AgNoStiC MuSliM
ADVISORS
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2007
- Messages
- 25,259
- Reaction score
- 87
- Country
- Location
Yes to the first question -under Daud an Afghan Lashkar was sent to try and occupy parts of FATA, and attempts were also made to stoke separatist rebellions in FATA - both failed. During the times of Soviet influence in Afghanistan, Khad/KGB also carried out numerous terrorist attacks in Pakistani cities.Did Afghanistan invaded Pakistan in the PAST? Did it took advantage of our vulnerable moments during our wars with India?
It does not have to be fenced, the Afghans have to simply abide by the Durand Agreement signed by their rulers and accept Pakistani sovereignty over the areas governed by Pakistan currently.I know that the case of Durand Line is complicated. However, why Durand Line has not been fenced since independence?
Again, fencing is not the issue - acceptance of Pakistani sovereignty and abiding by an international agreement is.Forget about Afghan Pakhtoons for a moment. Do Pakistani pakhtoons have problem with this fencing of Durand Line?
The use of Afghanistan to destabilize Pakistan, and the impact of a civil war in Afghanistan on Pakistan (millions of refugees etc.) justifies our intervention in Afghanistan.Border disputes do not justify our support for extremist elements in Afghanistan.
Much larger states, different dynamics.India and China have border disputes too. These states do not try to overrun each other by using extremist proxies over these matters.
My point is that supporting Taliban has done us no good either. Taliban gave sanctury to arab terrorists, which led to US invasion and vice versa.
Had Taliban handed over OBL and his goons to US, this mess would not have happened. Pakistani authorities also requested Taliban leadership to hand over OBL to US, but Taliban leadership showed a middle finger in response.
And you are contended with supporting these kinds of proxies which do not listen to even our demands?
The Taliban in fact did offer to shift OBL to a neutral country to be brought to trial. It was a very reasonable proposal - the US refused to consider it.
So long as Pakistan is not threatened by Afghanistan, I fail to see what the issue is with his views.Mullah Zaeef: "We are not against India. There are people who encourage India to do something against Pakistan in Afghanistan, and in the same way, there are people who encourage Pakistan to do something against India. They share a long border. If India and Pakistan have problems, they should sort it out there."
Q: "You called ISI [i.e. the Inter-Services Intelligence of the Pakistan military] a global evil. You seem to be angry with Pakistan."
Mullah Zaeef: "The ISI would say one thing to the Americans and the opposite to the Taliban. When the U.S. wanted the Taliban to hand Osama [bin Laden] over to them [after 9/11], Pakistan emboldened the Taliban by assuring that Pakistan would stand by the Taliban under any circumstances. Even today Pakistan's policy is not good for Afghans. The ISI should not have done anything wrong here. But, unfortunately, they are still doing a lot of wrong things. They arrested Afghan people and sold them to the Americans "
Check this interview: MEMRI Mobile - - Former Taliban Ambassador to Pakistan Mullah Abdul Salam Zaeef
These are the views of a prominent Taliban figure. Get the picture?
He is sheltering Baluch terrorists, there cannot be any more damning evidence than the embassy cables - Musharraf was screaming this for years, to the world and to the US. And the Americans would have us believe that the first they heard of it was in a 'chat with Karzai'. The guy is being sheltered under their noses in Kabul, we are telling the Yanks where he is, and they claim that this is the first they knew of it. Utter BS and lies.Regarding Karzai: Pakistan needs to send a strong message to this clown that if he would shelter balochi terrorists, he would face severe consequences.
The US and Karzai are clearly in cahoots in sheltering Baluch terrorists, and I see no reason why Pakistan should trust either of them.
Great - if they do accomplish what they are setting out to do, there will be no civil war, and 'Plan B or Plan C' will never be put to use.Did you checked the link provided by me?
ISAF objectives
NATO-ISAF, as part of the overall International Community effort, and as mandated by the United Nations Security Council, is working with Afghanistan to create the conditions whereby the Government of Afghanistan is able to exercise its authority throughout Afghanistan.
Transition
Transition Inteqal in dari and pashtu - is the process by which responsibility for Afghanistan will be gradually handed over to the Afghan leadership 1.
At the London Conference in January 2010, the Afghan Government and the International Community pledged to the development of a plan for transition, which they later endorsed at the follow-up Kabul Conference in July 2010.
Implementation of this plan is scheduled to start in the spring of 2011 and it is expected that, by the end of 2014, the Afghan authorities will have taken the lead throughout the country. As Afghan leadership expands, NATO-ISAFs presence in Afghanistan will evolve progressively from a mentoring to an enabling and sustaining role, beyond 2014, until that time whereby the Afghan leadership is capable of taking full responsibility for its country.
We have learnt our lesson and we are pursuing a different strategy that incorporates engagement with the various power centers in Afghanistan.So we have not learned our lesson yet?
Once again, supporting anti-NATO Taliban is not the solution to our problem. This strategy has already backfired upon us.
Do you think that WORLD will be silent spectator to our role in bringing back Taliban to power once again, regardless of any reason? Their will be serious ramifications for us.
Pakistan needs to actively engage US and Afghan government to chalk out an appropriate solution for Afghan problem which is acceptable to all sides.
In due time - I don't see the US/Afghanistan handing over a known terrorist leaders being sheltered in Kabul to Pakistan anytime soon, nor do I see the US taking any sort of military action to eliminate the Taliban groups led by Qari Zia-ur-Rehman and Mullah Fazlullah hiding in Eastern Afghanistan and carrying out attacks in Bajaur and Mohmand.However, we need to do something about Haqani Network as well.
As long as we will keep these kinds of proxies, tensions will continue to increase between US, Afghan government, and Pakistan.
If we feel justified in taking action against extremist groups (TTP and its cohorts) challenging us; The ISAF feels justified in taking action against extremist groups (Haqani and Co.) challenging its mission.
Where is the pressure on the US to eliminate threats to Pakistan from terrorists?
Where is the condemnation of the US for sheltering terrorists in Afghanistan?