What's new

Taliban Military Chief Mullah Baradar captured by Pakistan

Good Attempt to raise Moral of taliban's lovers.

wait for yousafzai statement when mulah omer would catch from same spot.

kisyani billi khamba nocheay!

I can understand reason for your hatred for Afghan talaban , wait for Iranian regime turn , Pentagon also planning to uproot them like Saddam.
 
I can understand reason for your hatred for Afghan talaban , wait for Iranian regime turn , Pentagon also planning to uproot them like Saddam.

After failure of operation desert cross and Saddam 8 year war with US support, US. has learned a lot.
They know war option would not be useful even in future.

They are secretly working on other option.
 
Pakistan will not hand Taliban suspects to US: Malik


Suspected Taliban commander Abdullah, alias Abu Waqas outside a local court in Karachi on February 18, 2010. – AFP

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan will not turn over the Afghan Taliban's No. 2 leader and two other high-value militants captured this month to the United States, but may deport them to Afghanistan, a senior minister said Friday.

Interior Minister Rahman Malik said Pakistani authorities were still questioning Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar, the most senior Taliban figure arrested since the start of the Afghan war in 2001, and two other senior militants arrested with US assistance in separate operations this month.

If it is determined that the militants have not committed any crimes in Pakistan, they will not remain in the country, he said.

''First we will see whether they have violated any law,'' Malik told reporters in Islamabad. ''If they have done it, then the law will take its own course against them.

''But at the most if they have not done anything, then they will go back to the country of origin, not to USA,'' Malik said.

Pakistani authorities working with the CIA arrested Baradar about two weeks ago in the southern city of Karachi, Pakistani and US officials have said. At about the same time, Pakistani security forces picked up Taliban ''shadow governors'' for two Afghan provinces, Afghan officials said.

A series of raids by Pakistani forces have followed, netting at least nine al-Qaida-linked militants who were sheltering in Pakistan. Missiles fired from a US unmanned drone aircraft on Thursday killed the brother of Afghan Taliban commander Siraj Haqqani, Pakistani intelligence officials said.

Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said the US was pleased with the recent arrests. He declined to say whether they were the result of better intelligence or an increased willingness by Pakistan to go after suspected militants.

''What I will say to you, yet again, is that we are enormously heartened by the fact that the Pakistani government and their military intelligence services increasingly recognise the threat within their midst and are doing something about it,'' Morrell said.

Some of those caught in the recent operations are key figures in the Afghan insurgency, while others are members of militant groups that operate just across the border in Pakistan.

Among those arrested were Ameer Muawiya, a bin Laden associate who was in charge of foreign al-Qaida militants in Pakistan's border areas, and Akhunzada Popalzai, also known as Mohammad Younis, a one-time Taliban shadow governor in Zabul province and former police chief in Kabul, according to Mullah Mamamood, a tribal leader in Ghazni province.

Others captured in Karachi included Hamza, a former Afghan army commander in Helmand province during Taliban rule, and Abu Riyad al Zarqawi, a liaison with Chechen and Tajik militants in Pakistan's border area, Pakistani officials said.

The Taliban shadow governors - Mullah Abdul Salam of Kunduz province and Mullah Mohammad in Baghlan province - were instrumental in expanding Taliban influence in Afghanistan's north, raising fears the insurgency was spreading beyond its base in the south.

Baradar is considered a pragmatic Taliban leader, prompting some experts to speculate that he was captured so he could liaise with the Taliban leadership. Other theories include that Pakistan arrested him to thwart attempts to exclude Islamabad from any negotiations between the Afghan government and the Taliban.

Richard Holbrooke, President Barack Obama's special envoy to the region, swatted off attempts to link its timing with efforts to negotiate with the Taliban or an ongoing US-led offensive in southern Afghanistan's Helmand province.

''He was picked up because the information was developed. It had nothing to do with anything else,'' Holbrooke told reporters in Islamabad.

DAWN.COM | Pakistan | Pakistan will not hand Taliban suspects to US: Malik
 
Last edited:
You're welcome to prove where I said you did. I'd be disappointed if so.
I didn't address you in my first post on this issue - I merely concurred with the Western official in the BBC report. Your subsequent response to my comments expressed a certain degree of skepticism about whether Pakistan was indeed able to do so itself. If that was not your intention and I misread your post then there is no point of disagreement.
Your perception. I've no doubt that we were involved in this arrest. You've decided to make this some cause celebre'.
I think the chances that the US was involved are high too - where I disagree is the extent of that involvement and whether the involvement was critical. It could have been critical, but I would need to see more information to on it before accepting it.

The US media, backed by the usual 'anonymous sources' loves to crow about US 'pressure' and this and that, as if the rest of the world are dumb amateurs sitting with their fingers up their noses until the 'Mighty Americans' show up to make sure things get done right.
The only arrogance I see is yours...to be spared if you don't mind. You seem to believe that you single-handedly developed the intel on this and conducted the operation. Maybe. Maybe not. I don't think so but I know who broke the story and what they said. The NYT called it a joint operation and only you seem to insist otherwise.
The NYT broke the story based on US sources, and the played up the US angle (see my comments above). As I said, at most the US might have provided intelligence. I won't say there isn't any possibility of US assistance, but I would argue that the US role and physical presence was limited.
If your intelligence was good enough to produce this arrest, you'd have busted the likes of Mehsud without others providing the kill. You know better than present childish strawmen I'd hope. Then again...
Given that Mehsud was targeted based on Pakistani intel (finally - remember we had intel on his location a few times before as well, when the US did not divert resources to target him), I fail to see what your comment above serves to establish. We don't have the technology of the Predator, beyond pulling the trigger on the target once Pakistani intel provided his location the US likely had little to offer.

Not our borders to control. I made that clear to any not obstinately blind...that is even assuming that they've done so.
That is a duplicitous argument - whether the Afghan government is sovereign or not is irrelevant to the fact that the security of the country is largely in the hands of ISAF. Afghan security forces that can take over from ISAF is a future goal, so yes, responsibility lies with ISAF - just another example of the blame deflection and deceit practiced by the US to explain away its failures.

Fully relevant to progess and, equally, fully informed. I made that clear also, you fork-tongued devil.:lol: There's a world of difference between failure and final victory-whatever that constitutes. You accused "failures". Not I. I'm far more circumspect and recognize the travails of raising forth a nation from the mess you sponsored.
Not a mess 'we sponsored' - Afghanistan was a larger mess with the factional fighting, with or without Hekmetyar, post-Soviet withdrawal. Taliban rule actually brought around stability and some uniformity in areas under its control. The subsequent degradation would be because of the US invasion, and therefore because of the mess you sponsored.
Afghanistan is at WAR with that enemy and the afghan taliban are viewed by too many in your national security and intelligence apparatus as a strategic asset. So too most of your country.
What they may or may not be viewed as does not change the fact that there has been no physical support of them, and that the entity Afghanistan and ISAF is at war with resides primarily on Afghan soil.
Circular logic by one who willfully dissembles the value of sanctuary. That's why the taliban are called "PROXIES" and why sanctuary is so valuable to "PROXIES" and their masters.
Last I checked the largest offensive on Afghan soil since the 2001 invasion was taking place in order to route out a 'sanctuary' of the Taliban in Marja, a town on Afghan soil, not Pakistani. And it is but only the beginning of such offensives by the US (after 9 years of 'controlling' Afghanistan), again all on Afghan soil, not Pakistani.

I think it is obvious which side is engaging in willful duplicity, dissemblance and blame deflection to hide failures.

If it was under AFGHAN control then it would not be sanctuary. There is a war fought in Afghanistan and nobody makes distinction between taliban there. Nobody in the world accepts this spew you've raised forth and haven't for years.

Pakistan repeatedly signed treaties with the TTP. Afghanistan has not yet done so. If they do so, it'll have the hand of the whole world upon it as guarantors. Maybe even including Pakistan. God knows you've experience with such.
Territory in Afghanistan is controlled by the Taliban, the 15,000 troops deployed to take on marja is clear indication of that. What excuses you choose to come up with to explain the presence of sanctuary for the Afghan Taliban in a country under ISAF control and occupation for nine years is your prerogative, but that the Taliban have managed sanctuary on territory ostensibly under ISAF control is beyond doubt.

This is an Afghan insurgency directed at Afghanistan from Afghan soil, not Pakistani.

As for peace treaties - you had your approach to deal with the problem and we had ours. Just because the US doesn't like the way we chose to deal with the Taliban does not mean we not try it our way, based on our domestic political compulsions and constraints.

It's neither a failure that Marjah may be the first of many such operations any more than the P.A. conducting operations from Bajaur through SWAT/Buner to S. Waziristan and now possibly Orakzai.
Perhaps not, but it clearly points out the duplicity of the US position that the insurgency in Afghanistan is externally directed, when it is clear that the Taliban were running the insurgency in Afghanistan from Afghan soil.
"directed", though, is salient. The rest of the world has no evidence that the TTP insurgency is anything but homegrown. Not so with the Afghan insurgency. Their leadership reside on your lands. Word has it that Marjah has gone so well that Abdullah Gulam Rasoul, the afghan field commander in the area, has now displaced permanently into Pakistan.
Perhaps he has displaced into Pakistan, but as you yourself accepted there, the field commander of the insurgency was in Afghanistan. The reports from Marja, according to the locals, indicate that the Taliban imposed a ten percent tax on the poppy production, which would indicate the resource generation for the Taliban is also largely Afghan based (along with whatever Hundi and Hawala bring).

This is an Afghan insurgency directed largely from Afghanistan, not from Pakistan, and there remains no evidence their leadership resides on Pakistani soil. Movement back and forth between Afghanistan and Pakistan, yes indeed.

Perhaps you can arrest him too...with your intelligence and your muscle.
Perhaps we will, if indeed he is in Pakistan.

Only if you can show me quotes from our political and military leaders, unattributed even, that define them as "strategic assets".
Strawman argument - can you show me hard evidence of Kiyani and the GoP calling Baradar, Omar or the arrested shadow governors 'strategic assets'?

Rhetorical question of course, I know you don't have any evidence.
Not at all. We don't know the nature or circumstances behind that arrest. It is unclear yet exactly why.
The circumstances don't matter since, going by just the facts, we know that Baradar was arrested, and we have no evidence indicating Pakistan aiding and abetting him.
As to "unsubstantiated rumor mongering" don't act like you sit in briefings and know what intelligence is passed between the American and Pakistani governments validating our concerns. Denials here by you don't mean sh!t when Baradar is busted in Karachi and Haqqani sits on his azz in Miram Shah. That's plenty of proof in my book, especially when it's been asserted exactly as such by myself from beaucoup linked sources far better connected than you...in Michigan.
Again - ludicrous logic. Using your logic no country should ever arrest foreign suspects on their soil lest they get accused of 'harboring' those individuals.

As for knowing what evidence got passed or didn't, you have no clue either, yet you insist that the US had some sort of critical role to play here.
The world's "...rather strange logic...". After eight years and many more than simply those arrested in the last few weeks. More conspiracies and paranoia.
See above.
"...managed..." is a different matter. We've no indication that you've an eight year on-going manhunt for these men. We've every indication, for instance, that you've ceded Miram Shah to the Haqqani network as a base for a "valued strategic asset".
You are correct, we had no eight year man hunt going on for these individuals since our resources were prioritized elsewhere. That we were focussed on other issues critical to Pakistani national security does not indicate 'willful duplicity', it means the issue was not a major concern to us till recently.


Read it a while back - more unsubstantiated allegations and yet more display of an exaggerated sense of self-importance and the need for some Americans to engage in self-validation by maligning others and painting a picture in which the other side was 'coerced' by America 'laying the smack-down' by providing irrefutable evidence that left no choice but for the other side to comply with American wishes.

U-huh.

Again, spare us the hubris.
Possibly on every account. So? That doesn't suggest American intelligence or operational planning assistance didn't play a role.
It doesn't automatically suggest that they did either, or that it was a critical role.

I sense a drumbeat of "U.S. control" that's becoming as irritating as if I were to suggest the same about U.S. control of Pakistan. Afghanistan has a sovereign government recognized by your own. Deal with that and you'll begin to improve matters immediately. This snide insinuation of yours is an insult to UNITY, ZERO BRAVO and others whom are Afghan and deserve all the common courtesy that you expect of them. It is also an insult to all those of other nations giving of their blood and capital to assist Afghanistan becoming fully stabilized.
I don't care how you parse words and engage in pedantry to illustrate 'Afghan sovereignty' - the reality, obvious to most, is that Afghanistan is under US/ISAF control (on the military and security front at least), and Baradar managed to travel through the country undetected, likely several times.
As to conjecture, your premise would only be true if we were to presume the ISI in as nascent a state of formation as the Afghan NSD. As to an afghan crossing from Pakistan into Afghanistan, insurgents do so often enough. I see nothing there unusual.
My premise is not based on any calculus that includes the Afghan security and intelligence apparatus - it is based on the fact that military control of Afghanistan lies in the hands of ISAF, and the relevant entities would be the ISAF militaries and intelligence, including the US military and the CIA.
 
Last edited:
Tipped off by the Americans, Pakistani counterterrorist officers took several men into custody, meeting no resistance.

Only after a careful process of identification did Pakistani and American officials realize they had captured Mullah Baradar himself, the man who had long overseen the Taliban insurgency against American, NATO and Afghan troops in Afghanistan.

New details of the raid indicate that the arrest of the No. 2 Taliban leader was not necessarily the result of a new determination by Pakistan to go after the Taliban, or a bid to improve its strategic position in the region. Rather, it may be something more prosaic: “a lucky accident,” as one American official called it. “No one knew what they were getting,” he said.
If the ISI had no idea about who it was getting, that establishes one lie at least, that the ISI has always known the whereabouts of the Afghan Taliban allegedly resident in Pakistan. If we knew their whereabouts and meant to protect them, and we knew the US would be providing intel on raids, we would not be leaving the safety of those leaders up to chance.

On the other hand, if we were that familiar with the Taliban leadership and their whereabouts, then the capture of Baradar would indicate a conscious decision to go after them.
 
Could this be the bust that nobody wanted? Did Kiyani want this to happen? Doesn't read like it. Did Baradar want this to happen? Nope. Did the Afghan government or taliban negotiating with them want this to happen? Haven't heard a word from the Afghans and it sounds like maybe some of the taliban are p!ssed.

Two weeks before the Americans could speak to him? Well, he is Pakistan's prisoner and busted on your land. We're just grateful to be able to have a chat.

Fascinating. Well there's a lot of intelligence still wrapped up in this guy so that's useful.
If this was a bust we did not want to happen, Baradar would have disappeared after being identified.
 
The same Rehman Malik that was screaming "Propaganda!" the other day? We'll see if the next face Baradar sees is Mullah Omar's. It would seem that the same determination of charges might apply to all the others as well. At a minimum, most should likely be guilty of charges under your immigration statutes but,
Rehman Malik was correctly screaming 'propaganda' about the 'joint raid' and what not reported by the NYT.

The fact that US officials were not able to get access to Baradar fro two weeks indicates that Rehman's comments about the US not getting custody of Rehman should be taken seriously.
perhaps, all Pakstan wishes to do is facilitate their return to their former activities. Anything's possible in the land of the pure.

Wouldn't that be an interesting turn of events?
Perhaps, but then we probably would never have intimated the US that we had Baradar after we ID'd him.
 
If the ISI had no idea about who it was getting, that establishes one lie at least, that the ISI has always known the whereabouts of the Afghan Taliban allegedly resident in Pakistan. If we knew their whereabouts and meant to protect them, and we knew the US would be providing intel on raids, we would not be leaving the safety of those leaders up to chance.

On the other hand, if we were that familiar with the Taliban leadership and their whereabouts, then the capture of Baradar would indicate a conscious decision to go after them.


A decision with consent of all three sides.


The spin by Western, US media claiming it was a pressure which resulted in the arrest is Only a dressing for face-saving of US. That is also agreed upon all sides.

End of the story. Just connect all the dots. Starting from London conference to Operation mushriq and deliberate announcement of the operation.

Ask Mr S-2 to give us if not exact then a rough number of Afghan fighters killed in this operation since start.

My claim is hardly even 10. The reason? :)))))))) you know its like Window shopping.
 
US was main financier in taliban war with New born Afghanistan Gov.
Pakistan agencies had provide this logistic and strategic support to mullah omer
OBL was also a US allies in Afghanistan-Russia war.

saddam is the one of the most important agent who fight 8 year with Iran with all logistic support of US,Kuwait and KSA.
He had used biological weapons against Iran provided by US.

Not one statement in your post is true. It is amazing to me that you could write five sentences and not manage to get a single fact correct. The Gulf states were the main financiers of the Afghan mujaheddin. The ISI supported several mujaheddin Afghan factions. Mullah Omar's "Taliban" didn't even exist until a few years after the Soviets left, at which point the ISI decided to shift it's support to him because Benazir Bhutto wanted Omar's group to support a natural gas pipeline project through Kandahar Province. OBL refused to even meet with an American in Afghanistan. He detested the infidel USA's involvement. He threatened to kill any Americans he encountered. The USA gaveminimal support to Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war. Most aid came from other Sunni states, France and Russia. And again, the USA only did the little it did because Iran was our enemy, not because he was our friend or "partner". The USA NEVER supplied chemical or biological weapons to Saddam. Some dual use chemicals were sold to Iraq by an American company, but without the knowledge or permission of the US government.

Your entire post a set of lies.
 
i will try to present my own assessment as to why it is absolutely critical that Omar and his main commanders be talked to via any means, one of which maybe made possible by this landmark capture of Mullah Baradar.

I wrote this twice and then deleted for fear of derailing the thread, however i felt i had to be this detailed in order to explain the change in dynamics over past few years and what is at stake.

Thank you All-Green for your excellent summary above of the situation. I think you are exactly right in your analysis. :tup:
 
Not one statement in your post is true. It is amazing to me that you could write five sentences and not manage to get a single fact correct. The Gulf states were the main financiers of the Afghan mujaheddin. The ISI supported several mujaheddin Afghan factions. Mullah Omar's "Taliban" didn't even exist until a few years after the Soviets left, at which point the ISI decided to shift it's support to him because Benazir Bhutto wanted Omar's group to support a natural gas pipeline project through Kandahar Province. OBL refused to even meet with an American in Afghanistan. He detested the infidel USA's involvement. He threatened to kill any Americans he encountered. The USA gaveminimal support to Saddam during the Iran-Iraq war. Most aid came from other Sunni states, France and Russia. And again, the USA only did the little it did because Iran was our enemy, not because he was our friend or "partner". The USA NEVER supplied chemical or biological weapons to Saddam. Some dual use chemicals were sold to Iraq by an American company, but without the knowledge or permission of the US government.

Your entire post a set of lies.

Do you think US planning to attack Iran in few months ? US Generals openly threaten Iran for possible war, what is your point of view ? America wanted peace deal with Talaban if they agreed to provide basis for US to attack on Iran.Saudia is also involved in these talks.

Israel and US working jointly on air defence system also provided THAAD system to UAE .
 
Do you think US planning to attack Iran in few months ? US Generals openly threaten Iran for possible war, what is your point of view ? America wanted peace deal with Talaban if they agreed to provide basis for US to attack on Iran.Saudia is also involved in these talks.

Israel and US working jointly on air defence system also provided THAAD system to UAE .

Fundamentalist! You are looking very anxious for US attack on Iran after closing taliban chapter.
certainly Saudia is very much willing to do its job again as they did in Iran-Iraq war.

This war is already silently going on but it take more time to unveil.

p.s:Mr.Fund. I am thankful for showing the true faces of US-saudi love.
 
Do you think US planning to attack Iran in few months ? US Generals openly threaten Iran for possible war, what is your point of view ? America wanted peace deal with Talaban if they agreed to provide basis for US to attack on Iran.Saudia is also involved in these talks.

Israel and US working jointly on air defence system also provided THAAD system to UAE .
Highly Likely

Excellent 'Lateral Thinking', Fundamentalist
 
Another twist in the story::: Famous FATA analyst Rahimullah Yousufzai said in his interview that There were disagreements between Mullah Umar and Mullah Baradar on the ongoing peace talks.Mullah Baradar refused to fight against Occupied forces in afghanistan due to which Mullah Umar sacked him as vice cheif of Taliban and appointed new leader in place of him. So guyz i think Mullah Baradar isolated himself from Taliban thts why he was enjoying his days in Karachi.It was cunning move by ISI to captured Mullah Baradar and smoothen relationship between US pak.According to me Mullah Baradar could hve been key fogure if he had been captured much earlier.:pakistan: :pakistan: :pakistan:
For all the storm in the teacup.
This was a DUD.
This Commander was DOA.
 
Back
Top Bottom