What's new

Featured US could Sanction Pakistan post-Withdrawal; Rubin

. .
Says the COVID aid recipient. Did you get your dose of oxygen today?
this is how indians please their white masters, fight on their behalf.

the reason why india is a lap dog of US and whites and they consider india neutral as they know servants can't ask questions. they only have problems with countries like China Russia Pakistan Iran & Turkey who dont take orders from white or US.
 
. .
There are still people on this forum who want F16 block 70 lol. I wish these people
had a little self respect.
People who have been westernised have no self respect. You will see this everywhere
 
.
I brought it up to raise awareness of what they are planning. I’m sure the Government and military are working on building its narrative and planning for all contingencies. It was in the 90’s that the US was negotiating with the Taliban for the Unocal pipeline (probably mostly through Pakistan) and it won’t be any different if they want to mine there once the dust settles in Afghanistan. Besides alienating Pakistan will create a country less likely to stay neutral via a vi some more ambitious Chinese interests in the region. The US is still gonna need Pakistan to keep an eye on groups like ISIS-K from growing in the region, as well as being not only a counter balance to China and Russia in Pakistan, but through Pakistan, possibly an alternative for Afghanistan and the Central Asian countries, like Kazakhstan, which wants to maintain a separate identity from the Russians. Working with Pakistan, is also the best long term way to hope the Taliban are not isolated and therefore the lives of Afghan people, for which the US sacrificed 20 years, has a chance to have any meaningful peace.

1997, Sugarland Texas where the Taliban were holding meetings with Unocal executives. At the end of the day, the strategic calculus will be about mutual benefit. Just like after the Vietnam war, the two countries, after some time, normalized relationships, and now focus on common interests.

99476acef4a4414c9cc47587fe8a53fe_18.jpeg





 
. .
Isn't guys like Rubin are considered white gods in India whom they worship ?
 
.

Great find, good to see the status quo prior to 9/11

If I remember correctly, I remember seeing this before 9/11. There biggest argument was that they inherited foreigners living in their country when they took power, and they were not given any options to expel him that would not violate Pashtunwali’s code of hospitality.

The American being interviewed points out that the US didn’t have a policy to Afghanistan and only a policy on OBL; I.e. failure to recognize and work with the government (and its justice system) in power in Kabul, regardless of whether you like them or not, similar to Nixon’s recognition of the CCP in Beijing over the KMT in Taiwan, was a major problem then and may be again if the government changes in the future.

The “whatever” in the third video at 2:50 when responding to “this is not a rationale explanation” :p:, and this gem “if you don’t like the image in the mirror, don’t break the mirror, break your face”:woot: at 4:20.

Secondly that a 24 year old diplomat, with presumably limited diplomatic experience (although he appeared calm, mostly cool except for the outburst and collected) was the person chosen to go speak to the US on their behalf, and that should have been a hint that they were being as straight forward as possible, or naively straight forward in their diplomatic overtures. He was also probably one of the best they hand.

The Buddha Statues incident showed the Taliban Council, made the decision/issued the advise and not the leader, were not going to beg for foreign aid (after supposedly giving two weeks to work out the matter) and when pressed we’re going to penalize the outside world for their implicit sanctions. This highlights the power of the council (or commission) over the leaders, as is seen with the shadow governors and commissions in each of the provinces nowadays. The video also hints that the Taliban election process is that of election of leaders through councils of hundreds or thousands of scholars. (In a podcast, their logic was explained as, “why should a drug addict have the same power via one man one vote as a scholar”)

Also towards the end of the first video (11:30-13:00) , what was being hinted at as Masood’s faction’s only realistic option was some kind breakdown among the Taliban, which did not happen (2001), and is even less likely these days (2021). Although, at the time there was the idea of partitioning Afghanistan with the Persian/Dari speaking areas going one way and the Pashto speaking areas going a separate way. In recent days, I have heard that this maybe what the Tajiks and other northerners might want if Kabul falls (an option mentioned by an American think tanker); with potential expulsion of Pashtuns from Northern Afghanistan such as areas around Kunduz, to minimize the chance the Pashtuns from the south could support with them to take over the north or be the means to prevent a partition in the first place.

For those that think they can use the Pashtunistan angle to get the Afghan Taliban to cross the Durand line military, should understand that they will probably make sure this partition doesn’t happen inside Afghanistan first, as it was territory they have controlled before and still do in parts. until all of Afghanistan is unified under one government, it is highly unlikely the Taliban will make any claims across the Durand line, and even then some kind of freer movement of peoples and goods could be worked out with the Pakistani government should it come to that.


Very curious to know what became of this diplomat. If he’s still around he would be in his mid 40s.
 
Last edited:
.
Great find, good to see the status quo prior to 9/11

If I remember correctly, I remember seeing this before 9/11. There biggest argument was that they inherited foreigners living in their country when they took power, and they were not given any options to expel him that would not violate Pashtunwali’s code of hospitality.

The American being interviewed points out that the US didn’t have a policy to Afghanistan and only a policy on OBL; I.e. failure to recognize and work with the government in power in Kabul. Secondly that a 24 year with presumably limited diplomatic experience was the person chosen to go speak to the US on their behalf, and that should have been a hint that they were being as straight forward as possible.
there is an argentinian company who got a contract from taliban for mining and other mineral extraction, not any yankee outfit. BUT 3 years later 9/11, that was 2 decades ago now and we come full circle.
 
. . .
there is an argentinian company who got a contract from taliban for mining and other mineral extraction, not any yankee outfit. BUT 3 years later 9/11, that was 2 decades ago now and we come full circle.

It has indeed come full circle.
 
.
Last edited:
.
They can try and then they can also forget that Afghan Taliban will keep any promise they made with USA.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom