success, the sorry my friend you need re-write the definition of 'success'

Now try to compare our input and the results, iam sure you'll feel the shame atleast when you'll go to bed.

You of all people beg your unpreparedness for this war. I know that you shall never be prepared but no group of men bear more direct responsibilities than your company grade officers and their mentors/commanders. Primarily, though, you lack nothing but determination to begin the fight.

We were not prepared but we are well prepared now!

Atleast i can bet our men bore more responsiblity then yours, and yes they are not paid thousand of $ monthly, but they still fight! And fight guud.

You are the first ever military strategis that i have seen in my life who have undermined the armed forces of the Sub-Continent, espacially india and Paksitan.

If that be the case, nay god bless you, undermine you enemy and get secrewed in the end.

As I've written, were they Indians you'd use any means at your disposal but with the taliban you seem content to acquiesce your lands.

Already killed to death, but i suppose old age has taken your toll, no worries i;ll explain again.

Dude if you consider that our fighting with india and the talibans take the same priorities then i must sadly say that you have just wasted your 12 years for nothing, is this what your nuclear deterrence master minds have taught you?

You cant even differentiate with between the two basic kind of conflicts.

As i mentioned earlier, would you apply the same rules of engagement when fighting the Canadians (for instance) and fighting insurgency in Texas (not afganistan, texas)?

This is what i get when you say were they Indians you'd use any means at your disposal but with the taliban you seem content to acquiesce your lands
and this is the second time you are making this basic mistake!

if it's any solace, I can assure you that should your army ever attempt to recapture the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan you'll find a committed army prepared to defend it's lands from you and fully fortified to that end.

Thanks for the Intel, iam grateful, we'll take it into definite consideration when we decide to in Wazir....
thanks again!

We'll see what you remember from your experiences in Bajaur. That's the relevant operational lesson as you may expect much more of the same on a far higher scale just to it's south.

To that end, what are you awaiting? A mid-intensity infantry-centric conventional battle awaits your forces. You'll need the full range of your conventional forces and you'll be wise take what lessons you can from who you may ASAP as it's clear you need to learn how to fight in your populous areas without leveling EVERY SINGLE BUILDING.

I understand the need in Loe Sam but that can't be replicated village after village in Waziristan. Your infantry, armor, engineers, air defense and artillery will play close and personal roles in these communities...I hope.

We exactly know what to do when, atleast the military cadre, so please keep your adivce for the Brits, they require it more, as they blindly follow you into the darkness!

You don't even know what we are thinking.

It took you 5 years to understand Musharaffs dual facet strategy (how naive of you), it would take another 10 to understand Kyani's!!!

Better write it down.

And God bless you and America!

 

[S-2]

"This pride of your is already quite shaken as you find your way through afghanistan and iraq."

You are amidst your own delusional hubris. Your awakening is upon you. We'll see if you display the same learning and adaptive culture that we have over the last seven years.

Little point to sharing those hard lessons with you though. You seem to have all the answers. Judging by the condition of your country, I can see that matters are well in hand indeed.

"Why don't you try to narrate us your achievements, lets see what all grace have you earned, except killing babies inside the wombs."

Coming from an officer of any army who's reputation among your own (once) Bengali and Baluchi citizens is heinous, please don't lecture. I managed to stay away from the sordid past through your little party on that tacky thread. Your own cheap comments were noted lacking the objective analysis of the reported news and, instead, indulging in the perversion it had become.

"lolzz.. i never knew our entire Army was fighting Batiula Mehsyd."

You might wipe the undeserved smirk off your face and consider such. Novel idea, eh?

"...we no more share the same strategy, so bye bye!"

Remember that when our NVGs show up in your unit arms room. Were it me you'd not receive one penny for your aforementioned reason. If your enemy, your intention isn't their defeat but their deflection back upon Afghanistan. That, of course, makes you an enemy of ISAF.

I only await my drunken government awakening to this simple fact. They actually are. What binds us is really Karachi and nothing more. If/when that's gone, the tone and timbre of our relationship will be too.

"Having discussed with you it seems to me that you are only in pursuit of a global hegemony, with all the oil reserves in your pocket, cheat the people on the name of freedom, and end up sucking the last drop of blood from every non-american."

You rant, young artillery officer. Please wipe your drooling chin. You're an emotional mess and a poor example to the men. Please gain control of yourself lest you embarass officers worldwide with your misconduct.

"you are no one to judge us, how can you juge us, on what grounds, are we being employed by the amerucans? or is it you people are holding up our oxygen supplies."

We've a civil and military aid package in the works. Mullen was sent back to the drawing board because the military side lacked performance caveats, I guess. It lacked oversight.

Those caveats are judgments. Draw your own conclusions but it'll be under those conditions that our assistance is offered. I PRAY that you become offended and turn it down.

Earn your honor and make the break you so desire. Then we can make war upon each other with our consciences clear and wearing the uniforms of our nations before our enemies-each other.

"We exactly know what to do when, atleast the military cadre..."

I'm sure your senior military leaders have plans just for this moment and await a full ripening. We can only trust this is so. What they are, though, one can only imagine.

Your strategists are terribly subtle displaying a rapier's sense of nuance. Inscrutible even.

"...it would take another 10 to understand Kyani's!!!"

Let's just hope you understand because we're taking bets you don't see two years as events continue to proceed apace.

Thanks.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well, we've reached a "mexican standoff" of my gov't's drivel against your gov't. drivel. Can we toss other nation's driveling thoughts in such as Afghanistan, Canada, and Great Britain too?

Sure you can, when you have something conclusive to show complicity, otherwise its just accumulated drivel from the GoUS and others.

You are utterly defensive and totally irrational. There are serious problems in any gov't that justifies proxy warfare for ANY reason over ANY issue. If you haven't grasped that salient fact then neither you personally nor your government can be good partners in the mission being conducted in Afghanistan by forty one nations besides America's afghani hosts

Hogwash - I am not reacting any differently than you would if every conversation we had included allegations of the CIA and US Military having carried out 911.

The West's allegations against Pakistani security forces fit into the same category. Accepting such ludicrous accusations without concrete evidence is 'irrational'.

We now have the Pakistani President, Prime Minister, COAS, DG ISI and the leader of the opposition (the most popular politician in Pakistan at the moment) categorically rejecting US allegations (of 'one unambiguous case').

Gillani has clarified several times now that the process of 'restructuring' the ISI will continue as long as is necessary, and in the absence of any evidence from the West indicating otherwise, I will believe the Pakistani political and military leadership over yours.

You can continue to have faith in Rummy's 'unknown unknowns'.

That said, at no point have I said that Pakistan is 'winning', or that the policies pursued are the best ones to defeat the insurgency. I have however, posted my opinions on why I think Pakistan is pursuing the policies she is, and I remain optimistic that the situation is still manageable.

You can disagree with me on the above, and have, but there is simply no room for discussion over Western allegations against Pakistan akin to 'the CIA did 911'.

Essentially, I gather that all of them think you're pissing on their efforts. I'm sure it's simply "drivel".

Without evidence indeed it is.

Argumentum ad populum - just because you can get a bunch of lackeys to agree with your propaganda does not make that propaganda any truer.

As to blood, we've traveled far to die for a cause that virtually all our soldiers believe in. I'm sorry for the fine soldiers in your army whose bravery for a common cause exceeds the government, citizens, and civilian leaders of your country. They did, however, die on their own soil. If a soldier is to fight on his own soil and not be victorious, it's best to die.

The point remains - the West's pontifications about 'billions' spent in a war far from her soil are arrogant and dishonest, given that Pakistan has lost tens of billions, and thousands of lives in a war on her soil. If sacrifice indicates intent and absolves one from accusations of complicity, the West does not come close to Pakistan.

Will you be victorious A.M. or do you need civil and military aid without restrictions and a U.S. sponsored plebiscite in Kashmir before you suddenly get interested?

Nobody really cares. I don't think aid can help you anyway. There's a 10% surcharge right off the top once it crosses your country's lines. Sunk costs in that case or throwing good money after bad. Wouldn't be the first time with Pakistan.

Time will tell if we are victorious or not. I remain optimistic we will, though Zardari might still prove me wrong.

Whether the world cares or not, I think we will find a way. But nice strawman there - a US sponsored plebiscite has never really been a condition for reorientation of forces at the official level. Please let me know if you have information indicating otherwise.

Keep your "contacts". You'll be needing them I suspect.

More unknown unknowns?

What contacts?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Well beyond that there's the more salient point that you don't have to sleep with the enemy to abet him. Your country's silence is deafening and in that vacumn of thought pass the taliban with seamless ease.

Indeed, but by that yardstick the fact that Afghanistan serves as the primary source/transit route of the drugs and weapons into Pakistan, supplying the Afghan and PakTaliban, and your inability to eliminate that after eight years speaks volumes of your nations 'guilt'.

But I am sure you have a dime a dozen excuses lined up to explain that away.

Pakistan's failures on the other hand are only because we are supporting Taliban attacks on NATO.

You have been utterly outmanuevered in an information war and no amount of civil or military aid can overcome that message at this point. This isn't about money. It's completely about moral determination and your civil and military leadership are as bankrupt there as your coffers.

Absolutely agree on the information war part, and possibly the civilian leadership, but your comments on the 'moral determination' of the military leadership are nothing but speculative tripe.

 

[S-2]

"unknown unknowns"

You've become a broken record.

Let's for a moment entertain the idea that reality is played out in your capitol, ours, and here as we see it.

"We've proof of ..."

"No you don't..."

Both comments used by both sides at some point in the discussion.

A.M., what next?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

"unknown unknowns"

You've become a broken record.

Not nearly as much as the endless stream of pejoratives against the PA from you.

"We've proof of ..."

"No you don't..."

Both comments used by both sides at some point in the discussion.

A.M., what next?

Agree to disagree, and move onto less circular and tired arguments.

You disagree with the polices of the GoP in combating the insurgency, fine. Its a legitimate point of disagreement, without dragging in 'ulterior motives'.

'CIA did 911' style accusations are not a legitimate point of discussion, and you cannot expect Pakistanis to just accept them.

 

[Captain03]

This should be helpful for those not familiar with the political geography of these areas.

must be an old map because the government and the forces took over most of these places, also don't get maps for this topic from non-pakistani sources as the western world will always add something else to the story

 

[Captain03]

This is a question i would like to ask my pakistani brothers and sisters?

Ive heard in thewestern press anything from 20 to 70% of pakistans territory.
Pakistan is a huge country, Can the taliban which number about 60,000 really controll such a huge area of land. The 60,000 figure comes from a BBC report and i feel would be about ok considering the northern areas have only a population of 5million.

Ideally pakistanis from the northwest of pakistan would be the best ones to answer the question.

Thankyou brothers and i pray for a swift victory over the kaffir taleban.

the taliban barely has 1 or 2 percent of pakistani territory in control and they still fighting to occupy it

 

[S-2]

No.

You miss the point of my question. What happens next in the course of this conversation? If both sides are rational (regardless of truth), what follows these mutual denials?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

No.

You miss the point of my question. What happens next in the course of this conversation? If both sides are rational (regardless of truth), what follows these mutual denials?

What actually happened was that both sides 'agreed to build trust' with each other, whatever that means.

Or, the side making the accusations would have to prove its case, and going by Petraeus's comments, there isn't much of one in favor of the US side.

Beyond that please do expound, since I know not what you mean.