Rawalpindi | Gentlemen, it’s time

[All-Green]

Ratus Ratus

You must appreciate the fact that PA despite its reputation is not as well financed as US, Australia, UK etc.

PA has despite its shortcomings always provided excellent support to the nation in times of crisis, the Army by virtue of its discipline has always been one of the most well organized relief force in times of national emergencies, despite suffering massive losses to infrastructure and mountain supply animals they did a fine job in Kashmir earthquake relief operation as well.
We had great help from US and i shall always remember the heli support by US troops, fine bunch they were.

I think in the current scenario, despite its best efforts the PA alone cannot be held responsible for the relief operation, we shall need the help from our allies since the scale is as big as that of Afghan war and we all remember the funding and support during those times.
PA will do a fine job in its limits but it has its own supplies, casualties and operational headaches to worry about.
This is not a peace time relief operation.
Still i know the spirit of our soldiers and will not underestimate them.

PA has improved and learnt some lessons in counter insurgency, i was damn frustrated with FC but believe me they have the aptitude to be most effective once we get them on track.
It was their tribal loyalty and mixed sentiments about ex Mujaheddin, Taliban and what they perceived as rewind of the Afghan war of old.
My father, two uncles and several cousins have served with FC on assignments in various areas in times of peace and war and all had the same observation regarding FC.
They are the best suited force for these areas, know the language, customs, terrain and have the instincts of crack troops but motivating them to stay put and face the tribesmen was very difficult even for the best of commanders.
Loyalty to the perceived tribal interests always hindered the FC in its operations.
Now thanks to TTP's excessive bloody handedness the attitude has changed slowly, the new DG of FC is a very skilled commander and he has instilled some new spirit into the force.

Once again what most forget is the national sentiment at the time of initial operations, which was 90% in favor of Taliban...now i think it is 40-50%.
This is something we have to consider when judging the PA, FC and their operations.

I hope you understand that dynamics of war change in the home turf...how i wish it would have been our strength to operate in home turf but sadly the world is not fair and this war is no different.

If i criticize the firemen for breaking my door in the effort to save me then would you not call me crazy?

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Saad Rafique of PML(N) on Express TV "We do not support military operation....army is just killing ordinary men women and kids.......We were not taken into confidence before launching this operation....how you justify it? If Mulvi Sufi breaks deal/promise you bomb his valley and when Musharaf breaks Constitution you give him Guard of Honor.....
These bastards should be hanged.

Interesting - different sentiments were expressed in the National Assemble yesterday by both the PML-N and PML-Q MNA's - strong support for the Military operation.

And from the 'Quaid' himself:

To a query, the former premier said “It is not a time to discuss the issue of taking PML-N into confidence over the operation, but now it’s a time to assist these victims.”

CM NWFP AMeer Haider Khan Hoti, Begum Kulsoom Nawaz Sharif, MNA Hanif Abbassi, PML-N leader Saranjam Khan, Pir Sabir Shah and former Federal Minister for Communication, Azam Khan Hoti were also present on the occasion.

Talking to media, the PML-N leader said that the elements responsible for the factors leading to launching of operation in Swat, Dir Lower and Buner districts did not deserve any leniency.
Nawaz Sharif visits Swat internally displaced persons’s camp

 

[dr.rehan]

Gov. might be very bad and people of pakistan might even hate it, but once foreigne fighters enter our motherland, dont follow peace deals offered, closing inn on Islamabad... Then there is not much choice at hand then to simply make a powerful example out of these talibans. Normally i respect them for being religious, but not at the cost of our own indipendence...

At such point in time, pakistan should not just put in 15k force, but 10 times the force that has entered our own country. There should be no more peace deals. Violation of our borders by these talibs should be meet with ARMAGEDON LIKE FORCE...

I hope Pak-Army get every last one of them. Secondly, this is not afghanistan which we dont know. This is pakistan,which we should know better then the Talibs.

At the end. I hope Pak Army shows no mercy to these talibans that took the risk to cross over to our motherland & kicks the living daylights out of these punks, and teach them a lesson they never forget. No more talks, no more peace deals. Its time for a powerful statement to those that cross our borders.

If this is not dealth with properly then i am afraid we will see all "Lallo Panjo" starting to cross over PK borders from all over....

The best way would be to capture as many of these talibans that came to pakistan back to Afghan border, and behead all of these 5000 punks.
A more powerful statement then that from PAK cant be made....

No mercy. No matter if its Taliban, Indian or US.
Take anyone that comes illegaly over our borders back to where they entered from and behead em all each and everytime.

It will stop!

 

[Elmo]

Your arguments are only designed to belittle the army, little else…

And your arguments sir are designed to belittle any argument that negate/question your beliefs...

And your suggested ‘solution’ of throwing down our weapons and saying ‘we don’t use force so you might as well do what you want with our country’ is preposterous

Sir jee, when exactly did I suggest this. Please don't get carried away.

Also as for the "dramatization" bit, well I don't like to take potshots. Find it below the belt. You obviously won't/don't understand that.

The right thing to do now is to tell our simple people that there is a line between what is acceptable and what is not. You are blurring that line at every opportunity and thus negating our nation’s ability to ideologically oppose and isolate the killers who bomb our cities and intimidate entire populations and murder our service-men on a daily basis.

That's an over-exaggeration of my statements. Once again: The Taliban are as unacceptable to me as they are to you, I do not agree with use of force, but since the army is using it right now, I would want to see that it doesn't go in futility. If the sceptics are talking about wrapping up the counter-insuregncy/war in the Frontier province, it must be for a valid reason. Provide people irrefutable evidence of the success of this operation so that they support it, but don't expect everyone to support the army blindly.

Case Closed sir jee.

Its not idealism when at least 45% of the population supports the military action in Swat.


45pc back military operation | Pakistan | News | Newspaper | Daily | English | Online

Thanks for the link.

Come now..how can you get THE date wrong?

Yup, my bad It's 1940.

As many as it takes. Who is getting it right anywhere?... "No lessons learnt" from FATA is a baseless claim and your perception. First thing you need to do is to understand and admit that this is a very difficult campaign made all the more difficult due to various religious and cultural linkages between the protagonists involved.

Dear sir, you just answered what I have been trying to say all along. It isn't a basless claim, your first sentence reads: "As many as it takes." So either you agree that lessons haven't been learnt, or say that they have and then detail them. I would rather take the liberty to suggest that it is a baseless accusation on your part.

We should draw parallels with operations being conducted by the ISAF in Afghanistan but not set that as the sole parameter of gauging success. While admittedly our war is complicated by the ethno-politico-religious links, the point is that collateral damage does not make a campaign effective but eradication of militants does. So yes, the ISAF operation has been a failure in many provinces in Afghanistan and so has our war against the Taliban been.

Secondly, tactics aside, what else is the Army to learn from it besides the fact that none of its operations in FATA were considered to be in the national interests and were actually seen as being conducted at the behest of the Americans? How can an Army succeed in such a mission? FATA is as expansive as Southern Afghanistan. With our very limited mobility, our troops were trying their level best and were not very effective. However if you look across the border in Afghanistan, how is the ISAF campaign any more effective in the Pakhtun areas despite the much touted COIN training and the maximum mobility available to the force there?

I agree it cannot succeed in a climate of hostility. This can also be blamed on the poor training of the Frontier Corps and Frontier Constabulary people and of course the khasadars who were unable to resist the militants. What complicates the ISAF campaign is the presence of foreign faces, which are unacceptable to the locals, whether the allied forces admit to it or not. That is not the case on our end.

Secondly, can you please elaborate on the limited mobility bit... how can we even justify that! We have one of the largest armies in the world, and by the threads that float on this forum, above par intelligence network and defence systems. How could there be "limited mobility"?

blain2:
without a shadow of doubt, most of the COIN training anywhere in the world is an OJT type of deal. You bring the lessons back and try to formulate a doctrine and a training curriculum around it so you can respond to such threats better

Yes and No.
In the early stages the military may phase in an OTJ training and implementation. But if you look at as a simple example the US, Australia and UK you will find doctrine is already written, ok updated where necessary, but it is inherent in the overall training. It is not an add-on.
Simple example in Vietnam the Australia did not have any specific COIN doctrine. What they pulled on was experiences from WWII in PNG, the Malaya campaign. This with then current experiences formed the COIN doctrine. It has been inexistence since early days of Nam.
It is constant included in all training as much as normal conventional training for all arms.

Most people in Pakistan don't even know what the COIN doctrine is, forget about it being written!

Nadja:
COIN intelligence..
Ho Hum..
Intelligence in these ops can be gained fro people providing it, i.e. the displaced pers, or by hard work, that is patrolling in depth.
At this point of time you do not have that luxury. At best you have unsubstantiated pointers from the displaced pers. This is a big problem as you have no idea if it is a fact that the enemy is there or it is a vendetta issue.

Thank you for seconding that!

 

[Ratus Ratus]

Most people in Pakistan don't even know what the COIN doctrine is, forget about it being written!

Don’t degrade yourself with comments like this.
In most countries few know what COIN or CI doctrine is. It is a military concept and has little to do with the average civi in the street. So bluntly one would not expect most Pakistanis to know what COIN/CI is or how it functions. If I walked down the local street where I live and asked someone what COIN/CI was very few would know other that its something to do with the army.
Don’t confuse military knowledge with civilian knowledge.
Secondly if it is part of a standard training concept there is written doctrine outlining what it is and how it is to be executed. Doctrine is in military generic terms so it, as doctrine, has flexibility.

Nadja:
COIN intelligence..
Ho Hum..
Intelligence in these ops can be gained from people providing it, i.e. the displaced pers, or by hard work, that is patrolling in depth.
At this point of time you do not have that luxury. At best you have unsubstantiated pointers from the displaced pers. This is a big problem as you have no idea if it is a fact that the enemy is there or it is a vendetta issue.

Your rely comment:

Thank you for seconding that!

I second nothing actually.
I do point out you do have intel. I also point out it may have errors like any intel. Do not twist what I said for your argument.
I am trying to point out some military fact that you do not understand.

I have no idea how you think intelligence is going to be gained. But it isn’t the TV style method.
You make criticism but no concept of how it may be dealt with. One sided flash points do not help with considered discussion.

The methods I mention are as valid as any, some of these being
1. Interrogation of IDPs.
2. Patrolling.
3. aerial/satellite photos

Now interrogation of IDPs has usually a limited ability as it requires a lot of cross reference of the gained intel. An IDP is not a totally reliable source.
But it is a source and useable.
For each piece of intel gained it has to be cross referenced with other bits from other IDPs. It is time consuming. In the end yes a picture can be built.
This is a method that can not be discounted of hand.
As I also said it may unfortunately involve matter of vendettas and that is a difficult point to deal with. There are examples of this in all CI ops.

Patrolling is one method that will return reliable intel. This though assumes you have some control of the ground and you use appropriate sized forces to patrol.
At present you are not in a position to actually do this fully and the terrain is not conducive to it in many places. The terrain is more conducive to ambush of the patrol so it risk is very high for a patrol. If you loose half a platoon for the sake of a bit of intel on 3 pers then it is over costly in life.

Aerial/sat photos are useful in some respects provided you are dealing with static positions. But if you have to deal with caves etc then they may be of little advantage. Here though tracks may show up but that is not specific proof.

Now I said you do not have the luxury of doing some of these. You do not in fact have the luxury of mounting patrols into a high risk area. You are at the start of this campaign not into it. So you must rely on a loose form of intel that is from local police, local security pers and also IDPs.

Now as for intelligence as a whole, whet you get substantiated or not is only a snap shot of time. It was only valid at the time that intel was observed. Nothing is static. Thus any actions based on that intel will have a probability level of error.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

If i criticize the firemen for breaking my door in the effort to save me then would you not call me crazy?

I would call you crazy anyway as we both know you stated the fire to get the insurance money..

 

[blain2]

Dear sir, you just answered what I have been trying to say all along. It isn't a basless claim, your first sentence reads: "As many as it takes." So either you agree that lessons haven't been learnt, or say that they have and then detail them. I would rather take the liberty to suggest that it is a baseless accusation.

I say as many as it takes because this is the nature of COIN. Army has conducted many operations and from a tactical standpoint they have been successes. However there are considerable other challenges that have negated these successes including political considerations, public opinion and religious sensitivities. Tell me who has it right and I will agree with your assertion.

We should draw parallels with operations being conducted by the ISAF in Afghanistan but not set that as the sole parameter of gauging success. While admittedly our war is complicated by the ethno-politico-religious links, the point is that collateral damage does not make a campaign effective but eradication of militants does. So yes, the ISAF operation has been a failure in many provinces in Afghanistan and so has our war against the Taliban been.

Our war against Taliban has not even started. Already willing to throw in the towel? This is the first time there is something of the sort of a national consensus. This means that for the first time the GoP, public and the Army are on the same page to face off the threat. To say that our war is a failure has yet to be seen.

I agree it cannot succeed in a climate of hostility. This can also be blamed on the poor training of the Frontier Corps and Frontier Constabulary people and of course the khasadars who were unable to resist the militants. What complicates the ISAF campaign is the presence of foreign faces, which are unacceptable to the locals, whether the allied forces admit to it or not. That is not the case on our end.

Our case is even more complicated than the one faced by the ISAF. In our case its brother turned on brother. All typical approached to COIN go by the wayside in a campaign where family and tribal alliances are strained. What matters more? Religion? tribe? country?

Secondly, can you please elaborate on the limited mobility bit... how can we even justify that! We have one of the largest armies in the world, and by the threads that float on this forum, above par intelligence network and defence systems. How could their be "limited mobility"?

Being one of the largest Armies does not mean that you have everything at your disposal. Air mobility is one of the most expensive things to be had because Helicopters are not cheap, yet afford the fastest means of insertion into and extraction from areas of interest. Without having a considerable fleet of these helis, there is only so much that you can attain by moving troops in vehicular convoys which take hours to get to troublesome areas and give more than enough early warning to anyone wanting to flee. There is only so much that goes around in a $3 billion defence budget.

Most people in Pakistan don't even know what the COIN doctrine is, forget about it being written!

People may not know because most people in the United States do not know what COIN is. The key is that those who have to wage it should know of it and as I have mentioned, its a known science, however its one that is constantly in need of revising and evolution.

 

[S-2]

"Army has conducted many operations and from a tactical standpoint they have been successes."

My compliments. America has had notable failures in every war of our history at the tactical level.

"However there are considerable other challenges that have negated these successes including political considerations, public opinion and religious sensitivities. Tell me who has it right and I will agree with your assertion"

I'd say the latter. Since when has any nat'l army operated in a vacumn devoid of external inputs? If so, why should it?

"Our war against Taliban has not even started."

Odd. We've been at war against a taliban operating from your lands for seven years plus. Thought you were too. Sorry. It appears America's been mistaken (again) or how, exactly, did those 4,000 soldiers of your's die in the last seven years?

"To say that our war is a failure has yet to be seen."

That's not what Nadja has said. She said-

"So yes, the ISAF operation has been a failure in many provinces in Afghanistan and so has our war against the Taliban been."

This neither suggests the present nor the future. It certainly condemns the past. Can there be any argument with this observation? It's clear that the eastern portion of Baluchistan, all of Waziristan, Korrum, Khyber, Orakzai, and even Bajaur/Chitral are not controlled by your government. This phenomena has transpired over the last seven and one-half years. It, perhaps, reaches back even further in latent guise.

All in addition to SWAT, Buner, and the encroachments into the Punjab.

Something hasn't been hitting on all cylinders in your country, it would seem.

"In our case its brother turned on brother. All typical approached to COIN go by the wayside in a campaign where family and tribal alliances are strained."

But afghans are not brothers or do you not realize the many afghans who daily die by the hands of their "brothers" or those who fight back against their "brothers". That would include, btw, pashtus fighting pashtus.

Or Iraqis? Were they not engaged in a civil war while trying to raise forth a country and an army? Are they not STILL engaged in such? Was Vietnam or Malaysia cases where brothers did not fight brothers?

I don't see the uniqueness. I know we SLAUGHTERED our brothers in the American civil war. But that's just us being us.

"Being one of the largest Armies does not mean that you have everything at your disposal...There is only so much that goes around in a $3 billion defence budget."

Don't go anywhere you're not prepared to stay. When you do, make it permanent. Despite what some say and the practical sense of it all, killing bad guys isn't the war-winner.

Securing the population and delivering services IS the war-winner. Visible change and the populace will deliver the bad guys. Visible alternatives and guys on the fence will come in from the cold. Making people SAFE to squeal on bad guys and wanting to protect their gains is important.

With that the kills go up, the land available as sanctuary goes down and their world becomes very, very small.

Build roads and guard them. This should be a component of your overall ambitions for the area in any case. Temper your ambitions as you move into operationally challenging areas like Waziristan. This won't happen overnight. It didn't get that way overnight either.

I've read that there's an op being set up for Waziristan in June. That'll be interesting and we'll have to see how the army chooses to enter. I hope they pick a place like Wana and just...show up.

Hi! We're here.

 

[jeypore]

As a civilian knowing nothing about these tactics, in a strategical level a statement by all Green flows a mile long.

Once again what most forget is the national sentiment at the time of initial operations, which was 90% in favor of Taliban...now i think it is 40-50%.

It clearly shows the Mushraff adminstration played a larger role in deceiving the world for last 7 years in this fight with the talibs.

 

[fatman17]

Are you trying to say don’t trust anything or anyone?

the enemy will go to any length!

 

[blain2]

"Army has conducted many operations and from a tactical standpoint they have been successes."

My compliments. America has had notable failures in every war of our history at the tactical level.

At a strategic level too. I get the pun, however not all has gone well for the US either.

I'd say the latter. Since when has any nat'l army operated in a vacumn devoid of external inputs? If so, why should it?

That poses all the more challenges. When you are an occupation force, you could care less about the prevailing political and public sensitivities. You do what you need to, in order to attain your goals which are essentially to pacify the opposition. In our case, this is not that simple.

Odd. We've been at war against a taliban operating from your lands for seven years plus. Thought you were too. Sorry. It appears America's been mistaken (again) or how, exactly, did those 4,000 soldiers of your's die in the last seven years?

Please lets not simplify the issue of fighting the Taliban from my land. I am sure the Taliban in Afghanistan are just dealing drugs to the ISAF and getting high with those blokes there and its only the ones operating on our side who are creating issues for your folks. The 4000 of ours died policing the tribal areas to provide cover for the war in Afghanistan. We can sit here for another two months arguing over this issue (whose war is it?), however the public opinion in Pakistan has only changed recently. Even now we only have qualified support of 45% or so for this campaign.

That's not what Nadja has said. She said-

"So yes, the ISAF operation has been a failure in many provinces in Afghanistan and so has our war against the Taliban been."

This neither suggests the present nor the future. It certainly condemns the past. Can there be any argument with this observation? It's clear that the eastern portion of Baluchistan, all of Waziristan, Korrum, Khyber, Orakzai, and even Bajaur/Chitral are not controlled by your government. This phenomena has transpired over the last seven and one-half years. It, perhaps, reaches back even further in latent guise.

That is your interpretation of what she said. That is not how I understood it given the fact that I do not think that we have ever taken on the Taliban problem head on until the issues cropped up in Swat. So most of our actions have been limited in scale and scope. Public opinion in Pakistan is an indication of when people have considered this to be a problem...there has been a change in this opinion recently and the Army has changed its approach appropriately.

It's clear that the eastern portion of Baluchistan, all of Waziristan, Korrum, Khyber, Orakzai, and even Bajaur/Chitral are not controlled by your government.

Really and this is news to you? How long have you been a student of Pakistan, care to tell me S2? I hope you have an idea about what Government control meant in those areas prior to the arrival of the Taliban and the recent BBC hogwash about declining control in these areas? I can provide a breakdown of each of those areas to you if you'd like to make a point that GoP has never had a very large presence in these areas and as such to claim that FATA and remote parts of Baluchistan are no longer under the control of the GoP is laughable. How was our control in the past? PA was it. One man..that is it. Lets not get carried away trying to over blow the magnitude of the problem.

All in addition to SWAT, Buner, and the encroachments into the Punjab.

What encroachment in Punjab? Admittedly the problem is in Swat and surrounding areas, how does Punjab come into the picture? Just because you read it in the western press about the "tentacles of Taliban reaching into Punjab" does not mean you should take it at face value. The provinces down south have very many other differences from FATA etc. which provide many in-built obstacles for the Taliban mindset to have a sway on the people. While extremists are every where, even then there is a difference in what the Taliban are and what these other extremists stand for.

Something hasn't been hitting on all cylinders in your country, it would seem.

Yes and this will remain the case. Taliban are a nuisance and they have to be dealt with, however Pakistan is not going nuts over this issue and kill every single one of them. The best approach will remain one where the locals take the lead and push back on the Taliban and are helped and aided by the government in doing so. Beyond NWFP, there is no support base for the Taliban. All their supporters can do is to cause civilian casualties but there is no taking over anything anywhere in the South. That is a fact and people need to realize this.

But afghans are not brothers or do you not realize the many afghans who daily die by the hands of their "brothers" or those who fight back against their "brothers". That would include, btw, pashtus fighting pashtus.

Yes I am sure some Pashtun are fighting with other Pashtuns in Afghanistan, but as you can see its not going that well. The ANA troops could care less about this war. Most of them have no heart in the fight so to claim that they do it to make a point is laughable. If they did then Southern Afghanistan would now be won over by the ANA and their ISAF supporters using their Pashtun cadres to get to the people to turn against the Taliban. Nothing of this sort is happening because in the end, the Pashtun kinship is stronger than the Afghan nationhood and the ANA.
The same problem exists in Pakistan's FATA and NWFP region to a great extent and this is the reason this is a very difficult fight.

Or Iraqis? Were they not engaged in a civil war while trying to raise forth a country and an army? Are they not STILL engaged in such? Was Vietnam or Malaysia cases where brothers did not fight brothers?

The vast majority of the Iraqi security apparatus is Shia trying to pacify a sunni insurgency and after they were kept subdued by Saddam for so long, they are willing to cooperate with whosoever gives them the ticket to assert themselves. You have essentially capitalized on that and thus things are faring a little better there than in Afghanistan. The Pashtun community that straddles the Pak-Afghan border is half the size of the total Iraqi population. The Pashtuns of Pakistan carry considerable weight in the national policy making, security and foreign policy. Every day Pashtuns die in Pakistan, the harder it becomes to prosecute a military campaign and sustain it.

Secondly, religion is a major factor here that was absent in the examples of Vietnam and Malaysia (which brother on brother action are your referring to for Malaysia?). Pakistanis are a practicing bunch of folks. They will not be convinced so easily about this war. Past and recent polls show as such. What ticked them off recently was the way the Taliban backtracked on their promise, however if the Taliban talk peace then people in Pakistan will support talks over continued carnage.

I don't see the uniqueness. I know we SLAUGHTERED our brothers in the American civil war. But that's just us being us.

We have done the same in the past, however the religious links were not as tight as they are now. There is much more Islamic activism in Pakistan now than compared to the 70s when ethnicity mattered more.

Don't go anywhere you're not prepared to stay. When you do, make it permanent. Despite what some say and the practical sense of it all, killing bad guys isn't the war-winner.

Securing the population and delivering services IS the war-winner. Visible change and the populace will deliver the bad guys. Visible alternatives and guys on the fence will come in from the cold. Making people SAFE to squeal on bad guys and wanting to protect their gains is important.

With that the kills go up, the land available as sanctuary goes down and their world becomes very, very small.

Build roads and guard them. This should be a component of your overall ambitions for the area in any case. Temper your ambitions as you move into operationally challenging areas like Waziristan. This won't happen overnight. It didn't get that way overnight either.

I've read that there's an op being set up for Waziristan in June. That'll be interesting and we'll have to see how the army chooses to enter. I hope they pick a place like Wana and just...show up.

Hi! We're here.

Good points! I agree.

 

[Ratus Ratus]

the enemy will go to any length!

I think we are on similar pages but the words, though different, mean the same thing.

 

[S-2]

"...not all has gone well for the US either."

Not that we encourage them, but mistakes are the inevitable outcome of unique circumstances.

It's how you react to them at the moment and what you learn later that matters.

Doctrine is nothing but a compilation of best practices at each level of the military art-tactical, operational, strategic. We are working very hard to assure a learning culture that is tactically inquisitive and risk-balancing. We've a very bright collection of soldiers whom seem, perversely, engaged in this battle intellectually like no other I recall. Not even the cold war.

"When you are an occupation force, you could care less about the prevailing political and public sensitivities. You do what you need to, in order to attain your goals which are essentially to pacify the opposition. In our case, this is not that simple."

Yeah and civilians are hardly on America's mind, eh? Come on! The Iraqis have since learned that the only good faith partner there is us. TOOOO many stories of Americans at the center of sunni/shia dispute resolution or Kurd/Arab spats, or Turk/Kurd spats.

Again, if this is a population-centric struggle, I doubt we're going to ignore our own advice. You can hunt bad guys forever. You'll do so because the insecurity of the people will create forever, bad guys.

Make the people secure, this goes away. At some point, btw, the people have to make themselves secure.

"I am sure the Taliban in Afghanistan are just dealing drugs to the ISAF and getting high with those blokes there and its only the ones operating on our side who are creating issues for your folks."

Snide. I'm sure that this rebellion in Afghanistan would be non-existent despite our mistakes were there no taliban gov't in exile, financing, medical, arms, and command & control in the Quetta area as sanctuary. The Canadian and British armies seem convinced of this.

Clearly there is combat in Afghanistan and certainly many are groups of Afghani taliban whom have family in A-stan. I've discussed this before. The further from the south, the less these groups exist. Ethnicity and religion, correct? Hazara, Uzbek, Turkoman, Tajik.

"...I hope you have an idea about what Government control meant in those areas..."

Blain2, modestly, nobody on this board has been so fascinated by Pakistan's selective application of sovereign rights and responsibilities as I when it comes to the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan, Baluchistan, or Kurrum, Khyber, Orakzai, Mohmand, Bajaur, and Chitral.

The hue and cry, of course, over PREDATOR. The hands washed clean when it comes to taliban sanctuary over tribal lands uncontrolled for decades past. Two sides of a coin not often seen.

Seen here all the time.

"What encroachment in Punjab?"

Sorry. I thought you'd attended THIS party.

"Just because you read it in the western press..."

Admittedly, CTC SENTINEL is western. West Point western in fact. The writer, Hassan Abbas, is Pakistani, no?

"Beyond NWFP, there is no support base for the Taliban."

Really? If you say so but my instincts are SCREAMING otherwise. What was that support base like for those guys up in Bajaur last fall? That was pretty supportive around Loe Sam wasn't it?

"The ANA troops could care less about this war. Most of them have no heart in the fight so to claim that they do it to make a point is laughable. If they did then Southern Afghanistan would now be won over by the ANA and their ISAF supporters using their Pashtun cadres to get to the people to turn against the Taliban."

And your excuse for not achieving the same in FATA is...equally laughable with far less justification? I see an army barely raised from the ashes with no pedigree at all. What do you see and upon what are your professional expectations?

Funny, for all the chest-beating military pride here, the urge to disparage others seems strong. My army receives such here all the time. I'd think more introspection would be merited on this specific ANA issue.

That's just me, though.

"The vast majority of the Iraqi security apparatus is Shia trying to pacify a sunni insurgency"

We're not talking about your assessment of our performance. We're talking about a nation of brother versus brother and what I believe remains a civil war. Inter-marriage, tribal marriages, community relations. There's a long and close history here. It's not shias to the right and sunnis to the left and kurds freeze in place.

If so, Iraq will collapse, which is o.k. by me. We'll still have a groovy lil' home up in Kurdistan, or so I'm guessin'.

"Secondly, religion is a major factor here that was absent in the examples of Vietnam..."

No. Buddhists and Catholics played a HUGE role in vietnamese politics and had to be factored into the nat'l political milieu. I was thinking more of the "emergency" than the Malaysian communist insurgency that ran from the late sixties till the late eighties.

 

[All-Green]

As a civilian knowing nothing about these tactics, in a strategical level a statement by all Green flows a mile long.



It clearly shows the Mushraff adminstration played a larger role in deceiving the world for last 7 years in this fight with the talibs.

I wish it was a simple thing to assess but it is not.
Please note that most of the Muslim world was thinking on these lines.

Past-
Russia invades Afghanistan...Mujahidden help Afghans...Jihad endorsed by US and the world as a great

Stage-1
USA invades Afghanistan..Taliban help Afghans...Jihad opposed by USA and west since they are the invader.
Musharraf tries to stop anti US Taliban...treachery and anti Muslim State/Army following US agenda...

Stage-2
USA claims of WMD and a stupid/arrogant but stable Iraqi government is thrown down and a developed country is turned inside out for decades to come.
U.N. does not sanction the action and many European countries also are not on board.
USA is perceived by overwhelming majority of the Muslim world as a gun slinging cowboy who will bring death and destruction to the land.
Taliban struggle intensifies as more and more people are becoming anti US in the Muslim Land.
No WMD found and comments by the likes of Medaline Albright regarding the Iraqi children dying of lack of supplies as an acceptable cost pisses off not only Muslims but pretty much most of the world.
Taliban gain support day by day and things become difficult for Pakistan.

I would not say Musharaff deceived the world, he was a good leader with common sense and was going in the right direction though there were hiccups on the way.

He was slowly trying to free the Pakistanis from Mullah hold and the free media etc were things only he was able to digest and ensure in Pakistan as a ruler.
Too bad that our media played political and supported the public in criticizing government and not looking at the other side of the coin.
He patiently waited for the media and the public to catch up to the idea of nationhood and what it takes to be a united country.

He was relying on the power of change to make Pakistanis see that Talibanization was not a justified act and much more damaging to Pakistan and Pakistani interest, however he had the acumen to take it slow and try to bridge the gap between east and west over the course of time.
Despite pissing off many foreign countries he was still not easy on extremism but the Afghan invasion by US was something of such a scale that it could not have been expected to root out extremism when the majority of people did not agree with the US invasion.
In those days the TTP was clever not to show its anti Pakistan and anti Muslim side and therefore it became near impossible to bring the public on board.

His slogan of Pakistan first was the right one though not many took it up especially in the tribal areas which are absolutely different from Pakistan proper.

The only long term solution to extremism is development and economy and Musharraf wanted to pursue this strategy despite the flak he got from all directions.

Military actions will assail the physical manifestation of extremism but it cannot stop the root cause of extremism and militancy.

 

[fatman17]

gents,

if Mr, Hallbrooke can tell congress not to pin the blame on "past mistakes" on the Obama Admn, then the same should apply to our civilian govt as well as the army. lets follow the progress of all three aforementioned starting 21st Jan-09 and then critique the good, bad and the ugly as we go along this long road.

it is very clear that all involved in this theater of war have made "mistakes" since 2001. the Obama admn is critically aware of this as well as the "beating" the US world image has taken since 2001. Pakistan's image has been a "perennial" issue being a muslim, nuclear-armed, militant-lover/supporter, all things negative to the western mindset. old habits die hard as we get badgerred daily by the western press.

the Obama admn is IMHO being "very fair" to Pakistan, and is having a great difficulty in convincing a "skeptical" congress to approve all the aid recommendations. it is all the more surprising to us pakistanis, is the fact that this is a democratic admn and tradition states that generally anti-pakistani. imagine the drone ops are now under the joint control of US-Pak team at jalalabad - i could have never imagined such a "concession" by the US.

so take a pinch-of-salt and lets see how things pan out. it cannot get any worse than the current situation as long as all the three parties are "on one page" determined to defeat the extremists!