What's new

Pakistan doesn't reopen border despite US apology

The pro-india Karzai government is not in Pakistan's interest and we've seen that in these past 9 years just like the pro-india pro-soviet government in Afghanistan in the 1970's was never in Pakistan's interest.

What happens in Afghanistan affects Pakistan much more than it affects india. Pakistan shares its 2nd longest running border with Afghanistan while india does not share a single border with Afghanistan.
If you think that Karzai is pro-india, then why don't you help some other leader in Afghanistan to step up. You know that he is the only guy who has somewhat higher confidence amongst the afghan people. The other leader that I see is Adbullah Abdullah who is also pro-India.

You think a weak pro-Pak leader is a better option than a strong pro-Indian? Of course you would... but the matter is that once you have a weak leader at the center, the region will still remain unstable and all these efforts would have gone waste. We will still see threats from this region and its impact will be felt all around the world... more so in Pakistan with whom it shares a long border.
 
.
the blind & distorted fail to see that which is out there which they don't want to see


again, plenty of threads out there to rubbish your claims



http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...-investment-afghanistan-hits-500-million.html


I could bring up hindustanis supporting elements that supported a movement that waged a painful 3-decade-long civil war in Sri Lanka (one that claimed MANY more lives and destruction than the taleban ever could dream of); but....... there's no need to 'mirror' such tom-foolery

I agree with everything that you say my friend and even that india supported LTTE at one point of time. BUT:

Isn't it true that India also sent IPKF to SL for which SL thanks India even today?

Isn't it true that Pakistan supported the taliban, might be with CIA but that doesn't absolve you of your responsibility in taking Afghanistan to the situation in which it finds itself today?

Isn't it true that even today Pakistan espouses the 'cause' of the taliban (read sirajuddin haqqani etc.)

Isn't it true that Pakistan has always classified Taliban into 'Good' and 'Bad'? Good being the ones which operate in afghanistan and bad being the ones which operate in Pakistan?
 
.
Yet again, a diversion with nothing relevant. Please, reply to what I am saying and if you can't comprehend what I am saying then say so.

You started to derail the argument by bringing in support of Indian govt into terrorism inside Pakistan. Lets stick to the point of discussion here.
 
.
i love how nobody is simply talking about pro-Afghan Afghan leader.......
 
.
You started to derail the argument by bringing in support of Indian govt into terrorism inside Pakistan. Lets stick to the point of discussion here.

Nope, it was relevant since Hawkish was claiming that US privately provides evidence to Pakistani government of support of Taliban from ISI. And I brought up an analogy in response to that.
 
.
i love how nobody is simply talking about pro-Afghan Afghan leader.......

Thats true... but the argument was started by Omar about Pakistan supporting a leadership which cannot be pro-India.... The baseline is we all should believe that a stable Afghanistan with whoever is the leader is in the best interests of both India and Pakistan. It really depends on the leader of Afghanistan to decide its loyalties, but at the moment it seems like Afghanistan is going to remain pro-India... doesn't matter if Pakistan likes it or not.
 
.
and even that india supported LTTE at one point of time. BUT:

Isn't it true that India also sent IPKF to SL for which SL thanks India even today?

too little too late I suppose. China (and Pakistan to a lesser degree) jumped in and filled a lot of gaps.


Isn't it true that Pakistan supported the taliban, might be with CIA but that doesn't absolve you of your responsibility in taking Afghanistan to the situation in which it finds itself today?

you give us too much ''credit''

most of their problems are internal issues which nobody can solve except Afghans themselves. We rallied for their cause when Ivan and his red army came in; we lobbied for them even after everybody else washed their hands and abandoned the region subsequent to Ivan's hasty departure.


Isn't it true that even today Pakistan espouses the 'cause' of the taliban (read sirajuddin haqqani etc.)

there are individuals in Pakistan who will openly (for moral, self-serving or other reasons) profess ''loyalty'' or ''admiration'' to taleban

when you say "Pakistan" you should be specific and careful


if you prefer to stand by your statement, for whatever reason, then I'm afraid I'm going to have to inconvenience you by asking for solid proof.


sn't it true that Pakistan has always classified Taliban into 'Good' and 'Bad'?

"Taleban" isn't even a central organization anymore. Anybody can call themself a "taleban"

there are violent elements, fanatic elements, and non-violent and somewhat moderate elements. The real challenge is weeding out the good from the bad, and for the sake of conciliation and representativeness (in my view) perhaps paving the way for ''talks'' with elements that will be willing to bend and compromise a little bit

behind the scenes this is already what will (rather IS) happening; with the blessing of even the U.S.

I don't need to keep re-stating Pakistan Nation's stance on this issue since it is very much clear and transparent. And always has been, for those willing to view things on a broader level, rather than a selective & self-serving (malicious) one.


Good being the ones which operate in afghanistan and bad being the ones which operate in Pakistan?

as Pakistan Nation itself is dealing with terrorist attacks, we have a right (and WILL) act on whomever, wherever, however and "why-ever" based on credible threat assesments and analysis.

our nation is our first and last priority before ANYTHING else --as rightly pointed out by somebody else in this thread.
 
.
Here is my common sense solution to Afghan problem.

1) India move your A*s out of Afghanistan. If you want to help, you are welcome and route the aid through UN. You don't have a border with Afghan

2) Pakistan: Give us Haqanni, Ilyas kasmiri, LeT chief and other Terrorists. Taliban CANNOT be there with their current values- Barbaric treatment of women etc. Be a Moderate Muslims community

3) NATO/US will be stationed till things become smooth

How does this sound?
 
.
Thats true... but the argument was started by Omar about Pakistan supporting a leadership which cannot be pro-India.... The baseline is we all should believe that a stable Afghanistan with whoever is the leader is in the best interests of both India and Pakistan. It really depends on the leader of Afghanistan to decide its loyalties, but at the moment it seems like Afghanistan is going to remain pro-India... doesn't matter if Pakistan likes it or not.

as Afghanistan is land-locked and much of their trade is based on agreements and cooperation with Pakistan (e.g. the use of our highways and ports) it damn-well does matter whether Pakistan "likes" it or not

remember, over 3-4+ million of their refugees (some of which are 2nd generation and born in Pakistan) reside in Pakistan Nation; that in itself gives us reason to have much focus on the war-torn country
 
.
Here is my common sense solution to Afghan problem.

1) India move your A*s out of Afghanistan. If you want to help, you are welcome and route the aid through UN. You don't have a border with Afghan

2) Pakistan: Give us Haqanni, Ilyas kasmiri, LeT chief and other Terrorists. Taliban CANNOT be there with their current values- Barbaric treatment of women etc. Be a Moderate Muslims community

3) NATO/US will be stationed till things become smooth

How does this sound?

Well, India isn't going to agree to point (1), Pakistan isn't going to agree to point (2), NATO/US might have to be stationed for a very very very long time, fighting a constant war of attrition, which will not be palatable to the US, I think.

Hence, the suggestions are not workable :toast_sign:
 
. .
US president needs to make an official declaration that there won't be any further attacks on Pakistan soil by Nato.
 
.
Well, India isn't going to agree to point (1), Hence, the suggestions are not workable :toast_sign:

Is that so? What if you have to choose between Kashmere and Afghan? or
What about choosing between UN seat and Afgan?
We got you by your balls
 
Last edited:
.
US president needs to make an official declaration that there won't be any further attacks on Pakistan soil by Nato.

Do you really think US president will do that? As long as there are safe heavens...It will be issues. Of course we would like to work with our friend and ally Pakistan. If they are not willing to do, all options are on the table for the president
 
.
I have to agree with you here. US is very much of aware of Indian position in Afghanistan and their high number of consulates in Afghanistan. They are in Afghanistan for one strategic reason. It gives them a tremendous control over Pakistan as well as interaction with Iran.

Now the smart thing is: India is accomplishing their strategic goal by social help/Nation building and they are doing it very successfully. By investing in infrastructure etc.

The problem with Pakistan: Using Taliban to achieve while India is doing with social work.

Stark contrast

Pakistan needs to play their card smartly. Yes You need to take care of Interest. No question. How do you do it? That is the point

You nailed it. As simple as that. Every country has right to achieve its strategic objectives, but in constructive way.

India focussed on Afghanisan, while Pakistan focussed on 'India-Focussing-On-Afghanistan' and keeps whining about it....
 
.

Latest posts

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom