Rohingya!

[Desert Fox]

.
The only time period in history when Afghanistan was not anti-Pakistan was when the Taliban were in power. Ironic for the secularists and liberals in Pakistan.

That is an undeniable fact of history.

The position we find ourselves in today is not the most ideal even from a military stand point. Roughly 70% of our border is occupied by nations hostile to us (India and Afghanistan), 20% by Iran which is not exactly friendly but not hostile either, and then 10% by China which is our only friendly neighbor.

That is extremely worrying. So in light of the above I believe we were justified in backing the Taliban because that was the only viable option to reduce the threats facing us. We were being pragmatic.

Interestingly I was reading Hitler's Second Book (that's the title too btw) which is explicitly focused on foreign policy and in it he mentions Germany's vulnerable position from a geographic stand point being surrounded by enemy powers on every side and lacking any natural barriers.

I believe Pakistan finds itself in a identical position today.

 

[Aung Zaya]

In a statement after a closed-door meeting, the 15-member Council "called for immediate steps to end the violence in Rakhine, de-escalate the situation, re-establish law and order, ensure the protection of civilians."

It sounds bad to you? @Aung Zaya

MM reponse: We agree!

they did again and again... and the result unchanged.. thanks to India , Russia and China.

 

[Psychic]

That is an undeniable fact of history.

The position we find ourselves in today is not the most ideal even from a military stand point. Roughly 70% of our border is occupied by nations hostile to us (India and Afghanistan), 20% by Iran which is not exactly friendly but not hostile either, and then 10% by China which is our only friendly neighbor.

That is extremely worrying. So in light of the above I believe we were justified in backing the Taliban because that was the only viable option to reduce the threats facing us. We were being pragmatic.

Interestingly I was reading Hitler's Second Book (that's the title too btw) which is explicitly focused on foreign policy and in it he mentions Germany's vulnerable position from a geographic stand point being surrounded by enemy powers on every side and lacking any natural barriers.

I believe Pakistan finds itself in a identical position today.

Exactly. Every Afghan government other than the Taliban had always supported the rebels in Baluchistan and the frontier province. The current Afghan government still does that.
Moreover, the Taliban did enjoy the support of the majority of the pushtoon population of Afghanistan contrary to what we are made to believe by the Western media. They still do enjoy the support of many Afghans.

Again I would like to ask those who call for an unbiased operation against all the militant groups. Is it worth it to make a new enemy...a new enemy which is now a big power in Afghanistan?
Is the appeasement of the US more important than relative peace in our country? We will only start a new fire in our country by taking action against such groups which are not harming us. (And no one will ever be satisfied by our new counter terrorism drive anyways)

Interestingly I was reading Hitler's Second Book (that's the title too btw) which is explicitly focused on foreign policy and in it he mentions Germany's vulnerable position from a geographic stand point being surrounded by enemy powers on every side and lacking any natural barriers.

Pakistan also lacks strategic depth.
Numerically smaller forces as compared to it's hostile neighbor.... a few choke points not so far away from the border....If they fall, then we are in for a big trouble...less space to withdraw. The real game changer is the nuclear deterrent.