Pakistan's War - Documentaries

[MastanKhan]

Anwar,

How are you doing today? Children should not play with fire, if they don't want to get their clothes catch fire and get burned---but then why would they be called children----because kids do things because, how they think.

But then comes a change in the surrounding areas----things happen that the kids don't have any control over----times moves forward at a lightning speed----the child has to grow up to an adult and accept responsibility of his inactions. The old loyalties are thrown aside---the sense of self preservation takes hold---law of nature supercedes the alliances of convenience---neccessity takes precedence over survival---RHETORIC AND BANTER IS LEFT FOR THE FEW LIKE YOU.

Pakistan has once again become a land for the pakistanis and not for any and every reject radicals of their respective countries. The transition is not an easy one----the price for moving ahead, cutting off old alliances and chosing ones own destiny is extremely difficult and the responsibility of the burden is extremely heavy. The walk is not through a bed of roses but rather a bed of coals with fires burning hot charring and singing the skin.

The suicide bombings, the talibanization, the murder of innocent people is how we are being paid back by the very people to whom we gave a place to live and start up a new life. These very rejects, to whom, their own motherlands kicked them out of their land----we gave them a place to live----a place called home----where they could start up a new life---marry, have children---plough the land and make a life for themselves---The Zawahiris---the Bin Ladens---and their cohorts---.

These are the people who are the true criminals---the true enemies of the muslims---the true killers of the muslims of afghanistan---pakistan----the killers of the children----it was because of them that the americans invaded afghanistan---if the top two had killed themselves ( committed suicide ) and laid their lives----because they had already done what they wanted to---afghanistan would have been spared----but the arabs being arabs----didnot foresee the consequences of their actions---.

Why didn't this yemeni Bin Laden and the egyptian Zawahiri do what they had to do from their own parent countries----why did they not bring the wrath of Allah on their own nations of birth---they were a guest---a people who were given sanctuary when they had no home----they were given a home when they had no place to live----they were given a place to live when everyone kicked them out of their place of birth---they had no honour----they had no compassion---they had no soul---they had no morals---the quranic verses they recited were meaningless----they killed their own and seeked pleasure---they tortured their own and enjoyed every moment of it---they slaughtered the prisoners in the most inhuman manner and called for Allah's blessings upon themselves----these people are truly mentally sick and there is only one place for them.

The sad part is that pakistani administration and the pakistanis in general---had to grow up real fast---from adolescense to and adult was rather too fast for them----that is why there are GROWING PAINS. That is what we are going through right now----trying to learn to act and operate like adult nations---trying to understand to leave the brotherhood of islam where it belongs and take up the pakistan first anthem as a priority.

 

[fatman17]

Zbigniew Bzrezinski Holds Forth on Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan

By Spencer Ackerman 1/8/09

Former Carter administration National Security Adviser Zbigniew Bzrezinski has moved far to the left over the past several decades — and in particular over the last eight years, when he’s become downright combative — and so today it’s interesting to hear him talk about four distinct but somewhat linked issues: Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan. He immediately warns against war with Iran, something he fears could unite all four challenges. “We must think seriously [about] the consequences of our actions,” he says. Uh, true enough. OK, disaggregation time.

Iraq: “We have now terminated the debate about whether there should or should not be a fixed date for U.S. disengagement,” he says, citing the Status of Forces Agreement. But a “military departure alone” just requires “serious regional consultations” with all of Iraq’s neighbors for shaping the post-occupation environment — that means Iran, Turkey, Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan. He wants the consultations to come ahead of disengagement so that “an incipient regional security approach and consensus” can mitigate potential security deterioration. Mowaffaq al-Rubaie, the longtime Iraqi “national security adviser,” is on this panel, so it’ll be interesting to see what he says here. Anyway that leads to Iran.

Iran: Precondition-heavy negotiations amount to starting from the finish line, so it’s a non-starter. Zbig prefers “mutual concessions” to start talks: nuclear enrichment suspensions for sanctions suspensions. Also, don’ threaten Iran if you want anything but Iranian intransigence.

Afghanistan: Avoid the mistakes of the Soviet Union. Namely “they came to Afghanistan with the illusion they could replicate the Soviet Union with the help of Afghan Marxists” with little domestic support, while occupation “increasingly galvanized” opposition “that, in the end, even 160,000 Soviet troops could not crush.” He’s seemingly agnostic on President-elect Barack Obama’s desired troop increase — he says that “some” added troops are needed — emphasizing instead the importance of winning Afghan popular support. If the United States loses that, then game over, and the war is “turning in the direction of the Soviet experience.” The solution is to negotiate “decentralized political agreement” with non-eschatologically-minded Taliban. If possible. He doesn’t know whether it is.

Pakistan: “We have neither the understanding nor the physical means to solve the problems of Afghanistan,” he says. As Afghanistan goes south, so will Pakistan. He doesn’t have really anything to say about Pakistan distinctly. But there you go. It’s a fairly good summary of the pessimistic wing of 2008-vintage progressive thinking.

 

[beetel]

Anwar,

How are you doing today? Children should not play with fire, if they don't want to get their clothes catch fire and get burned---but then why would they be called children----because kids do things because how they think.

But then comes a change in the surrounding areas----things happen that the kids don't have any control over----times moves forward at a lightning speed----the child has to grow up to an adult and accept responsibility of his inactions. The old loyalties are thrown aside---the sense of self preservation takes hold---law of nature supercedes the alliances of convenience---neccessity takes precedence over survival---RHETORIC AND BANTER IS LEFT FOR THE FEW LIKE YOU.

Pakistan has once again become a land for the pakistanis and not for any and every reject radicals of their respective countries. The transition is not an easy one----the price for moving ahead, cutting off old alliances and chosing ones own destiny is extremely difficult and the responsibility of the burden is extremely heavy. The walk is not through a bed of roses but rather a bed coals with fires burning hot charring and singing the skin.

The suicide bombings, the talibanization, the murder of innocent people is how we are being paid back by the very people to whom we gave a place to live and start up a new life. These very rejects, to whom their own motherlands kiccked them out of their land----we gave them a place to live----a place called home----where they could start up a new life---marry, have children---plough the land and make a life for themselves---The Zawahiris---the Bin Ladens---and their cohorts---.

These are the people who are the true criminals---the true enemies of the muslims---the true killers of the muslims of afghanistan---pakistan----the killers of the children----it was because of them that the americans invaded afghanistan---if they top two had killed themselves and laid their lives----because they had already done what they wanted to---afghanistan would have been spared----but the arabs being arabs----didnot foresee the consequences of their actions---.

Why didn't this yemeni Bin Laden and the egyptian Zawahiri do what they had to do from their own parent countries----why did they not bring the wrath of Allah on their own nations of birth---they were a guest---a people who were given sanctuary when they had no home----they were given a home when they had no place to live----they were given a place to live when everyone kicked them out of their place of birth---they had no honour----they had no compassion---they had no soul---they had no morals---the quranic verses they recited were meaningless----they killed their own and seeked pleasure---they tortured their own and enjoyed every moment of it---they slaughtered the prisoners in the most inhuman manner and called for Allah's blessings upon themselves----these people are truly mentally sick and there is only one place for them.

The sad part is that pakistani administration and the pakistanis in general---had to grow up real fast---from adolescense to and adult was rather too fast for them----that is why there are GROWING PANGS. That is what we are going through right now----trying to learn to act and operate like adult nations---trying to understand to leave the brotherhood of islam where it belongs and take up the pakistan first anthem as a priority.

The best post I have read in this forum thanks

 

[All-Green]

I think the name of Islam is being abused by these bloodthisty miscreants.

Whereas I maintain that US and Pakistan interests are not the same (a natural thing with two nations especially of predominantly different faiths) it does not mean that we do not clean our house.

US also has been responsible for a proxy war and covert operations so they are also jointly responsible for a lot of mess in these areas. But they are continents away and can have the luxury to go back. We are here to stay. This is our homeland and we cannot afford to be lax!

We cannot neglect non state actors who like to set everything on fire.
Never in the history of Islam did such an anti state movement go unpunished severely by the state.
Be it the Mehdi uprisings in North Africa, Berber uprisings in Spain, Kharjis etc.
everyone claimed to be the champion of righteousness but ended up wreaking havoc on the ordinary muslims.

Muslim principles do not allow Muslim Soldiers to kill Women, Children and even harm trees in the territory of our enemies (instructions of first Caliph of Islam).
What Islam is being followed by these miscreants who are propagating suicide attacks agains all citizens of Pakistan?

Does anyone agree with the tactics being deployed by these self proclaimed champions of Islam who love to kill fellow Muslims/civilians without any remorse?
We are all living in fear of the suicide bombs but the fact that these people are being used in the name of Islam further disgusts me.
Why are we going down this road?
What are these miscreants going to achieve in terms of Justice, Social Welfare, equality and peace (THe basic pillars of any Muslim state)?
Does anyone think they can achieve these things with AK-47s?
Ok our governments have also not provided these things i totally agree but these miscreants are destroying what little was done and dragging everyone down to the abyss with them.

I really do feel that there are foreign elements fuelling the fire here and there but still what about the brainwashed 15 year old children wearing suicide vests, are they all foreigners?
Do we abandon our children to the terrorists in order to be brainwashed and throw their lives away?
They are our children too and need to be rescued from the clutches of the crazy people who are using them as cannon fodder!

Once we are united and strong, nobody can interfere in our internal affairs and influence our land, but to be strong and unified can we ignore this state within a state?

Many US interests shall be served here but by dealing with the miscreants we shall also secure a safer Pakistan for all the peace loving people living here who want to lead a normal life instead of living under fear.
We are Muslims and not afraid to die but we should not delude ourselves that these miscreants are fighting for Islam or protecting the Muslims.
The real agenda of these miscreants is unknown to me but so far it has been totally against Muslims, especially in Pakistan.

Let us fight the battle for our country and only then we can deal effectively with external threats.

A strong united Pakistan would have to be respected by USA/world even if they do not see eye to eye on many issues. Only once a nation is divided can it be dictated by foreign powers.

 

[fatman17]

ASIA PACIFIC

Date Posted: 05-Jan-2009

Jane's Defence Weekly

Afghan provinces call for Coalition troops to focus on Pakistan border

Brooks Tigner JDW NATO and EU Affairs Correspondent - Brussels

Coalition troops in Afghanistan are needed most along the country's border with Pakistan to fight the Taliban - and not in its cities, say the governors of two Afghan provinces close to the border.

Kunar governor Sayed Fazlullah Wahidi said in Brussels on 15 December: "We don't need ISAF [the 50,000-strong NATO-led International Security Assistance Force] in our cities. We can fight the Taliban insurgents there on our own. We need those troops along our frontiers: if our frontiers are secured, our cities will be."

One of Afghanistan's smallest provinces with a population of only 600,000, Kunar nonetheless shares a 240 km border with Pakistan, which is studded with mountainous terrain.

"We have five unofficial passes with Pakistan that are very difficult to control," said Wahidi. "They are a big problem for us in terms of the insurgency. More [ISAF] troops - as many as possible - are needed for the border region. Why? Because the balance of power between Afghan forces and those of the Taliban is not yet there. Neither the ANA nor the ANP are fully formed and trained," he said, referring respectively to the Afghan National Army and the Afghan National Police force.

Wahidi and fellow Afghan Mohammad Halim Fidai, governor of Wardak province - which encompasses the so-called Gate of Kabul region - both gave a briefing organised by the German Marshall Fund and the US mission to NATO on the economic achievements and security problems in their region.

Each pointed to hard-won economic gains such as new roads, schools and clinics constructed during the last four years - and a measure of progress in fighting the Taliban and their links to organised crime in their provinces. In Wardak alone, for example, Fidai said heavy weapon systems captured from the enemy rose from 17 systems in 2007 to 81 in 2008. "The increase is due mainly to better training of our police and soldiers. It is significant today that there are no checkpoints [in Wardak] that belong to the enemy and they have no longer have any permanent base here. The Taliban is weaker in Wardak: I can confirm that."

However, each achievement is mitigated by the general security situation facing the two provinces. For example, Wardak province has managed to shift opium production - by tradition a major source of work - out of its region within the last two years but at the cost of soaring unemployment, which now sits at 54 per cent of the population.

"We've promised to find a livelihood for these people but we don't have a lot [of resources] to back that up in the long term," said Fidai. "Suicide bombers are drawn from the very poor, among others. A long-term commitment [by the international community] is required for Afghanistan. If it took 30 years to destroy it, it will take at least that long to rebuild it."

Another problem for both provinces is that the Taliban have changed tactics. "They're no longer strong enough to attack military convoys. Instead, they now attack civilian convoys," he said, adding that the insurgents rely increasingly on landmines and improvised explosive devices to disrupt local economies.

Noting that the province is subjected to 28 different kinds of mines, Fidai said Wardak's 270 km of roads presented "an opportunity for our enemies to plant landmines, which makes it hard to provide to our districts in time of need."

Stronger funding and use of Afghanistan's Provincial Reconstruction Teams (PRTs) - the mixed units of military, government and civil reconstruction personnel sponsored by individual nations - would help confront the Taliban, argued Wahidi.

The 26 PRTs in Afghanistan have been criticised for their divergent capabilities, budgets and lack of co-ordination not only with each other but with local authorities and humanitarian aid groups operating in the country.

"There should be better co-ordination among donor countries and, preferably, a balancing of resources among the PRTs via a central funding system," said Wahidi. "Co-ordination makes a difference."

According to him, the Afghan government's Independent Directorate of Local Governance, created in August 2007, is pushing for more co-ordination between the PRTs and provincial security committees to hammer out a more consistent approach to security and reconstruction at the local level.

"We've recently conducted three deadly operations against insurgents in our province where no civilians were hurt or killed. This shows that co-ordination can work," he said.

© 2009 Jane's Information Group

 

[blain2]

Your offering was excellent. Your accompanying comments less so. When the commander of the F.C., Tariq Khan calls this a global war of terror, perhaps you should listen. After all, it was you that offered these videos (until I also found Kidwaibhai's).

"We're not only doing MORE than ANY country in the world, we're also suffering the most."

You might be suffering more but that's debatable. I doubt that you're doing more though.

Here are America's casualties from October 2001 through December 2008 for both OIF and OEF-

Casualties By Military Component- Defense Manpower Data Center

Blood is only one measure of commitment, though. The bravery of your soldiers and their officers isn't questioned by anybody. Not even the Indians disparage your forces devotion to duty.

More to the point- why should you do any less when all of your soldiers have fallen on Pakistani soil? Indeed, do more! The war is upon you and you cannot afford otherwise.

S-2,

While I don't disagree with the point that its our war and we should do what we must, I think the point about losing a lot of people has to be seen in the context of the duration of this campaign. The fact that we have lost so many in such a short time does point to the fact that we are sending our troops in harms way instead of pussyfooting around the issue which many in the west think we are doing.

Pakistan does not have immense resources like the US. These people move around. We launch an operation in one area, the militants re-group in another. This is the problem that most in the West do not understand. It takes us much longer to regroup and get manpower in the new areas where the Taliban have relocated to. Secondly, this being a case of a classic insurgency, we can't rely on massive firepower everywhere. As soon as we do that, there would be a massive campaign inside of Pakistan decrying (rightly so too), the loss of civilian lives.

There is no really good way of going about this. It will be a slow and difficult campaign. The only thing that irks Pakistanis is the way judgment is
passed over us about our lack of action. The fact that Pakistan has to live with these people is something that most Westerners don't understand. To them its simply a matter of dropping bombs over these "Taliban" and being done with it. The reality in Pakistan is much different as you must be becoming aware of. We really don't have too many great choices. There is a Pashtun war raging in Afghanistan and to expect that the folks in the tribal areas are just going to be repressed by the actions of Pakistani, or US or ISAF forces is misleading to say the least.

 

[blain2]

"...it hurts him when the western community thanklessly overlooks the efforts of his Men and Pakistan Army. Clearly he knows what he's talking about."

He shouldn't be so sensitive. In general, it's a soldier's lot in life. Specifically, he shouldn't feel singled out as a Pakistani warrior. The western community "thanklessly overlooks the efforts" of our men and western armies daily as well.

Join the crowd.

Those whom are professionals know the story. There are grave issues in the Pakistani army but motivation by the soldiers at the sharp end isn't any issue of consequence. Tactics and training, equipment, more troops, more aviation, armor, engineers, more civil aid, medics, community liaisons- sure, lots of problems there.

Higher up, though, remain the real questions-

1. How did Bajour, specifically Loe Sam, become so fortified and when?

2. Who should have known and when? ISI? Tribal Agents?

3. How did the Army NOT KNOW until they literally stumbled on militias in Loe Sam. This despite the F.C. unit being nearly wiped out only recently?

4. Now that the P.A. does know, do they intend to occupy and HOLD the ground. To do so will require more, not less forces. To not do so means that the land remains contested.

5. Any clue on Mohmand and the Waziristans? More of the same fortifications? If so, when attack, if ever? Each passing day suggests that the tunnels only become longer and deeper.

6. Is the P.A., instead, intending to turn Bajaur into a Potemkin village while it tries to play off Mehsud, Nazir, and Bahadur against one another further south?

S-2 let me address some of the questions in your post.

1. How did Bajour, specifically Loe Sam, become so fortified and when?

Bajaur and areas such as Loisam have always been fortified as you see. The reason is not that these folks suddenly dug up these positions to counter the PA. Throughout the existence of tribal areas, there have been massive inter-tribal conflicts. These tribals use heavy weapons against each other (AAA, Grad rockets, RPGs, calibers upwards of 37mm are the norm). When they live here, they live with their women and children. These houses and villages provide them with protection and as such they are built to withstand considerable firepower. Also this is not common to only Bajaur. You go to any other Tribal areas where there is no conflict between the PA and the tribals, you will see similar defences.

2. Who should have known and when? ISI? Tribal Agents?

They knew when the militants regrouped in Bajaur. As far as fortifications etc., read the above point.

3. How did the Army NOT KNOW until they literally stumbled on militias in Loe Sam. This despite the F.C. unit being nearly wiped out only recently?

I believe you are wondering about PA not being ready for the militants, right? My own take is that we are still trying to figure out the nature of the fight. We have had officers and men go up to these houses (they are literally forts) to talk to the people and then have had the troops shot. The reason in many cases has been that when the Army moves in, it is still attempting to contain the feelings of the locals that the Army is against them. You have to be mindful that Pakistan Army has only once before operated in Bajaur (which was in 1960-62). Secondly, not everybody is a talib. You move into the area which is extremely vast. Its hard to tell who is who. We have learned some lessons from our operations in East Pakistan which led to alienation. There is a great concern that this must not be repeated.

4. Now that the P.A. does know, do they intend to occupy and HOLD the ground. To do so will require more, not less forces. To not do so means that the land remains contested.

They cannot stay in areas indefinitely for a multitude of reasons. Firstly, Army does not want to be seen as an occupying/holding force (this may change as the tribal leaders are convinced about the risks of leaving these areas unmanned, so we may see Army setting up garrisons however it would have to be done after getting the tribal leader's approval, otherwise its one more cause for the militants to talk up against the state). Secondly and more importantly, people are extremely wary of having the Army in their areas. Thus the focus is on FC to take up the role of maintaining presence so the militants stay out. FC capability is bound to increase with a renewed focus on this force.

5. Any clue on Mohmand and the Waziristans? More of the same fortifications? If so, when attack, if ever? Each passing day suggests that the tunnels only become longer and deeper.

See 1. The last thing we want is a fight with everyone. Not all tribals are aiding and abetting the Taliban. This has to be kept in mind.

6. Is the P.A., instead, intending to turn Bajaur into a Potemkin village while it tries to play off Mehsud, Nazir, and Bahadur against one another further south?

Thus far nobody is willing to get played by the government. All of the tribes are in it to make sure that they are not the ones left to loose it all in the end. Militancy is one thing, tribal politics an altogether different issue. A lot of the tribal politics are spilling over into militancy. The last thing we want to do is to put a stamp on this as an-anti Pashtun campaign if we take on all of the tribes with some level of militancy. It cannot be sustained inside of Pakistan if its seen to be this way.

 

[fatman17]

Text of Joint Declaration between Afghanistan and Pakistan

Following is the text of the historic joint Declaration between Afghanistan and Pakistan which was signed by the two foreign ministers in the presence of the Presidents of Afghanistan and Pakistan, in Kabul this afternoon.

Joint Declaration Between The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan And The Islamic Republic of Pakistan on Directions of Bilateral Cooperation

The Islamic Republic of Afghanistan and the Islamic Republic of Pakistan,Recalling their historical, cultural and religious bonds;Firmly believing on the need to open a new visionary chapter in their bilateral relations to further strengthen the overall good neighborly relations and mutual cooperation between the two countries, as well as to enhance regional cooperation and world peace;

Stressing on mutual respect for each other's sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity as well as on the principle of non-interference in each other's internal affairs according to the United Nations Charter, Kabul Declaration on Good-Neighborly Relations as well as Ankara and Istanbul Declarations;

Affirming their deep commitment for working resolutely towards making the South Asia an abode of stability, peace, prosperity and moderation;

Recognizing that militancy, extremism and terrorism are common threats to both countries as well as to the region and the world at large;

Encouraging the vital role of moderate, progressive and democratic forces;Reaffirming their deep commitment to completely eliminate the scourge of militancy, extremism and terrorism in all their forms and manifestations, including entities promoting them;

Reaffirming their sincere commitment to develop closer bilateral relations and to pursue forward-looking policies in all fields,In this spirit, and with a view to create sound foundations for deepening bilateral cooperation in all fields, the two countries hereby agree as follows:

To maintain frequent exchange of high level visits and contacts and to strengthen the exchange of visits and communications between the governmental departments, parliaments, armed forces, security agencies and non-governmental organizations of the two countries with a view to enhance mutual understanding and friendship in all fields.


To remain fully supportive of the Joint Peace Jirga process.


To remain fully engaged with other frameworks of cooperation between the two countries.


To further develop a joint comprehensive strategy for combating terrorism and strengthening bilateral cooperation by the Ministries of Foreign Affairs of Afghanistan and Pakistan.


To closely cooperate with each other as well as with the international community to counter and completely eliminate the menaces of militancy, extremism and terrorism from the region.


To cooperate closely for the complete eradication of narcotics drugs and psychotropic substances, including their production, consumption and trafficking from the region.


To make full use of their historical, political and geographical advantages as well as the region's rich resources in order to promote bilateral and regional cooperation in all fields, especially in the realms of economy, trade, transit, investment, agriculture, education and technology.


To take urgent steps to improve connectivity through quantitative and qualitative improvement in infrastructure, especially improving and adding road and rail links and building transportation, transit and communication corridors connecting the entire region.


To collaborate closely in developing energy corridors in the region via Afghanistan, including building oil and gas pipelines and electricity networks.


To develop bilateral programs and projects for the exploitation of mineral resources and other fields in their respective countries. In this context, they express their readiness to seek assistance from third parties on the basis of mutual interest and agreement.


To promote bilateral trade on preferential terms and working expeditiously towards full implementation of the South Asia Free Trade Agreement (SAFTA) and Economic Cooperation Organization Trade Agreement (ECOTA).


To encourage cultural as well as people -to-people exchanges and contacts, especially between the academia, think tanks, media and civil society of the two countries.


To cooperate closely in regional and international forums, including the United Nations (UN), the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) and South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).


i wonder if any of this will be implemented on the ground!

 

[blain2]

The tanks are powerful and useful- but not perfectly so. The main gun and machine guns are valuable in this fight and should dominate but need targets to do so. For that they need infantry. They also need infantry to provide immediate protection.

Those vehicles were 1950s-60s era armor. They also didn't possess reactive armor. They would be vulnerable to shaped charge anti-armor weapons like 107mm recoil rifle fire as well as RPG-7s. Numerous instances we saw a disabled T-54 near Loe Sam town. As you will recall, the tanks initially appeared in front of everybody, to include their own infantry before withdrawing. There may have been good reason. There may also have been good reason for the journalist to leave. I'm less certain about why the infantry broke contact and retreated. I'm also actually unsure whether any of them were IN contact at the time.

Generally, infantry move toward the sound of guns- not away.

That was disturbing.

The reason the infantry and armour backed off was due to the fact that the helis (Cobras) were going in. The tank troop commander mentioned that while talking on the radio and you can hear that chatter (part 3, ~8:37).

Also the tanks in use are what is available to the units in the region. That is not really proper tank country thus the basic armour is what they get (older T-59s which are on the verge of being phased out). Most of the time, tanks are used to provide firepower against built up positions with their 105mm guns which otherwise would have to be towed. Aside from that its actually fairly dangerous to operate tanks or even APCs in that area thus the infantry move in trucks that allow quick access in and out of the vehicle. The Tank is actually protected by the infantry on the move. On the other side of the border, tanks and BTRs used similarly by the Soviets are strewn across the Afghan landscape. There is only so much you can do with even ERA.

 

[fatman17]

S-2 let me address some of the questions in your post.




Bajaur and areas such as Loisam have always been fortified as you see. The reason is not that these folks suddenly dug up these positions to counter the PA. Throughout the existence of tribal areas, there have been massive inter-tribal conflicts. These tribals use heavy weapons against each other (AAA, Grad rockets, RPGs, calibers upwards of 37mm are the norm). When they live here, they live with their women and children. These houses and villages provide them with protection and as such they are built to withstand considerable firepower. Also this is not common to only Bajaur. You go to any other Tribal areas where there is no conflict between the PA and the tribals, you will see similar defences.



They knew when the militants regrouped in Bajaur. As far as fortifications etc., read the above point.




I believe you are wondering about PA not being ready for the militants, right? My own take is that we are still trying to figure out the nature of the fight. We have had officers and men go up to these houses (they are literally forts) to talk to the people and then have had the troops shot. The reason in many cases has been that when the Army moves in, it is still attempting to contain the feelings of the locals that the Army is against them. You have to be mindful that Pakistan Army has only once before operated in Bajaur (which was in 1960-62). Secondly, not everybody is a talib. You move into the area which is extremely vast. Its hard to tell who is who. We have learned some lessons from our operations in East Pakistan which led to alienation. There is a great concern that this must not be repeated.


They cannot stay in areas indefinitely for a multitude of reasons. Firstly, Army does not want to be seen as an occupying/holding force (this may change as the tribal leaders are convinced about the risks of leaving these areas unmanned, so we may see Army setting up garrisons however it would have to be done after getting the tribal leader's approval, otherwise its one more cause for the militants to talk up against the state). Secondly and more importantly, people are extremely wary of having the Army in their areas. Thus the focus is on FC to take up the role of maintaining presence so the militants stay out. FC capability is bound to increase with a renewed focus on this force.

5. Any clue on Mohmand and the Waziristans? More of the same fortifications? If so, when attack, if ever? Each passing day suggests that the tunnels only become longer and deeper.

See 1. The last thing we want is a fight with everyone. Not all tribals are aiding and abetting the Taliban. This has to be kept in mind.




Thus far nobody is willing to get played by the government. All of the tribes are in it to make sure that they are not the ones left to loose it all in the end. Militancy is one thing, tribal politics an altogether different issue. A lot of the tribal politics are spilling over into militancy. The last thing we want to do is to put a stamp on this as an-anti Pashtun campaign if we take on all of the tribes with some level of militancy. It cannot be sustained inside of Pakistan if its seen to be this way.

Blain2 - when we speak in the historical context (as you are) i couldnt agree with you more.

The real issue of "knowing" and "not knowing" what the Taliban did in the FATA, after we had deliberately provided them space to retreat from afghanistan was "over-looked" by Gen. Musharraf and his military commanders esp the ISI.

and now when the client has bitten the patron, the army and the current commanders (under extreme pressure from the US and UK) are doing what should have been done many years ago. its a bitter lesson (one of many in our history, I dont want to go towards the LeT issue - similar circumstances and results).

we just cannot continue these policies of giving "moral-support" to such organisations who have gone out of control. granted they may have been useful in the past but not anymore. the writ of the state must cover 100% of what is known as Pakistan.

 

[blain2]

"Secondly, when you're operating in a terrain which is favourable for guerilla insurgents, it's really hard to gather Intel on their whereabouts and numbers."

This is Pakistan. It's your terrain. There should be nothing favorable to the enemy about it. Your national intelligence has failed you that an enemy militia could seal this region and fortify it from their supposed prying eyes.

Get this counter-insurgent, guerrilla hocus-pocus out of your system. This fight is nothing like the fight in the Konar. There are no civilians here. It's a battlefield and a very conventional one at that. Clear tunnels with purpose and then seal them. There are proven methods for doing so. Isolate the battlefield. If after two to four months in this highly defined and small battlespace you've no clue to the infil and exfil routes, then your battlefield reconnaissance is not doing it's job. If you do have a clue, then your infantry commanders aren't doing theirs.

Finally, are there enough troops to do the job? They must find, fix, fight, and finish the enemy. Then they must stay to secure the peace such that re-construction can commence. Until then, Loe Sam is a wasteland and you lose.

S-2, you are way off here. As was the case with Loisam, all other areas the militants move to have civilians. The Army moved the civilians out of Loisam to reduce the chances of civilian casualties. Once this was done then the militants were pounded. Shops and houses along the main road in Loisam were demolished to not allow militants access to the main road. This cannot be done all the time. Other areas are more densly populated than Loisam. What do we do there? Start shooting and killing everyone?

I have already mentioned in my previous post how the fortifications exists and why they exist. Welcome to Tribal Areas!

Intelligence on the ground fails us regularly but then failure in intelligence is not specific to Pakistan only (I am sure you have read or heard about the so-called "American agents" in the tribal areas being killed, have any idea how and why they are killed?). In Afghanistan under the nose of the US and ISAF, Taliban have taken over entire towns without the US/ISAF troops doing anything. Then they go in and push the Taliban out. 6 months down the road the militants are back in. In FATA, tunnels are bulldozed over. The militants are always pushed back every time the Army moves in (despite what you see in the documentary, in Loisam the militants were beaten and the town is in complete control of the Army, the documentary was taped over past 4-5 months). However the problem is that Army cannot be everywhere all at the same time just like even with the soon to be a total of 130,000 US troops and whatever else the ISAF can muster, you have not been able to be present everywhere all the time. Its an unrealistic expectation for us while you yourselves are failing at it inside of Afghanistan even when you have much more mobility and firepower at your disposal than us.

 

[blain2]

Blain2 - when we speak in the historical context (as you are) i couldnt agree with you more.

The real issue of "knowing" and "not knowing" what the Taliban did in the FATA, after we had deliberately provided them space to retreat from afghanistan was "over-looked" by Gen. Musharraf and his military commanders esp the ISI.

and now when the client has bitten the patron, the army and the current commanders (under extreme pressure from the US and UK) are doing what should have been done many years ago. its a bitter lesson (one of many in our history, I dont want to go towards the LeT issue - similar circumstances and results).

we just cannot continue these policies of giving "moral-support" to such organisations who have gone out of control. granted they may have been useful in the past but not anymore. the writ of the state must cover 100% of what is known as Pakistan.

Sir I am only discussing the realities on the ground. To me it matters little now as to what the past governments should have done as whatever they should have done is being done now. You won't find me supporting the anti-state players in Pakistan, however I still feel that there is a feeling that the Army is taking it easy with these folks. Its not. Its just a difficult job. We are trying to set history straight with regards to waging war in this terrain. Thus far nobody has proven the history wrong. At best we can achieve a stalemate here but beating the militants into submission is something that is no achievable.

To your very last point, I am totally in agreement and I do not feel that finding strategic depth inside of Afghanistan is in Pakistan's interest. However something that I strongly believe in is that Pakistan simply cannot afford to alienate the Pashtuns in Pakistan for the sake of what is going in in Afghanistan. Both countries need to work together to pacify this Pashtun insurgency, only asking Pakistan to kill their Pashtuns so the Afghans can live in peace will leave us in the lurch in the end. Afghan government needs to act and get this mess sorted out so the Pashtuns in Pakistan do not feel that they owe anything to the Pashtuns in Afghanistan. For as long as this does not happen, we are in for the long, painful haul.

 

[S-2]

Thanks for the comments but I fear that many of your replies were generalizations that don't give adequate credence to my concerns.

I know that the natural construction of homes in this area are "stout". I understand that many of the homes, particularly those isolated away from others, are veritable fortresses.

Still, if I understand matters correctly, these already formidable structures have been measurably enhanced by additional work not typically common- unless tunneling under public roads between one house and another is the norm-and I suspect not.

That's an example provided by the commanders of the ops, IIRC. They seemed surprised by the extent of preparations. To do so takes work that's not easily hidden and goes above the norm, it would seem.

"You go to any other Tribal areas where there is no conflict between the PA and the tribals, you will see similar defences."

Structures, yes, I know that. We see very similar structures and homes in Kunar, Nuristan, Nangahar and elsewhere along the border. I'm not as certain about other aspects that have enhanced an already existing defensive base.

"The fact that we have lost so many in such a short time does point to the fact that we are sending our troops in harms way instead of pussyfooting around the issue which many in the west think we are doing."

I don't question bravery. I don't question blood shed by your troops and company/battalion officers. I do question whether they've been used fecklessly by the previous administration and whether that might hopefully change.

"Pakistan does not have immense resources like the US."

The U.S. doesn't have immense resources "like the US". We battle images of omnipotence by others.

"These people move around. We launch an operation in one area, the militants re-group in another. This is the problem that most in the West do not understand."

Hardly. "Whack-a-mole". We've fallen into that trap at least twice-once in Iraq and so far in Afghanistan. It helps not to announce your intent and to place ops on "close hold" from those you can't trust. We're underresourced too while trying to raise two nat'l armies and police forces to do the real job.

"It takes us much longer to regroup and get manpower in the new areas where the Taliban have relocated to."

blain2, it does the same for us in Afghanistan and reflects resources. We literally are chasing the fight instead of controlling the terrain such that the fight can't move without bumping into us somewhere.

Until control is established throughout rural communities, there will always be some element of that. Too, because this is so, it also becomes an indicator of spreading progress or otherwise. As we've gained some control in Iraq, we've seen that it becomes increasingly difficult for the militias to move unimpeded away from us. They're detected and attacked without being able to fully disengage. Often that first hint of detection is a cell-phone call from a local.

"Secondly, this being a case of a classic insurgency, we can't rely on massive firepower everywhere."

You speak in general terms to a guy whose nation has been engaged like yours since 2001. That said, kinetics have their place-even in insurgencies. Specifically, Loe Sam- this is a mid-intensity infantry-centric conventional fight at this point. There it has long since passed the soft-caps, pass out goodies to the kids "walk in the sun" patrol stage. Your opponent may be "insurgents" but your battlefield in the immediate environs of Loe Sam is devoid of citizens and has been for some time. Some 300,000 Bajaurans are refugees and I suspect that includes virtually 100% of those true innocents within a ten km radius of Loe Sam.

Whatever it might be elsewhere, here along this road on the valley floor is a dug-in force that's still able to resupply and reinforce itself within a small and defined battlespace that's been contested now for better than five months. The enemy were prepared to absolutely fight for this terrain and haven't yet ceased to do so. They meant to hold it.

"As soon as we do that, there would be a massive campaign inside of Pakistan decrying (rightly so too), the loss of civilian lives."

Wrongly so. A gross generalization to follow- your nation's citizens possess unique perspectives of sovereignty which must change for you to survive. It's not acceptable to provide sanctuary to those intent on making war upon a neigboring nation or, for that matter, the government of Pakistan.

When men of that ilk show up in your neighborhood, you (variously) fight them, report them, and/or run away from them. But you don't accept and accomodate them. Doing so makes you theirs. Defying them is a tenet of citizenship.

Your nation has not remotely attempted to sell this message and imprint it upon your populace. There's been great duplicity here by your various governments and your public's outrage is 1.) misplaced where directed at your army and, 2.) a function of Pakistan's unwillingness to educate it's citizens to their responsibility. This includes tribal citizens.

There is no writ of state in Bajaur. It is contested land that the Pakistani government will have to earn back in blood. That the insurgents are on the valley floors cutting lines of communication, gang-pressing recruits from families, taxing commerce on roads, and imposing THEIR "sharia" courts makes clear that this is key terrain to them.

Did you know that Bajaur has (had) a population density about double the next highest agency in FATA? Small agency-lots of people. The domination of this area by the militias was a very sensible and cost-effective objective for them.

You can't knock on the door and ask them to leave and you really shouldn't nuke them so what's in-between? You fight where you must and will be required to do so with all that's at your disposal from time to time. This is a reflection of past choices of governance which now present the bill.

 

[waraich66]

S2,

Majority of Pakistanis think that WOT is not war of Pakistan,that war is forced on Pakistan by US ,so Pakistani general public including FATA no yet convinced why Pakistan is fighting for US .US drone attacks increased further hatred in general public because of civilian killings.

If US want to win this war they should first convinced general public of FATA and take them in confidence.Musharaf was dictator ,he has done wrong or right but general public or FATA residence were not taken in confidence.

Point to understand for US think tank is that if US lead forces failed to control resistance in Afghanistan and more then 70% area is still under their control ,how PA could manage or break network of support of talaban inside Pakistan.

Pakistan losing more then 200 billion Rs revenue yearly through Afghan boarder smugling and from last sixty years could not control or block it.

If US has any plan to stop smuggling and restore peace then lot of things needed in this area,development of infrastructure,restoration of their jirga system and concret fence should be built between Afghanistan and Pakistan which needed more then trillion dollars.
If USA help Pakistan to develop that area then insurgency will be uprooted automatically otherwise there is no short cut.

US should revise their distructive approach to resolve the international issues of terrorism,killing the leaders of talaban or Alqaeada or Hamas or surgical strikes will not solve the problem of terrorism.


Surgical procedure should be last option when there is no chance of cure and when there is danger to life of patient.

 

[Anwar2]

Dear MastanKhan:
Your post is remarkable for its genuine and sincere portrayal of facts on the ground, and a pragmatic approach to adjust to them. Your point of view is shared by a number of mature and enlightened people, with a genuine concern for the welfare of population held hostage by the events.
“Childish Rants” is a way to dismiss or dehumanize the contrarian views held by an equally significant percentage of Pakistani people.
In a way you are saying that anybody resisting occupation, or raising his voice in hold-up situation is putting the sufferers in mortal danger; and is doing a disserve to themselves, and the Ummah at large.
Few people had any love lost for OBL or Zawahiry in our area. These guys became the icons of defiance and resistance only after the full might of the greatest super power on earth was unleashed on unarmed innocent people. Taliban too were essentially finished after the collapse of Kabul in late 2001, few people really liked them at the zenith of their power.
It was through systematic mishandling, and through the misuse of Pak Army by Musharraf regime, and through the forfeiture of national sovereignty that these “forces of darkness” have gained an iconoclastic status. The resistance is not really for the Love of OBL or his philosophy, it is a genuine expression of revolt against injustice.
Yeh … this is all part of the process of growing. Roman Empire’s decline spanned over 3 centuries, British Empire’s downslide spanned over 40 years (1918-1948), the American downslide is even faster.