How much of Pakistan do the Taliban actually control

[Always Neutral]

Who are you as a matter of fact what are you.

Man read the history of NWFP. These areas are never controlled by any military. Ask British even they can control these areas. Pakistan army has taken control of those areas in which British never did and dream of taking them.

Mr. Pako,

Then declare these areas independant of pakistan and Nato will be most happy to operate there.

I think Swat has proved and validated most of S 2's theories and instead of asking him questions you should ask the PA why 10000 murderers with their leader BM are running amok in your country.

Regards

 

[pakomar]

Why? We will deal with our own problem .US must stop interfacing in Pakistan and deal with their side of border.

 

[Always Neutral]

Why? We will deal with our own problem .US must stop interfacing in Pakistan and deal with their side of border.

Since you are not able to deal with it NATO has to. Thats the reality.

Regards

 

[pakomar]

Since you are not able to deal with it NATO has to. Thats the reality.

Regards

We are in this mess because of US and NATO (by letting Taliban into Pakistan and not blocking their retreat). We are dealing with them perfectly. Not every time military action is necessary. US learnt it the hard way in Iraq when they made peace deal with insurgent.

 

[Xeric]

Mr. Pako,

Then declare these areas independant of pakistan and Nato will be most happy to operate there.

Ahan, there comes the truth.

i wonder what makes you different then the Soviets-they also wanted the Frontier regions to be part of Afghanistan or to be independent when they invaded it, now you, the champions of capitalism, all have the same goals.

I think Swat has proved and validated most of S 2's theories and instead of asking him questions you should ask the PA why 10000 murderers with their leader BM are running amok in your country.

Regards

Oh S-2 the philospher! He sould be in one of you think tanks, i bet.

BTW we should ask you or the ISAF in specific, why 100000 murderers with their leader UBL and the Talibans are at lose in Afghanistan?

@ enigma947: I wasn’t looking for an answer. But good work with the link (you have researched a lot) but what was the point though? I can refute many of your points therein. Some of it borders on propaganda.

What was the point though?
What do you think it can be?
i wrote something factual, and want people to read it, you showed some similarity of thoughts (specific to the our geostrategic location in connection to gwadar) and i wanted to see if we were on the same grid, but i guess we are not, you are welcome to refute, please do so on that thread, i'll keep my answers ready

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Then declare these areas independant of pakistan and Nato will be most happy to operate there.

The only thing allowing full fledged US/ISAF military operations in FATA will do is push the insurgency deeper into Pakistan, draw in more of the population and expand, and destabilize it further.

 

[Elmo]

@Enigma: What do you think it can be?

I am a girl, really really really dumb. Didn't get the point the first time around but now I think I get the point: you just wanted someone to go over your work and give you a thumbs up. So here you go

I wrote something factual, and want people to read it, you showed some similarity of thoughts (specific to the our geostrategic location in connection to gwadar) and i wanted to see if we were on the same grid, but i guess we are not, you are welcome to refute, please do so on that thread, i'll keep my answers ready

The geo-strategic importance was not vis-a-vis Gwadar (that's the propoganda bit). And yes we ain't on the same grid. As for refuting, do you really care what a newcomer gotta say?


@Agnostic Muslim: The only thing allowing full fledged US/ISAF military operations in FATA will do is push the insurgency deeper into Pakistan, draw in more of the population and expand, and destabilize it further.


I don't know who you were replying to but I agree with your statement. An operation by international security forces will only increase the sympathies of the local to the Taliban with the "collateral damage". Already this is the main cause of the support base the Taliban has in the Waziristan agencies. This wave of sympathy will only spread further, give the Taliban a nidus to infiltrate their ideology and hence destabilise the country.


@Always Neutral: Since you are not able to deal with it NATO has to. Thats the reality.

You surely ain't all that neutral I think Nato just needs a job description and a purpose to justify its existence.

 

[jeypore]

[B

@Agnostic Muslim: The only thing allowing full fledged US/ISAF military operations in FATA will do is push the insurgency deeper into Pakistan, draw in more of the population and expand, and destabilize it further.


I don't know who you were replying to but I agree with your statement. An operation by international security forces will only increase the sympathies of the local to the Taliban with the "collateral damage". Already this is the main cause of the support base the Taliban has in the Waziristan agencies. This wave of sympathy will only spread further, give the Taliban a nidus to infiltrate their ideology and hence destabilise the country.

Isn't that already happening without any interventions from outside? Some of the Pakistanie population is already sympathiesing with this talibs and are not forseeing the danger of the invasion.

 

[Xeric]

@Enigma: What do you think it can be?

I am a girl, really really really dumb. Didn't get the point the first time around but now I think I get the point: you just wanted someone to go over your work and give you a thumbs up. So here you go

The geo-strategic importance was not vis-a-vis Gwadar (that's the propoganda bit). And yes we ain't on the same grid. As for refuting, do you really care what a newcomer gotta say?

You are not that innocent which you make us believe

Second, had i needed the thumbs up, i had could have taken other measures, not referred it to a dumb girl (as you claim).

the thing is that you talked of the geostrategic thing, so i thought you might like to read something related, as you had voiced this fact to that other guy to whom you replied earlier.

As for the refuting thing, if that bothers you so much why did you hinted on it at the first place?

i dont know, first that other thread, now this one, i guess i'll be avoiding future contact with a new comer!

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Isn't that already happening without any interventions from outside? Some of the Pakistanie population is already sympathiesing with this talibs and are not forseeing the danger of the invasion.

It'll increase manifold, and the insurgency and militant Islam will find more legitimacy, while those who are moderates and pro-democracy get sidelined as 'weak' and 'US lackey's'.

 

[jeypore]

It'll increase manifold, and the insurgency and militant Islam will find more legitimacy, while those who are moderates and pro-democracy get sidelined as 'weak' and 'US lackey's'.

They already are Mr. AM, The army and GoP has virtually given up, with the peace deal in SWAT and the armies inaction of Banur. To the moderate and pro-democracy this are already signs. Mr. Muse's anger is perfect example, I might add.

In order to combate this properly, there has to be a synergy between and US and Pakistan, which I forsee it will not happen. The quagmire of minds in Pakistan is the problem. There has to be a focused colactive mind and to consider this as a threat for the humanity because of Pakistan nuclear arsenal. Mr. Kerry is given 6 to 12 months for red lights to be turned on!! Lets wait and see What Pakistan does to curve this internal threat.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

They already are Mr. AM, The army and GoP has virtually given up, with the peace deal in SWAT and the armies inaction of Banur. To the moderate and pro-democracy this are already signs. Mr. Muse's anger is perfect example, I might add.

The moderates and democracy are in no way discredited at the moment in large parts of Pakistan.

Certain policy decisions have been less than optimal, to say the least, but the majority of Pakistani society remains committed to a democratic and moderate path.

I could see that changing drastically with US/ISAF military operations in FATA, and the subsequent shifting of the insurgency deeper into Pakistan.

In order to combate this properly, there has to be a synergy between and US and Pakistan,

I would argue that there has to be synergy between the US, Pakistan and India on this issue, since the hostility with India, especially post Mumbai, has placed security constraints upon Pakistan.

 

[jeypore]

AgNoStIc MuSliM
The moderates and democracy are in no way discredited at the moment in large parts of Pakistan.

Certain policy decisions have been less than optimal, to say the least, but the majority of Pakistani society remains committed to a democratic and moderate path.

You are right, but you must admit AM, there are tid bits of occassions and signs!!

I could see that changing drastically with US/ISAF military operations in FATA, and the subsequent shifting of the insurgency deeper into Pakistan.

This is the evantuality that US is not motivated to take, the key does lie on Pakistan hands though.

I would argue that there has to be synergy between the US, Pakistan and India on this issue, since the hostility with India, especially post Mumbai, has placed security constraints upon Pakistan.

Now, I will not give you credit for this at all. The talibanization of Pakistan has nothing to do with India. It is all Pakistan, period. But argument of India's involvement is over-simplification to say the least. The mistrust of insurgency in the Kashmire valley with rise of talibanization in the neighborhood will prevent India from moving it's troops. If there has to be a synergy, then the kashmir subject has to be left out.

 

[Elmo]

@Enigma: You are not as innocent as you'd make us believe.

And you ain't as smart as you would like one and all to believe
My dumb girl comment was sarcasm, which was obviously lost on you.


Second, had i needed the thumbs up, i had could have taken other measures, not referred it to a dumb girl (as you claim).

Ahan (rolling eyes).


The thing is that you talked of the geostrategic thing, so i thought you might like to read something related, as you had voiced this fact to that other guy to whom you replied earlier.

Yes I got that, but when i asked you what the point was, I wanted to know what the point of your research work was. If you answer a question with another question (what was the point? Re: what do you think it is), the conversation goes nowhere. You could have simply asked what I was referring to. It wouldn't have made you a lesser mortal.

As for the refuting thing, if that bothers you so much why did you hinted on it at the first place?

It didn't and still doesn't bother me.

i dont know, first that other thread, now this one, i guess i'll be avoiding future contact with a new comer!

You are such a heartbreaker. I am genuinely upset (sarcasm)
(Neither would I want to interact with a miserable grinchy old-timer like you who is rude and overbearing and derails every thread he is on (or at least every single one of his which I have come across.))

(P.S.: Rudeness begets rudeness, niceness begets niceness, just so you know)

CASE CLOSED.




@Agnostic Muslim and Jeypore and everyone else on this thread: I want you guys opinion: if we are saying that the Taliban have won sympathies of the people due the collateral damage that has accumulated over the years, do you think we are justified in waging a war against them and imposing the same on the locals to protect what is essentially our way of lifestyle? The Taliban do have support from the tribal people.

 

[jeypore]

if we are saying that the Taliban have won sympathies of the people due the collateral damage that has accumulated over the years, do you think we are justified in waging a war against them and imposing the same on the locals to protect what is essentially our way of lifestyle? The Taliban do have support from the tribal people.

One must ask a question first if Pakistan is ready to be ruled by shariah law with the ideology of wahabism, and to remove it's existing constitution if it means anything. That is what the Pakistan taliban clearly want. From my perspective, the current pakistanie population, GoP, and the Army is not taking this as a serious threat, while the world around them is noticing this seriousness of the situation.

If Pakistan wants to be a global player and a economic powerhouse, first and foremost it has to curb these talibans.

do you think we are justified in waging a war against them and imposing the same on the locals to protect what is essentially our way of lifestyle?

Very, very important question, the answer is Big Yes. It is afterall your lifestyle, but with the nuclear arsenal at play here, the world is not going to give these talibs and AQ the utopia they so much desire.