Operation Rah-e-Nijat (South Waziristan)

[PAFAce]

Question 1:

If the TTP is not fit for us, what makes you think it's good enough for the Afghans?

Answer:
Not provided.

Question 2:

What makes you think that i have said that?

Answer:

Steve you would prefer a Pakistan focused TTP leader and Pakistanis want an Afghanistan focused TTP leader

Just assumed from your claim that maybe you think that an Afghanistan focused TTP would be preferrable to you.

By the way, doc, loved the rest of your post. Agree with it, all except the PsyOps part (what happened there?). Afghanistan did not deserve to suffer through a decade of war so that the Americans could say "don't mess with us" to the world. There's something not right about a country claiming that they will "defend the basic rights of men" and at the same time say "you're either with us or against us". Hypocricy, I believe, is what this is.

Heck I was discussint this with a friend the other day. If you think about it, the Afghan war is essentially a hissy-fit gone badly, badly wrong. Unfortunately, when elephants throw fits, the entire circus comes tumbling down.

 

[Dr-Sangeen]

I have been contributing to this forum for almost two months now. During this i time i have fought with the sheer arrogance of the moderators and admins of this forum.

The final straw was when they closed my welcome thread, as some of my friends were posting there.

I asked them for a reason and the reply was and i quote " i shall consider myself lucky that it was allowed for that long..."

No I don't consider myself lucky at all, they shall consider themselves lucky that people, like myself, waste their time by posting on this web page.

As far as i am concern if my welcome thread is not good enough to be here then they don't deserve to have my other contributions to this forum either.

Hence i am withdrawing all my posts from this forum.

 

[fatman17]

US State Dept digitally updates Bin Laden’s photo

WASHINGTON: The US State Department on Friday updated its 1998 file photo of Al Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden, digitally altering it due to a decade’s aging and possible changes in his facial hair. There is a $ 25 million bounty on bin Laden’s head for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on US soil and the 1998 US embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya. He is now 52 and is believed to be hiding in the mountains of the lawless Pakistan-Afghanistan border, although his exact whereabouts are unknown since late 2001. ap

 

[fatman17]

The Taliban

Dawn Editorial

Friday, 15 Jan, 2010

The recent video showing Hakeemullah Mehsud seated next to the Jordanian suicide bomber makes nonsense of the American claim that while the Pakistani state’s actions against the TTP are a start, the real work against groups such as the Quetta shura and the Haqqani network is yet to begin.

Is Hakeemullah Mehsud dead? History suggests we must wait until we can know for sure: the TTP leader has risen from the ‘dead’ before. But two observations are in order. First, even if Hakeemullah has been killed, it does not mean the TTP will automatically collapse.

When Baitullah Mehsud was killed last August, there was much speculation about rifts within the TTP and whether it was possible to find a replacement leader as charismatic and deadly as Baitullah. But soon enough the talk of dissent died down and Hakeemullah rose to become a fearsome leader. True, Operation Rah-i-Nijat has deprived the TTP of its ‘centre of gravity’ in South Waziristan and caused its leadership to scatter, but the army itself acknowledges that counter-insurgency operations against the TTP must go on. The TTP is not a spent force yet.

The second point is for the Americans. While Pakistan has been blamed for making a good Taliban/bad Taliban distinction, the fact is the Americans have long had their own ‘order of preference’: the Afghan Taliban have been of more concern to the Americans than the Pakistani Taliban. So if the Pakistan Army’s distinction has been wrong and misguided (as it has been), so has the Americans’. It makes little sense for the Americans to tell Pakistan that there is no such thing as ‘good’ Taliban because all Taliban are the same when the Americans are themselves busy making distinctions according to their own agenda in the region.

The recent video showing Hakeemullah Mehsud seated next to the Jordanian suicide bomber who attacked a CIA base in Khost makes nonsense of the American claim that while the Pakistani state’s actions against the TTP are a ‘start’, the ‘real’ work against groups such as the Quetta shura and the Haqqani network is yet to begin.

Clearly, the Americans have extended some cooperation to Pakistan in the fight against the TTP: Baitullah Mehsud was killed in a drone strike, military equipment was rushed to Pakistan to aid its counter-insurgency operations over the last year and aerial surveillance has been shared. The problem though is the way the Americans and the Pakistani sides approach the Taliban problem: each is obsessed with only part of the Taliban ‘spectrum’ and looks at the rest as incidental to its concerns. But the distinctions are artificial and meaningless in many respects — there are only Taliban, and they need to be defeated.[/B]

 

[S-2]

"...i did not mean exactly you i meant US Army stationed in Afghanistan."

Consider my thoughts as paralleling, unofficially, the views of my serving peers too. I'd be stunned to find a minute minority-much less the entire U.S. Army in Afghanistan as generally eager to see the TTP continue their destruction and mayhem.

Nobody I know finds pleasure or relief by what's being experienced in the streets and villes of Pakistan and, actually, I rather am appalled that you might reach some conclusion as that.

In fact, I'm wondering if you've an insidious agenda designed to promote discord and further antagonism between America and Pakistan.

I hope that's not the case for a man of your professed scholarship.

Thanks.

 

[fatman17]

Pakistan Security Brief - January 15, 2010

New reports indicate Hakimullah Mehsud injured in a fresh drone strike on Friday; Pakistan’s Interior Minister reports on Ashura blast in Karachi; roadside bomb kills Mohmand peace committee members; five bullet-ridden bodies found in Orakzai Agency; strikes called throughout Balochistan; US indicts three individuals on terrorism charges.

It is still unclear as to whether TTP commander Hakimullah Mehsud is alive. Updated reports suggest the TTP commander may have been injured or killed in a new drone attack launched Friday in South Waziristan. Prior to Friday’s report, TTP spokesman Tariq Aziz claimed the leader was alive and an audio tape believed to be from Mehsud surfaced. However, the tape provided no details indicating that Mehsud recorded the tape after the strike.[1]

Interior Minister Rehman Malik claims there is sufficient evidence to link Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, Tehrik-i-Taliban Pakistan, Jaish-i-Muhammad, and Al Qaeda to the Ashura blast on December 28 that killed 45 people. According to the report, the four groups formed a “network” that was behind the terrorist operation.[2]

An anti-Taliban peace committee chief, Muhammad Akbar, was killed by a roadside bomb in Mohmand Agency on Thursday. One other person was killed and seven were wounded from the blast as the group traveled through Dorbakhel. A local TTP spokesman for the Mohmand area claimed responsibility for the attack.[3]

Bodies of five suspected militants, all containing multiple gunshot wounds, were discovered in the Darra Adam Khel region, which is located in Orakzai Agency. Pakistani troops have been conducting operations against militants in the region recently, but Pakistani officials deny any involvement in the killings.[4]

 

[S-2]

"What i mean is the fact that Taliban brought peace to war torn Afghanistan, albeit with an iron fist, but a much need iron fist."

You've an interesting view of bringing peace between 1994-2001. Let me offer one brief mitigation to your notion of peace and a certain confirmation of your notion of iron fist, if you don't mind-

Human Rights Watch-Hazara

"opium eradication without any international support."

This is an especially interesting comment devoid of perspective. Let me explain via this document-

Afghan Opium Survey 2009 Summary Findings-UNODC

I'll refer you to the chart on page 1 of the document. Doc, can you explain how the taliban permitted four years of consecutive increases in the cultivation of opium between 1996 when they seized power and culminating with a peak in 1999 (inclusive) when Afghanistan set a then world record for cultivation of opium?

I ask this given the rapidity with which they mastered the opium scourge in 2001. Could this not have happened immediately? Or in 1997? Or in 1998? Or in 1999? Frankly, even 2000, which was only slightly less than 1999?

I'm confused. One might presume that the taliban found financial and tactical advantage to permitting that heinous trade which overcame any moral compunctions against such, wouldn't you agree?

Would you care to guess the impact upon the deluded simple opium farmers in 2001 when the taliban reversed their policies overnight? Horrific as I understand matters. They drove those farmers to their knees and without warning.

Finally, if you wouldn't mind, the chart on the following page (page 2) shows the afghan opium status by province today. Opium is a virtual non-issue throughout much of Afghanistan-except in those areas of traditional pashtu lands that also mirror the heartland of the taliban such as Kandahar, Helmand, Nimroz, Oruzgan, and Zabul...maybe Farah. Particularly Helmand, Oruzgan, and Kandahar where over 98,000 planted hectares of 123,000 total in Afghanistan reside.

Look at that carefully, please. Three provinces with over 80% of the current production. One is the source province (Oruzgan) of Mullah Omar and from which the taliban emerged and the other two the bastions of their support today.

A correlation exists, no?

So...bullsh!t.

Opium is a tactical weapon of the taliban that is used at their convenience and discarded when it becomes an impediment. In 2001, the taliban decided there was more money to be made by eradication and reconciliation with an estranged internat'l community than by continued cultivation. So the taliban did so at the immediate harsh expense of those unwitting farmers whom they'd led by the nose through five sum total years previous of opium cultivation.

"After 9/11 they offered a trial for Bin Laden in Afghanistan."

After 9/11 we offered war if they didn't surrender him immediately and forthwith. Their intent was dissemblance. So's yours.

"They asked for proof of Bin Laden's involvement from USA that USA did not give them, even though they had given the proof to everyone else that was even slightly interested."

Look on the FBI most wanted sheet. See 9/11 on it? No need. He's wanted for a bevy of crimes previous. We attacked Afghanistan to depose the taliban. OBL was already on our radar. The taliban just made themselves a convenient hors d'oeuvre.

OBL Most Wanted-FBI

"... still just attacking Afghanistan was a bad idea..."

That's your opinion. Others might not agree. I know I wouldn't.

"...and did it not turn AQ into a global phenomenon, an immortal enemy?"

Only among those pre-disposed to cheer for such a beast in any case.

"To this date no one has come up with concrete proof of Bin Laden's involvement in 9/11"

Personally I rather like the video confession of his as ample evidence but it's irrelevant. Should we capture and bring him to court (not), he'll be accused off the present and very adequate charge sheet.

"...let alone Taliban's involvement who openly condemned the attacks."

The taliban's involvement reaches far beyond 9/11. They'd offered safe haven to a man wanted for attacks on American facilities in Yemen, Dar-es-salaam and Nairobi well before 9/11.

Bring some better ammunition to our next spat. You appear unbalanced in your views and unprepared to really spar adequately. I almost felt sorry for you reading that but...alas, there's no crying allowed for big boys and Ph.Ds.

Thanks.

 

[Xeric]

well he is a bad leader and is not only barking at the wrong tree but he is busy barking in a wrong jungle altogether.

Steve you would prefer a Pakistan focused TTP leader and Pakistanis want an Afghanistan focused TTP leader

Since this goombah has hit on CIA and is on run now, i will prefer a leader on run rather a leader out on revenge.

..and that would qualify him to stay alive, right!

Sooper!

 

[Xeric]

S-2, guud try, but still much of it remained wanting.

 

[S-2]

"S-2, guud try, but still much of it remained wanting..."

As opposed to what, exactly, sir-your own pre-conceived prejudices or the good doctor's skewed and incomplete grasp of the facts?

I'm fine but I do appreciate the encouragement.

Thanks.

 

[Xeric]

"S-2, guud try, but still much of it remained wanting..."

As opposed to what, exactly, sir-your own pre-conceived prejudices or the good doctor's skewed and incomplete grasp of the facts?

I'm fine but I do appreciate the encouragement.

Thanks.

Say whatever you want to, but (as an appetizer) you still failed to convince the world that why the FBI website doesnt accuse UBL for 9/11?!

 

[Condor]

Its best that HakeemUllah stays alive and stays in command of TTP.

Specially after his success in Chapman endeavour.

Thanks for saying out loud, something that could be almost suicidal here. If only the Pakistanis knew how to play the game better
This Rah e Najat is not najat for Pakistan but Najaat from Pakistan.
And do not worry too much about S-2 He's just another.........., probably sits in the room next door to the 'Drone Operator's in Langley Virginia.

 

[S-2]

"And do not worry too much about S-2 He's just another..........,"

another..., guy who's forgotten more than you'll likely ever know?

"...probably sits in the room next door to the 'Drone Operator's in Langley Virginia."

Probably.

Thanks.

 

[Dr-Sangeen]

I have been contributing to this forum for almost two months now. During this i time i have fought with the sheer arrogance of the moderators and admins of this forum.

The final straw was when they closed my welcome thread, as some of my friends were posting there.

I asked them for a reason and the reply was and i quote " i shall consider myself lucky that it was allowed for that long..."

No I don't consider myself lucky at all, they shall consider themselves lucky that people, like myself, waste their time by posting on this web page.

As far as i am concern if my welcome thread is not good enough to be here then they don't deserve to have my other contributions to this forum either.

Hence i am withdrawing all my posts from this forum.

 

[Dr-Sangeen]

I have been contributing to this forum for almost two months now. During this i time i have fought with the sheer arrogance of the moderators and admins of this forum.

The final straw was when they closed my welcome thread, as some of my friends were posting there.

I asked them for a reason and the reply was and i quote " i shall consider myself lucky that it was allowed for that long..."

No I don't consider myself lucky at all, they shall consider themselves lucky that people, like myself, waste their time by posting on this web page.

As far as i am concern if my welcome thread is not good enough to be here then they don't deserve to have my other contributions to this forum either.

Hence i am withdrawing all my posts from this forum.