Operation Rah-e-Nijat (South Waziristan)

[air marshal]

Lethal weapons and ammunition seized by Security Forces

 

[ajpirzada]

where the **** did they get all this weapon from
at 53 sec you see a logo on one of these mini artillery. whose logo is this?

 

[TalibanSwatter]

Daily Times Editorial
December 03, 2009

US President Barack Obama’s much-awaited announcement of his new Afghan strategy has evoked alarm and disappointment in equal measure. Obama has committed to sending 30,000 additional US troops, but also announced a withdrawal date starting from July 2011. The thrust of his message is that the US cannot fight an unending war in Afghanistan and therefore must seek an honourable exit. How honourable it may turn out to be, given the ground realities, is a moot point. As though the US president’s ‘cut and run’ strategy is not alarming enough, his Nato allies are even less willing to come forward with additional troops, some even a continuing presence. The West as a whole then, led by the US, seems inclined once again to turn its face away from benighted Afghanistan.

The ‘sweetener’ meant to make the virtual surrender, sooner or later, to the Taliban more palatable, trots out the fiction that the period until July 2011 and the additional troops will train an Afghan army and police force capable of holding its own against the tough Taliban. Based on the track record in this respect of the last eight years, this seems unattainable. The numbers targeted have yet to be reached, and the quality of the trainees leaves much to be desired. They are by no stretch of the imagination capable of standing up to the Taliban and defending their country against an extremist takeover a la 1996. Nor are they likely to be, the wishful thinking of Washington notwithstanding (actually, this may also be the attempt at a justification for the impending abandonment of the Afghan people to their fate).

The Pakistani military establishment, which has been working towards some such outcome since 9/11 by attacking al Qaeda and saving the Afghan Taliban for a rainy day (one has just arrived, courtesy Obama), must be laughing all the way to the bank, followed closely by the Afghan Taliban. All Mullah Omar and his fighters now have to do is wait out the US and Nato, and Karzai’s regime will fall to them like an overripe plum.

The implications of such a scenario are scary for the region, the world, and most of all for Pakistan. There is no sign that Mullah Omar, despite keeping his distance publicly from al Qaeda since 9/11, has abandoned his alliance with his ‘guest’ of yore, Osama bin Laden. The Haqqani shura based in North Waziristan is widely believed to be openly working with al Qaeda. That implies that if the Mullah Omars and Haqqanis once again are ensconced in Kabul (even two years from now), you could be excused for thinking that Osama bin Laden would not be too far away. The antediluvian regime of the extremists would once again be foisted by force of arms and with the backing of the Pakistani military establishment on the long-suffering Afghan people.

Such a rejuvenated regime that hosts al Qaeda once again would threaten US and Western interests globally. It may prove too wild a horse for our military establishment to ride, let alone control (remember Mullah Omar’s intransigence in the face of Pakistani advice in 2001 to surrender or at the very least expel Osama bin Laden from Afghanistan?). Even more worryingly, the restored Taliban rulers in Kabul may find the temptation irresistible to fish in the troubled waters Pakistan finds itself in by backing the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. After all, in comparison with ruined Afghanistan, control over a nuclear-armed Pakistan may be too mouth-watering to ignore.

The US and the West have proved fickle allies. Their public at home has no stomach for foreign wars, especially after the shenanigans of Bush and Blair. Imperialism is passé. Afghanistan is about to be left to its own devices once again. The world may, however, once again live to regret it.

 

[Stewart1989]

Daily Times Editorial
December 03, 2009

US President Barack Obama’s much-awaited announcement of his new Afghan strategy has evoked alarm and disappointment in equal measure. Obama has committed to sending 30,000 additional US troops, but also announced a withdrawal date starting from July 2011. The thrust of his message is that the US cannot fight an unending war in Afghanistan and therefore must seek an honourable exit. How honourable it may turn out to be, given the ground realities, is a moot point. As though the US president’s ‘cut and run’ strategy is not alarming enough, his Nato allies are even less willing to come forward with additional troops, some even a continuing presence. The West as a whole then, led by the US, seems inclined once again to turn its face away from benighted Afghanistan.

The ‘sweetener’ meant to make the virtual surrender, sooner or later, to the Taliban more palatable, trots out the fiction that the period until July 2011 and the additional troops will train an Afghan army and police force capable of holding its own against the tough Taliban. Based on the track record in this respect of the last eight years, this seems unattainable. The numbers targeted have yet to be reached, and the quality of the trainees leaves much to be desired. They are by no stretch of the imagination capable of standing up to the Taliban and defending their country against an extremist takeover a la 1996. Nor are they likely to be, the wishful thinking of Washington notwithstanding (actually, this may also be the attempt at a justification for the impending abandonment of the Afghan people to their fate).

The Pakistani military establishment, which has been working towards some such outcome since 9/11 by attacking al Qaeda and saving the Afghan Taliban for a rainy day (one has just arrived, courtesy Obama), must be laughing all the way to the bank, followed closely by the Afghan Taliban. All Mullah Omar and his fighters now have to do is wait out the US and Nato, and Karzai’s regime will fall to them like an overripe plum.

The implications of such a scenario are scary for the region, the world, and most of all for Pakistan. There is no sign that Mullah Omar, despite keeping his distance publicly from al Qaeda since 9/11, has abandoned his alliance with his ‘guest’ of yore, Osama bin Laden. The Haqqani shura based in North Waziristan is widely believed to be openly working with al Qaeda. That implies that if the Mullah Omars and Haqqanis once again are ensconced in Kabul (even two years from now), you could be excused for thinking that Osama bin Laden would not be too far away. The antediluvian regime of the extremists would once again be foisted by force of arms and with the backing of the Pakistani military establishment on the long-suffering Afghan people.

Such a rejuvenated regime that hosts al Qaeda once again would threaten US and Western interests globally. It may prove too wild a horse for our military establishment to ride, let alone control (remember Mullah Omar’s intransigence in the face of Pakistani advice in 2001 to surrender or at the very least expel Osama bin Laden from Afghanistan?). Even more worryingly, the restored Taliban rulers in Kabul may find the temptation irresistible to fish in the troubled waters Pakistan finds itself in by backing the Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan. After all, in comparison with ruined Afghanistan, control over a nuclear-armed Pakistan may be too mouth-watering to ignore.

The US and the West have proved fickle allies. Their public at home has no stomach for foreign wars, especially after the shenanigans of Bush and Blair. Imperialism is passé. Afghanistan is about to be left to its own devices once again. The world may, however, once again live to regret it.

How amusing! I hear more on this forum (comprising of mostly pakis) of wanting immediate pullout from Afghanistan than I hear in western media and from western people about pulling out. Yet, Obama sets a date to BEGIN pull out and everyone slanders him for pulling out to soon. It's tough to be the leader of the free world. It's a shame the people of Afghanistan will never know the joy of living in a FREE world.

 

[Patriot]

How amusing! I hear more on this forum (comprising of mostly pakis) of wanting immediate pullout from Afghanistan than I hear in western media and from western people about pulling out. Yet, Obama sets a date to BEGIN pull out and everyone slanders him for pulling out to soon. It's tough to be the leader of the free world. It's a shame the people of Afghanistan will never know the joy of living in a FREE world.

US is in deep **** now.They've got to fix the damn situation.You just can't make matters worse and then decide to pull out.It's a huge ******* mess.As far as free world bs pleas keep it to yourself.You're too naive.

 

[waraich66]

How amusing! I hear more on this forum (comprising of mostly pakis) of wanting immediate pullout from Afghanistan than I hear in western media and from western people about pulling out. Yet, Obama sets a date to BEGIN pull out and everyone slanders him for pulling out to soon. It's tough to be the leader of the free world. It's a shame the people of Afghanistan will never know the joy of living in a FREE world.

Afghans were living in free world of their own , which was based on islamic fundamentals.

Obama have no other option left other than to leave Afghanistan , in the end Afghan talaban will rule the country free from capitalist economy.

 

[Stewart1989]

US is in deep **** now.They've got to fix the damn situation.You just can't make matters worse and then decide to pull out.It's a huge ******* mess.As far as free world bs pleas keep it to yourself.You're too naive.

Naive how, sir?

And regardless - to this day on this forum there have been calls for immediate withdrawl.. And now he's copping it for a plan to BEGIN pull out in 18 months? We've learned our lessons. There is no helping those who won't help themselves.

 

[Patriot]

Naive how, sir?

And regardless - to this day on this forum there have been calls for immediate withdrawl.. And now he's copping it for a plan to BEGIN pull out in 18 months? We've learned our lessons. There is no helping those who won't help themselves.

You are naive because you think Afghans want to live like Americans.What they want is peaceful life.Pakistanis who think the withdrawl will help are naive.It will have a lot of fallout of Pakistani as TTP and Talibans will think they have achieved victory against NATO (Crusaders in their mind) so they will attack Pakistan then to occupy it (Though, they have very slim chances..its just that NWFP terrain helps them immensely)So if Obama does pull out within 18 months Pakistan will be in deep **** unless we manage to get moderate taliban elements and have them cut their connections with Alqaida and TTP.

 

[TaimiKhan]

No 510/2009-ISPR Dated: December 3, 2009
Rawalpindi - December 3, 2009:



1. South Waziristan - Operation Rah-e-Nijat. Details of operation of last 24 hours are as follows:-

a. Jandola Sector. Security forces conducted search operation at Tsapparai and destroyed 15 terrorists bunkers.

b. Shakai Sector. Security forces carried out sanitization of area around Shahur River, Garezai Algad and discovered 22 tunnels (6-7 feet each and interconnected).

c. Razmak Sector.

(1) Security forces cleared large number of compounds at Kot Band Khel, Iman Khel Zingai and defused 9 IEDs.

(2) Security forces conducted search and clearance operations at Lawara Punga, Wucha Dara, Badam Shah, Zarnai Killi, Pasal Kot, Shahudin, Dwa Khula, Talakai, Khajai and Qalandar. Huge cache of arms and ammunitions were recovered.

(3) Terrorists fired rockets at Blanki Sar, resultantly one soldier got injured.

2. Swat - Malakand - Operation Rah-e-Rast

a. Security forces apprehended 2 (would be suicide bombers) including a lady at village Nawe Kalle.

b. Security forces killed 10 terrorists at Sigram during search operation.

c. Security forces apprehended 12 suspects at Langar, Ahingro Derai, Qambar and Udigram.

3. Relief Activities. 16,255 Cash Cards have been issued to displaced families of Wazirsitan.

 

[All-Green]

Patriot and Stewart

What many of us want USA to do is to talk to Taliban and then come up with an exit plan in mutual consultation with Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Taliban were better (please compare based on the ground realities prevalent before the rise of Taliban) than the warlords and that was the reason for their success in Afghanistan, they had a lot of local support which was due to the order they brought instead of the chaos that prevailed after Soviet War.
A man whose clothes are torn would be happy with a simple attire but a man who is used to the best will not be happy in the same clothes...that is the difference between Afghans and the Free (actually read developed not free) world...it is not that Afghans are inferior in mind or body...it is because of the series of terrible events that shook their society and brought every form of progress to a grinding halt...
You judge Taliban by western standards and you see barbarians...
We see the post soviet war slaughter, rape and absolute chaos which was ended with Taliban's ascent...sure they were not gentle and in war committed cruelty but were better than the civil war and constant chaos which the masses were subjected to...at least they attempted a unified governance and were not really following any agenda against the foreign countries.
I know of friends who traveled to corners of Afghanistan in this era because the Taliban had ample control in the country and so there was no more the case of a different set of rules governing one's life around every hill...there was a semblance of a country during their reign and that is why we feel they are not completely evil, demonic or barbarians as they have been made out to be.
Care to read about the current lot in power and you would know what i mean.

Coherence even under the Taliban's mostly severe and strict rules was still better than what was before and what is now...the warlords and drug lords held sway before the Taliban and after them...what has improved?

I disagree with many of Taliban's strict steps and their interpretation of Islam is basic to say the least and heavily influenced by the circumstances prevalent in their country...i am positive that they were desperate for world aid and had the US taken lead in this role of development assistance in Afghanistan at the clear and defined condition of Taliban ensuring that there was no terrorist on their land, it would have been a much more solid plan.
They were seeking money through trade and projects and that is why they were also interested in the oil and gas pipelines to pass through Afghanistan.
Their desires were and still are not beyond Afghanistan.
Al Qaeda is totally different and needs to be weeded out and that made it all the more important to isolate them from Taliban and not brand them as the same.
The Taliban could have been dealt with much more easily by US peacefully and with 20% of the amount spent on this war, the Taliban would not only have been moderated when the money would have flowed in Afghanistan but Osama would have been denied the best diversion he has created in the form of shifting US focus on Taliban who have a lot more support than Osama.
Now the only way to deal with Taliban is to talk to them and make them part of the Afghan government...the only hurdle in this move was the demand of Mullah Omar for the US exit and now that too is no more since US plans to leave anyways...therefore now it is time Obama talks to the Taliban and assure them of US sincerity towards the Afghans and help their economy instead of spending billions on the warlords in NA ranks.

Taliban and Al Qaeda may have found a common cause but they were not the same and that is the only hope for peace in Afghanistan...do not brand them all in the same category just because you hate their overtly strict rule...they are simple hard men but are much better than the Al Qaeda which has highly educated Arabs in its ranks and is still deliberately following a terrorist agenda against the spirit of Islam and causing pain and suffering in all the Muslim world through its nefarious activities.

Look at how the Saudi regime has mellowed down...Taliban were similar in thought and actions to the Saudis.
Their strictness would have slowly melted away as the economics improved had this road been traversed by the free world...instead the free world made fun of the offer of Taliban to try Osama in their courts...what was wrong with this offer, it was a huge thing for Taliban to try their formed guest in their courts and had they given him up everybody would have won and had they defended Osama then most of the current people supporting them would not have accepted this action of supporting terrorism by the Taliban...
All in all accepting this offer was very logical and a win win situation for the free world no matter which way the Taliban decision went...why was it not taken?

Just because a person is not highly educated and from an undeveloped land does not imply that he is a complete oaf and cannot read the writing on the wall...the offer was the best thing for all parties but was rejected and mocked at...instead the attack was launched the very day or next.

So who is laughing now, not me, not US and certainly not Afghans.
George Bush's impatience was the worst thing that could happen to USA and the world by its consequence.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

edit, wrong thread..

 

[S-2]

"the warlords and drug lords held sway..."

This comment is utterly befuddling. Are not the taliban both now and then heavily involved in opium? The answer is unequivocably "YES".

Of course you're aware that world records for opium cultivation were set in 1999 (please consult UNODC data which I've posted numerous times here for confirmation). How can this be THREE years after they seized power?

Or Helmand now? We know that until April that much of this province-the world's single largest opium producing area-was FULLY under taliban sway. What, then, explains this explosion if they've effectively controlled this area?

As to warlords, are not the taliban warlords on steroids? What separates them from the others? Perhaps you're unaware of UNITY's comments to taliban corruption in Afghanistan? Please contact him via P.M. and ask if he'd agree with you.

"We see the post soviet war slaughter, rape and absolute chaos which was ended with Taliban's ascent...sure they were not gentle and in war committed cruelty but were better than the civil war and constant chaos which the masses were subjected to...at least they attempted a unified governance..."

Did they not slaughter as well? Which of these competing factions wouldn't attempt a unified governance if provided the opportunity?

"You judge Taliban by western standards and you see barbarians..."

What standard do you use? Is this taliban standard sufficient to permit such within Pakistan? If not, are you "western"? If "western", do you prefer a non-western approach to Afghanistan? Do you suggest that what's good for afghans isn't good for Pakistanis just over the border? Are there "different" talibans, All-Green?

I sense condescension here suggesting that the afghan people aren't capable or deserving of a higher order of governance other than an iron fist and hillbilly perversions of Islamic theology. That such might be beyond the capabilities of Karzai doesn't mean that it should be rejected. Certainly no more so than the same for Pakistan's corruption riddled governance and Zardari.

The key is, of course, getting better men and women to stand for election-in BOTH countries.

 

[S-2]

"The Haqqani shura based in North Waziristan is widely believed to be openly working with al Qaeda."

I see the DAILY NEWS has no problem admitting that the afghan insurgency operates from Pakistani sanctuary for the past EIGHT years. This, of course, says nothing of your own Pakistani warlords like Nazir and Bahadur who make war on Afghanistan as well.

It seems an open secret among all of you...except when discussing this subject with ferenghi. THEN, of course, the three monkeys of see no, speak no, hear no evil emerge.

That's too bad for America. We really should just acknowledge openly that your objectives for Afghanistan are markedly in opposition to ours' and act accordingly.

That would be the honest, open, and sincere relationship that you long for from America. Trust me when I write that I long for it too. Both of our governments need greater honesty when dealing with one another.

 

[Barrett]

whose War is funded by opium ?

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

Patriot and Stewart

What many of us want USA to do is to talk to Taliban and then come up with an exit plan in mutual consultation with Afghanistan and Pakistan.
Taliban were better (please compare based on the ground realities prevalent before the rise of Taliban) than the warlords and that was the reason for their success in Afghanistan, they had a lot of local support which was due to the order they brought instead of the chaos that prevailed after Soviet War.
A man whose clothes are torn would be happy with a simple attire but a man who is used to the best will not be happy in the same clothes...that is the difference between Afghans and the Free (actually read developed not free) world...it is not that Afghans are inferior in mind or body...it is because of the series of terrible events that shook their society and brought every form of progress to a grinding halt...
You judge Taliban by western standards and you see barbarians...
We see the post soviet war slaughter, rape and absolute chaos which was ended with Taliban's ascent...sure they were not gentle and in war committed cruelty but were better than the civil war and constant chaos which the masses were subjected to...at least they attempted a unified governance and were not really following any agenda against the foreign countries.
I know of friends who traveled to corners of Afghanistan in this era because the Taliban had ample control in the country and so there was no more the case of a different set of rules governing one's life around every hill...there was a semblance of a country during their reign and that is why we feel they are not completely evil, demonic or barbarians as they have been made out to be.
Care to read about the current lot in power and you would know what i mean.

Coherence even under the Taliban's mostly severe and strict rules was still better than what was before and what is now...the warlords and drug lords held sway before the Taliban and after them...what has improved?

I disagree with many of Taliban's strict steps and their interpretation of Islam is basic to say the least and heavily influenced by the circumstances prevalent in their country...i am positive that they were desperate for world aid and had the US taken lead in this role of development assistance in Afghanistan at the clear and defined condition of Taliban ensuring that there was no terrorist on their land, it would have been a much more solid plan.
They were seeking money through trade and projects and that is why they were also interested in the oil and gas pipelines to pass through Afghanistan.
Their desires were and still are not beyond Afghanistan.
Al Qaeda is totally different and needs to be weeded out and that made it all the more important to isolate them from Taliban and not brand them as the same.
The Taliban could have been dealt with much more easily by US peacefully and with 20% of the amount spent on this war, the Taliban would not only have been moderated when the money would have flowed in Afghanistan but Osama would have been denied the best diversion he has created in the form of shifting US focus on Taliban who have a lot more support than Osama.
Now the only way to deal with Taliban is to talk to them and make them part of the Afghan government...the only hurdle in this move was the demand of Mullah Omar for the US exit and now that too is no more since US plans to leave anyways...therefore now it is time Obama talks to the Taliban and assure them of US sincerity towards the Afghans and help their economy instead of spending billions on the warlords in NA ranks.

Taliban and Al Qaeda may have found a common cause but they were not the same and that is the only hope for peace in Afghanistan...do not brand them all in the same category just because you hate their overtly strict rule...they are simple hard men but are much better than the Al Qaeda which has highly educated Arabs in its ranks and is still deliberately following a terrorist agenda against the spirit of Islam and causing pain and suffering in all the Muslim world through its nefarious activities.

Look at how the Saudi regime has mellowed down...Taliban were similar in thought and actions to the Saudis.
Their strictness would have slowly melted away as the economics improved had this road been traversed by the free world...instead the free world made fun of the offer of Taliban to try Osama in their courts...what was wrong with this offer, it was a huge thing for Taliban to try their formed guest in their courts and had they given him up everybody would have won and had they defended Osama then most of the current people supporting them would not have accepted this action of supporting terrorism by the Taliban...
All in all accepting this offer was very logical and a win win situation for the free world no matter which way the Taliban decision went...why was it not taken?

Just because a person is not highly educated and from an undeveloped land does not imply that he is a complete oaf and cannot read the writing on the wall...the offer was the best thing for all parties but was rejected and mocked at...instead the attack was launched the very day or next.

So who is laughing now, not me, not US and certainly not Afghans.
George Bush's impatience was the worst thing that could happen to USA and the world by its consequence.

this is a very well written piece. Spot on.

Lets hope sanity prevails in the end!