What's new

Operation Rah-e-Nijat (South Waziristan)

.
"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,

Do i love Taliban, no.

However they were in control not because of their weapons, they were supported by the locals since the locals were sick of the post Soviet war infighting.
Do i say that they did nothing wrong or killed no one, of course i do not...they did many cruel things in their bid to unify the land, however the point is that they did manage to unify the Afghan people and were in control of the country. They were now facing a dilemma of how to sustain their rule and so were in dire need of to aid in reconstruction and all signs are that they were seeking it...this was a window of opportunity even after 9-11.
OBL had no such responsibility or liability but Omar was the Emir of Afghanistan so had to do something about the plight of Afghans even if it was not much.
To gain control US still had to go and hire known thugs of NA who are rotten to the core, because they are locals and US needed local support. Still no real result in gaining the level of control which Taliban had...reason is simple, US action is seen as anti Afghan by many because US went after Taliban.
Taliban represent Afghans or at least significant number of Afghans.
Al Qaeda does not represent Afghans nor would it have been helped by the Afghans except for money which Al Qaeda had a lot of but nothing compared to USA. Al Qaeda would have spent a lot of money but without Taliban becoming the cannon fodder, Al Qaeda could not have sustained the terrorism it has managed to sustain.
The two were made as one and same, one was deliberately following a terrorist agenda despite being highly educated and well financed.
The other group was merely a reaction of the Afghan civil war and promised the Afghans something better and so gained support or at least significant support. This group could have been worked with...
When you brand both the same then you risk Al Qaeda gaining access to millions who see Taliban as their previous government which was turned to dust, the Afghan Shura which came together before the attack on Afghanistan was launched did offer to try Osama in Afghanistan...knowing Afghan pride...this was a huge thing and really a good offer...it was because there were many Taliban who hated OBL and due to the pressure of the world were able to convince Omar to let go of his strictness and show flexibility...this was a hope...
As i have discussed in my recent post, either way the decision of the trial would have not been in favor of Al Qaeda.

Do not assume that i wish Taliban rule over Afghanistan, Taliban ruled over Afghanistan unlike what was before and that is a fact.
My wishes have nothing to do with it.
On this forum many bombard Saudi Arabia but i have seen them evolve to the point that now they are much more tolerant and mild.
This change comes in due time and could have come in Taliban but never in Al Qaeda...because Al Qaeda has chosen terrorism as the only means of its life whereas Taliban were motivated by a national integrity and an agenda to put an end to civil war...the ideology of Taliban was not evil...the ideology of Al Qaeda is purely evil.
The overtly strict Taliban were backwards and not educated but they were in contact even with USA so clearly they were not going to be shy in dealing with USA...Al Qaeda on the other hand would have been doomed had the USA talked to Taliban and inked down an agreement of assistance to Afghan reconstruction at the assurance of dismantling of any and all Al Qaeda operations in Afghanistan.
OBL breathed a sigh of relief when the US attacked the Taliban and branded them one as the same...they are not the same and even your state apparatus acknowledges that in many statements now..

You do not like the Taliban and honestly i am not their fan either, but what then do you attribute the Taliban success to in post Soviet war scenario?
External factor cannot give any party such a firm control of Afghanistan...you have tried that, USSR tried that...it is not possible.
What has come of it?
Even worse than the rule of Taliban...
Speaking of the unification, the Taliban managed to do it where all others failed so does that not merit some understanding or inspection rather than just calling them barbarians and be done with it as has been the wont of all experts?
The free world has no problem with Saudi Arabia which does not fit their standard of governance, so is it not better to deal with Taliban who are ideologically very hard (as Saudis once were) but have displayed the ability to successfully unify Afghanistan.

I wish the Afghans all the best but you at least would know of the NA commanders, ex KHAD hierarchy and all sorts of rubbish which is neither the voice of the people nor is it any less barbaric than what you think of Taliban. To top it all they have failed to do anything like what the Taliban managed to do.
Afghanistan under the Taliban was still better than the Somalia like situation it was under during the post Afghan Jihad era...with NA you guys can spend billions but all leaders follow a different path...with Taliban even 10 billion dollars worth of aid may have gained enough cooperation to deal the most crushing blow to Al Qaeda...my point is that it was never given a chance at all despite the obvious global pressure the Taliban felt and despite the obvious change in their stance when they offered to try OBL...that was a huge change in stance, believe me.

My analysis is Afghanistan specific only and no malice or sadistic joy governs my comments when i say that it would have been better to deal with Taliban diplomatically rather than giving Al Qaeda the opportunity to use them as their foot soldiers in a common cause...

Speaking of Pakistan, we may not be happy with our government but thankfully our circumstances are not the same as Afghans and we still have enough nationalists in our ranks to ensure that the there is no need for any Taliban like movement to unite the land. The TTP is now one of the most hated enemies of Pakistan and that too is our evolution as a nation.
The people in Pakistan have had access to a lot more freedom in this decade and we are slowly maturing into a nation which is conscious of the problems it faces. The power is coming to the people as they realize that they can make a difference. The people forced the government to restore the judiciary and that too is a groundbreaking achievement in our history.

The difference between Omar's Taliban and TTP is not that much in their claimed struggle for Shariah but rather in their practical objectives and that has to be realized when discussing the two.
The Taliban in Afghanistan were nationalistic in their ideology and so they succeeded. This is the sole reason for their support in Afghanistan.
The TTP here are anti nationalist and acting against Pakistan and so are now hated by the Pakistanis whose overwhelming majority is behind the Army Action.
We shall terminate them, inshallah.

We sincerely want USA to help itself, ourselves and Afghans by talking to the Taliban even now and put pressure on Al Qaeda.
Even now Al Qaeda faces hate from most of the Islamic world and that should be used in splitting the two...this will help the entire world.
No good is coming out of treating Omar and Osama alike since it makes them allies...to lethal effect.
They had entirely different motivations for doing what they did.
Osama was the one who attacked USA not Omar.
USA primary mission was Al Qaeda...It is Al Qaeda which wants to wage a global war on USA...it was not Taliban...never did they say that it was their goal to fight a global war with USA before they were attacked.
 
Last edited:
. . .
S-2,


We sincerely want USA to help itself, ourselves and Afghans by talking to the Taliban even now and put pressure on Al Qaeda.
Even now Al Qaeda faces hate from most of the Islamic world and that should be used in splitting the two...this will help the entire world.
No good is coming out of treating Omar and Osama alike since it makes them allies...to lethal effect.

They had entirely different motivations for doing what they did.
Osama was the one who attacked USA not Omar.

USA primary mission was Al Qaeda...It is Al Qaeda which wants to wage a global war on USA...it was not Taliban...never did they say that it was their goal to fight a global war with USA before they were attacked.

Unfortunately, Mullah Omar's track record speaks for itself. He was the one who provided AQ the space to incubate and plan attacks around the world including the one on 9/11. When he was asked to turn over OBL in 2001 , he refused. He has shared the same bed with Al Qaeda for too long - clearly, he and his core group of followers have a symbiotic relationship with Al Qaeda and must be eliminated as well.

However, there are several Taliban factions who are not necessarily ideoligically bound at the hip with Al Qaeda, Mullah Omar and the Greater Salafi Jihadi Network - those are the ones the US/Afghan Govt. could potentially negotiate with and reintegrate within the community.
 
.
Unfortunately, Mullah Omar's track record speaks for itself. He was the one who provided AQ the space to incubate and plan attacks around the world including the one on 9/11. When he was asked to turn over OBL in 2001 , he refused. He has shared the same bed with Al Qaeda for too long - clearly, he and his core group of followers have a symbiotic relationship with Al Qaeda and must be eliminated as well.

However, there are several Taliban factions who are not necessarily ideoligically bound at the hip with Al Qaeda, Mullah Omar and the Greater Salafi Jihadi Network - those are the ones the US/Afghan Govt. could potentially negotiate with and reintegrate within the community.

Omar is not my hero and neither am i trying to glorify him or the Taliban. However he did have some spine in him to unify a war torn country, do you deny this achievement no matter how it came into being?
Omar was in control but had no cash to sustain an Afghan state...OBL had the cash...i see a marriage of necessity and not of love.
If it was love then there is no way Omar would have been pressurized into holding a trial of Osama...even bringing Osama to trial was a huge and unexpected move and i think most Pakistanis know that it is not easily done by the Afghans to treat a guest this way.
I think the Moderate Taliban were strongest at the point in time since the poisonous fruit of OBL's efforts was manifesting itself clearly in form of the threatened US attack on Afghans...this is the time when i am sure even Omar had to realize that supporting OBL was to go down a hell hole...this message was conveyed to him both by Pakistan and his moderate aides who saw the writing on the wall...he changed his mind and swallowed his pride and agreed to hold a trial...and what happened then?

What was gained by not exploring this option when the Taliban agreed to hold a trial?
Did the US not have evidence or was it not after OBL?
US did have proof and OBL was wanted even in Libya and Saudi Arabia...it did not make sense not to carry on with this option.
I do believe OBL is a terrorist and i want him to be caught but was the Taliban offer not something worth considering at all?
I think it was a reasonable option and when people say all efforts were exhausted...i am sorry but not all efforts were exhausted.
Just when the pressure of the world on the Taliban bore its fruit, the attack was launched instead and OBL was given a major part of Afghanistan as his shield against the world...

The Taliban did change their position and this is what i want us all to remember...remember the difference between Al Qaeda and Taliban because that is the key to defeating Al Qaeda...it was then and still is now...especially since Obama has decided to exit Afghanistan...no harm now in talking to Taliban and Omar.
 
.
I think that while there was an argument to be made in favor of supporting a regime like the Taliban in the chaos of Afghanistan post Soviet withdrawal - there is a much weaker case in support of a similar regime now.

While Afghanistan is still not stable (a large part of which is the result of the Taliban insurgency) it is far more stable than it was when civil war broke out after the Soviets left. There is a constitution and democratic institutions for governance, along with security institutions, that can be used as the basis for a stable Afghanistan, even if they are currently weak.

In such an environment the best way forward is for the Taliban to engage in the political process under the existing framework, and not overthrow the system and return to the old Taliban system. The current system is flawed, no doubt about it (the fraudulent elections are an example of why) but reforming some of the flaws (by pushing for a truly independent election commission for example or looking at significant provincial autonomy) could form the basis of Taliban negotiations with the GoA.

Also bear in mind this - the Taliban have been permeated with AQ's virulent and extreme ideology as well, and their commanders in the field at least have had significant cooperation and engagement. These commanders are going to be the ones that wield power in a Taliban regime, even if initially the 'leadership' is represented by people like Mullah Omar and the old guard Taliban. However, given the extreme views of the Neo-Taliban, the old guard will end up either having to succumb to the demands of the Neo-Taliban, be killed in a power struggle, or the Neo-Taliban will wait till the old guard dies off and they can take control.

None of the above paints a positive picture of what a Taliban regime will look like in the future.

I do not see the autocratic Taliban system as being a viable alternative to the current system in Afghanistan in the current environment. The most favorable option now, for everyone with a stake in Afghanistan, is for the Taliban to participate in the political process, and perhaps negotiate with the GoA on certain constitutional and institutional reforms as a precondition to their participation.
 
.
Now can i have any updates on Rah-i-Nijat.

Mods! Please, we have number of other threats for geopolitical discussion. Please leave it just for what its title says.
 
.
Unfortunately, Mullah Omar's track record speaks for itself. He was the one who provided AQ the space to incubate and plan attacks around the world including the one on 9/11. When he was asked to turn over OBL in 2001 , he refused. He has shared the same bed with Al Qaeda for too long - clearly, he and his core group of followers have a symbiotic relationship with Al Qaeda and must be eliminated as well.

However, there are several Taliban factions who are not necessarily ideoligically bound at the hip with Al Qaeda, Mullah Omar and the Greater Salafi Jihadi Network - those are the ones the US/Afghan Govt. could potentially negotiate with and reintegrate within the community.

You need to get your facts straight!

When Omer gave 'refuge' to OBL it was decided that OBL would not plan/execute attacks from Afghanistan on the US. Omer was kept in dark about 9/11 and it is on record that when Omer learnt about 9/11 and the alleged involvement of Al Qaida cum OBL he was quite furious and it is also said that he did put across his view to OBL, but the problem was too soon spoiled when the US came rushing in without giving much time to Omer and party.

It was made clear by Omer that he would not JUST hand over OBL (as per their traditions) and instead would allow OBL to be tried in their courts, which indeed was quite workable as already explained well by All Green.

You would be highly mistaken of you consider Omer and OBL the wheels of the same cart. No doubt now (since 9/11) they have a common cause that's where the US screwed up. The US should have reduced her enemies instead of multiplying them, but unfortunately her strategies gave her the latter, both when it went in Iraq and Afghanistan!
 
.
What i think is that the Army is getting trapped in this "war". It is just what happened with the Soviets.
First they started a so called operation in Swat then in Waziristan, some day it may be start in lahore and karachi.
What they should be doing instead of fighting individuals is to cut there supply chain of arms and armanent. Not only will this force them to give up their arms but it will also put a hold on the suicide bombs.
 
.
You need to get your facts straight!

When Omer gave 'refuge' to OBL it was decided that OBL would not plan/execute attacks from Afghanistan on the US. Omer was kept in dark about 9/11 and it is on record that when Omer learnt about 9/11 and the alleged involvement of Al Qaida cum OBL he was quite furious and it is also said that he did put across his view to OBL, but the problem was too soon spoiled when the US came rushing in without giving much time to Omer and party.

It was made clear by Omer that he would not JUST hand over OBL (as per their traditions) and instead would allow OBL to be tried in their courts, which indeed was quite workable as already explained well by All Green.

You would be highly mistaken of you consider Omer and OBL the wheels of the same cart. No doubt now (since 9/11) they have a common cause that's where the US screwed up. The US should have reduced her enemies instead of multiplying them, but unfortunately her strategies gave her the latter, both when it went in Iraq and Afghanistan!

Just to add, the current alliance between Taliban and Al Qaeda is out of necessity and not of love for each other, they need each other for survival, I bet if US did leave, we will be seeing AQ gone from here also as Taliban will not repeat the same mistake again and even currently western news sources are reporting that AQ guys are shifting to newer locations, most favorably to Somalia.
 
.
i think Iraq blunder can officially go down as one of the biggest blunders of all mankind.

the policy advisors and strategists have done little justice for american credibility


as for Mullah Omar, lets look to today. He has clearly made the distinction that he and his factionalized group want nothing to do with TTP as their goals and objectives are completely mis-matched

we can all agree that the foreign jihadys were and still are a REAL threat, and it was huge mistake of taleban government to have allowed them to settle and use Afghanistan as one base for AQ (like Somalia and Sudan).

We and the Saudis asked Mullah Omar to not give refuge to OBL, and this was after twin blasts of US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.

Then it takes us to 9/11. Mullah Omar did clearly say that if it is proven OBL carried out these terrorist attacks, he would be remanded by the courts.

The foreign fighters have abused and exploited traditional Pakhtun culture --which demands that you give hospitality even to your enemy -- if he asks for haven. Things on the ground are changing and this centuries old tradition will be lost, no thanks to these terrorist element.


i think there is no need to doubt about a joint political and military approach, because that is already what is going on. Once Afghanistan stablizes, so will Pakistan. And that will only happen once the environment is CONDUCIVE for peace.

This is no different than when the soviets were in Afghanistan. And it will end up ending the same way. Best thing that financially endowed countries can do is invest in Afghanistan's schools, hospitals and institutions. Crush the drugs trade, which is funding a lot of this terrorism. Don't give credence to corrupt warlords (or politicians who deal with them) -- these people have worse human rights records than even talebans do.


2001 was the time to do this.......not wait 8 years for the anger and resentment to build up -- with distractions in Iraq coming in between.

Americans can easily pull out and send their troops home comfortably. We are the ones in this neighbourhood who deal with the fall-out. And it never helps to have certain nearby enemy countries exploit the situation and support anti-Pakistan elements.


it really is the time to get ruthless, and demand that if people are not with Pakistan -- then get out of our way or fight us directly. It takes strong and clear-headed leadership
 
. .
7 killed in forces’ air raids in Orakzai

Updated at: 1045 PST, Saturday, December 05, 2009

PESHAWAR: At least seven miscreants lost their lives during security forces’ air strikes in parts of Orakzai Agency on Saturday morning Geo news reported.

According to sources, forces’ gunship choppers pounded militants hideouts located in many areas of agency including Shekhan, Mishti, Ghaljo and Damburi which resulted in the deaths of seven miscreants meanwhile, 11 others also sustained injuries during air offensive.

Also, five sanctuaries of the brother of Hakimullah Mehsud were shelled while three vehicles were ripped apart amid operation, sources said.

Still, the migration of local people from Orakzai and Kurram Agencies is underway owing to skirmishes between militants and forces, sources revealed.
 
.
While these 2 videos were posted by an Afghan to defame Pakistan (and he failed to do so), they are in fact good excerpts of a clearing op in Buner by army and SSG and firing range practice by FC.

********.com - Pakistan Army Patrolling Tribal Areas After a firefight

********.com - Pakistan Army Stages a Firefight.

Enjoy!
 
.
Back
Top Bottom