Pakistan to launch another Potemkin offensive in North Waziristan

[INDIC]

Lol, they were paying 20,000 USD per container for northern supply routes

Here its 250 USD.

Your figure seems exaggerated. But didn't America announce no supply route, no aid. Just two years back Pakistan got more than $3 Billion aid, now its too less.

 

[airmarshal]

The simple fact that terrorists have successfully based in and terrorized Pakistan for over a decade implies that Pakistani generals aren't the sharpest pencils in the box when it comes to lives, time, and resources, yes?

What are US troops doing in Afghanistan? Vacationing? The terror threat that Pakistan faces today is coming from Afghanistan. These TTP terrorists are finding safe havens in Afghanistan. And your troops haven't done a zilch to remove them.

This war on terror is becoming a farce. US country asks Pakistan to launch offensive against Taliban but at the same time it wants to talk to them. Launching an operation inside Pakistan is Pakistan's prerogative. I would not like to see any aid coming from your country. At the same time, I dont want Pakistan to be engaged in someone else's war. So no to war, no to NATO supplies and NO to drones.

I think Pakistan has done a lot in this war than all the the NATO allies combined. We lost more in economics and lives. We certainly dont deserve respect because if our leaders drag us into unnecessary wars and want us to stay engaged against our will, we deserve what we are getting.

 

[forcetrip]

Dont worry .. Pakistan army is sitting in green zones just like the americans are sitting in theirs..

 

[karan.1970]

Now that was really cute

Thanks

death of soldiers was no play.

For patriotic Pakistanis, yes.. but for politicians on both sides, including Kayani, it was

and its Americans who paid up to their nose for alternate routes.

$ 700 million in 7 months.. upto the nose from a military whose annual budget is $ 700 billion ...Perspective dude...

And didnt they reduce this much amount from the csf due to Pakistan after resumption of the route.. So guess who paid thru the nose..

what were you expecting?
teleportation devices?

a lot changed... fortunes of the Western route holders and conversely the misfortunes of the Yanks. since you see this was as a business transaction so you will understand what I mean.

we didnt try.. we just closed the route for 7 months.. it was never meant to be permanent anyway otherwise we would have disassociated from WoT.

Do elaborate what Pakistan gained from those seven months except losing out close to a billion USD and receiving a half a$$ non apology along with formalization of the fact the Salala was due to faults on both sides ...?

 

[sayyieth]

Pak Soldiers | Facebook

 

[Bratva]

The simple fact that terrorists have successfully based in and terrorized Pakistan for over a decade implies that Pakistani generals aren't the sharpest pencils in the box when it comes to lives, time, and resources, yes?

Replace Pakistan with Afghanistan in first line and Pakistani Generals with American Generals in second line than post makes more sense than. We remeber how your American Generals performed in Vietname War and how They are performing now in Afghanistan for last 11 years.

 

[Irfan Baloch]

Had Pakistan not Opened The Nato Supply Routes, they would have been officially declared Terrorist Country...

yea exactly

and the motion supported by India, Fiji islands and state of Kongo

 

[blain2]

So lets be clear. What guarantees does Pakistan have about our long terms interests in the region/Afghanistan? Why should Pakistan roll the dice and conduct operations in NW, when we know that without any long term understanding with either the US or the Afghans, Pakistan will immediately be rocked by massive suicide bombings, increased militancy in the North (KP and Punjab) of the country, which is the economic bread basket. In the face of already very tight economic conditions, more casualties and expenses to be incurred without having secured any of Pakistan's long term interests does not look like a formula for success from a Pakistani point of view. Yes to the West and ISAF, taking on the militants in Pakistan seems like a good thing, but the reality is that these folks will not give up the fight just like they have not done so in Afghanistan. As it is, the fight against the TTP is in its 6th year. While degraded, they are still around and making their presence felt because they are able to recruit using the cause of foreign occupation in Afghanistan. They fight the Pakistani troops because they consider them to be apostates who side with the US. So for Pakistan, none of the options on the table are very enticing especially when Pakistan's long term concerns are not even being considered. We take another 2-3K killed, thousands more civilians dead, economy further damaged just so the ISAF can claim victory in Afghanistan is not a good bet.

 

[blain2]

The simple fact that terrorists have successfully based in and terrorized Pakistan for over a decade implies that Pakistani generals aren't the sharpest pencils in the box when it comes to lives, time, and resources, yes?

Solomon,

Let me ask you something here. When you use the term "Terrorists" do you understand the connotation there? In Pakistan, we are facing a limited Pashtun insurgency. This is beyond Al-qaida and the so called terrorists. This does not end for Pakistan by killing a few leaders, as has been the case with Al-Qaida which is pretty much dead with OBL gone.

The more we go after established Pashtun tribes, the more recruits they get. The Haqqanis aren't some terrorists. They are Afghans and have significant tribal support on both sides of the border. On top of that, they openly claim that their fight is against "occupation of Afghanistan by foreign forces". Which means that their agenda is much different from that of a "terrorist" of the AQ type who cares to disrupt and generate instability only to make a political statement.

So contrary to your silly assertions about our Generals not being quick on the ball to understand this, they know this much better than you or any of the American generals operating in that theater. You have the luxury to pull out if things hit rock bottom, we don't. We are stuck with this problem in the long term. For Pakistan, Pashtun nationalism is a big problem, and taking on the Haqqani network is bound to inflame this.

The only out is to get the Haqqanis talking to Karzai and the ISAF. For us to fight this war against the Haqqanis for a tactical win for ISAF is essentially digging our own graves at the cost of our national stability and cohesion. Unless the overall situation with regards to Pakistan's security concerns on its Eastern and Western borders is concerned (yes this includes sanctity of Durrand Line as well as insurance against use of Afghanistan as proxy by India), we will remain stuck in this situation which is clearly not good for ISAF, nor Afghans or Pakistan.

 

[Rafi]

Solomon,

Let me ask you something here. When you use the term "Terrorists" do you understand the connotation there? In Pakistan, we are facing a limited Pashtun insurgency. This is beyond Al-qaida and the so called terrorists. This does not end for Pakistan by killing a few leaders, as has been the case with Al-Qaida which is pretty much dead with OBL gone.

The more we go after established Pashtun tribes, the more recruits they get. The Haqqanis aren't some terrorists. They are Afghans and have significant tribal support on both sides of the border. On top of that, they openly claim that their fight is against "occupation of Afghanistan by foreign forces". Which means that their agenda is much different from that of a "terrorist" of the AQ type who cares to disrupt and generate instability only to make a political statement.

So contrary to your silly assertions about our Generals not being quick on the ball to understand this, they know this much better than you or any of the American generals operating in that theater. You have the luxury to pull out if things hit rock bottom, we don't. We are stuck with this problem in the long term. For Pakistan, Pashtun nationalism is a big problem, and taking on the Haqqani network is bound to inflame this.

The only out is to get the Haqqanis talking to Karzai and the ISAF. For us to fight this war against the Haqqanis for a tactical win for ISAF is essentially digging our own graves at the cost of our national stability and cohesion. Unless the overall situation with regards to Pakistan's security concerns on its Eastern and Western borders is concerned (yes this includes sanctity of Durrand Line as well as insurance against use of Afghanistan as proxy by India), we will remain stuck in this situation which is clearly not good for ISAF, nor Afghans or Pakistan.

Excellent response - )

 

[blain2]

Do elaborate what Pakistan gained from those seven months except losing out close to a billion USD and receiving a half a$$ non apology along with formalization of the fact the Salala was due to faults on both sides ...?

What got registered was more important than losing out a billion or ten billion, which is scapegoating us and hitting us directly won't work. That was a red line that was crossed and we registered our protest.

Opening the GLOC was the right thing to do, but not before making others pause and realize that Pakistan would take actions within its power, no matter how limited, when it is threatened or attacked.

If economic relief was the only purpose behind the closure, we would have seen the GLOC opened a long time ago. It clearly was not.

 

[airmarshal]

Solomon,

Let me ask you something here. When you use the term "Terrorists" do you understand the connotation there? In Pakistan, we are facing a limited Pashtun insurgency. This is beyond Al-qaida and the so called terrorists. This does not end for Pakistan by killing a few leaders, as has been the case with Al-Qaida which is pretty much dead with OBL gone.

The more we go after established Pashtun tribes, the more recruits they get. The Haqqanis aren't some terrorists. They are Afghans and have significant tribal support on both sides of the border. On top of that, they openly claim that their fight is against "occupation of Afghanistan by foreign forces". Which means that their agenda is much different from that of a "terrorist" of the AQ type who cares to disrupt and generate instability only to make a political statement.

So contrary to your silly assertions about our Generals not being quick on the ball to understand this, they know this much better than you or any of the American generals operating in that theater. You have the luxury to pull out if things hit rock bottom, we don't. We are stuck with this problem in the long term. For Pakistan, Pashtun nationalism is a big problem, and taking on the Haqqani network is bound to inflame this.

The only out is to get the Haqqanis talking to Karzai and the ISAF. For us to fight this war against the Haqqanis for a tactical win for ISAF is essentially digging our own graves at the cost of our national stability and cohesion. Unless the overall situation with regards to Pakistan's security concerns on its Eastern and Western borders is concerned (yes this includes sanctity of Durrand Line as well as insurance against use of Afghanistan as proxy by India), we will remain stuck in this situation which is clearly not good for ISAF, nor Afghans or Pakistan.

Very well said. But to Americans who want total subjugation of your interests to their myopic ones, this is just a stupid rant from a crazed Pakistani who has been surviving on 'generous' US 'aid'. You take money from them and dont fight their war? How dare you??

 

[graphican]

The simple fact that terrorists have successfully based in and terrorized Pakistan for over a decade implies that Pakistani generals aren't the sharpest pencils in the box when it comes to lives, time, and resources, yes?

If success of terrorists is the parameter to judge, you would need to admit American military officials are rather head-less who have continuously lost more and more territory to Taliban despite of spending 100 times more resources than Pakistan. Do we agree? In case yes, we know where we need to concentrate more and in case no, you have no reason left to blame anybody on this side of the border.

 

[karan.1970]

What got registered was more important than losing out a billion or ten billion, which is scapegoating us and hitting us directly won't work. That was a red line that was crossed and we registered our protest.

Opening the GLOC was the right thing to do, but not before making others pause and realize that Pakistan would take actions within its power, no matter how limited, when it is threatened or attacked.

If economic relief was the only purpose behind the closure, we would have seen the GLOC opened a long time ago. It clearly was not.

May be the registering of the protest was the right thing.. But then the vested interests dragged it along for too long.. and what was once a protest of an angered ally, became the blackmail of a dubious one. Worse, the bluff got called and suddenly the bargaining chip did not remain such a good bargain..

 

[airmarshal]

Well the way things stand right row, CIA has implicitly accepted TTP is the bargaining commodity. They have effectively said to Pakistan to launch operation against Haqqani and we'll do the same against TTP. So they have accepted which many in Pakistan believe to be true - that there is support and encouragement to the fake band of Taliban called TTP.