US & Pakistan Dispute and Tensions over Haqqani group

[Patrician]

Like I've said before, English is a wonderfully rich and nuanced language.

Si Seniore!

 

[VCheng]

America's Shambles in Afghanistan!
Brian Cloughley

................................I’ve got news for Mullen and Panetta. If they imagine the Pakistan Army will be a pushover like the Iraqis, they have another think coming. If US forces attempt an incursion into Pakistan in North Waziristan or anywhere else they will meet reaction not only from the tribes and militants but from a proud and professional army which will not accept flagrant violation of national sovereignty. I know the Pakistan Army, and I state flatly that man-for-man it will hammer any opponent, no matter if the skies are horizon-filled with US bombers.

Does America think this is a price worth paying?

It depends on how high the stakes are raised.

 

[TaimiKhan]

Haqqani network created by the CIA: Rehman Malik – The Express Tribune

Kind of true, since in the soviet-afghan war, Haqqani's came to light.

 

[Patrician]

So what if the members of the NA & Imran Khan are lying?

So you are accepting that Imran Khan lied and your masses in Pakistan were entrapped by his lies, throng as they did, his dharnas?

That means Pakistani masses themselves do not know what is good for them.

That means someone from outside must come in and tell them what's good for them, in this case, Uncle Sam, probably?

So what's wrong if Uncle Sam starts upping the ante against Pakistan, tomorrow i.e. puts the heat on Pakistan?

As it is, you have accepted that Pakistani masses, and by implication of that, their voted-to-power leaders have no competence in deciding on the common good of the country.

That particularly justifies any offensive Uncle Sam decides to partake in, in Pakistan.

...and you also agree to this.

 

[Rafael]

It depends on how high the stakes are raised.

You missed rest of the article?

 

[iPhone]

So you are accepting that Imran Khan lied and your masses in Pakistan were entrapped by his lies, throng as they did, his dharnas?

That means Pakistani masses themselves do not know what is good for them.

That means someone from outside must come in and tell them what's good for them, in this case, Uncle Sam, probably?

So what's wrong if Uncle Sam starts upping the ante against Pakistan, tomorrow i.e. puts the heat on Pakistan?

As it is, you have accepted that Pakistani masses, and by implication of that, their voted-to-power leaders have no competence in deciding on the common good of the country.

That particularly justifies any offensive Uncle Sam decides to partake in, in Pakistan.

...and you also agree to this.

why are you thinking so hard? I thought you didn't give a damn?

 

[Patrician]

why are you thinking so hard? I thought you didn't give a damn?

That was on the other thread.

Besides, that's why they say Jesus loves beer, eh!

Coz' it makes genius flow!

Hic!

No, seriously, I do not have to think hard on matters of common sense.

Mr. Haider is only making it easier for me.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Firstly, in such cases, cumulative number of attacks have no meaning since it gives enough time in between to the terrorists to regroup etc. hence even if this is on from last 10 years, a couple strikes a week if merely a reminder to the targets that USAF is around.. Nothing more..

I don't see how you can argue that a group can regroup from 'two strikes a week', if its training camps, bases and HVT's are being targeted. This is an insurgent group, not a military with a vast infrastructure.

And again, I dont think I have advocated stand off weapons by them selves.. A punitive expedition doesnt need to be only airborne.

A 'punitive expedition' will not eliminate the group either, since the group will merely scatter and regroup after the 'punitive expedition' is over, or regroup elsewhere in FATA.

The deal in Afghanistan is that USA does not want Taliban or similar terror supporting groups back in absolute power as they were before 2001 and hence they need to have continuous boots on the ground. Eliminating Haqquanis from NW will not require the same presence as if and when US forces start the locate and destroy ops in that area,

If the Haqqanis are as significant a threat as the US claims, then they number in the thousands, and they are well entrenched in local society and the tribes, which means that they will simply melt into the locals and surrounding areas in FATA. I don't understand why you think that somehow a tactic that will not work in Afghanistan will work in NW.

Pakistan army will need to abandon the fence its been sitting on for last 10 years and take a side (like Musharraf had to in 2001). And PA going either way will make the job easier than what it is now. If PA goes after Haqqanis, then it will end up doing the dirty work for USA with USA continuing its air support via drones. If PA fights against USA, then for USA, it will become a visible and conventional enemy instead of today's hidden one and apart from jingoistic chest thumping aside, it wont take US military more than 3-4 weeks to decimate the Pakistani armed forces in a toe to toe fight.

Pakistan won't have to overtly oppose the US if it enters NW on a 'punitive expedition' because such an expedition would be doomed to failure - it would unite the tribes with the Taliban, and invite Al Qaeda and every other extremist group in Pakistan to join the fray, and essentially end up strengthening the Haqqanis. The group itself would relocate to other parts of FATA and carry out hit and run attacks against any 'punitive US expedition', and then the US would be calling for 'military operations against the Haqqanis and others' in other parts of Pakistan.

Without Pakistani military support the only thing the US will accomplish is to make the problem much worse and even more intractable.

 

[VCheng]

You missed rest of the article?

Nope. Read and understood every word.

 

[unicorn]

The attacks that happened in Afghanistan on the same day as there was a ceremony held in New Yorks about the victims of 9/11 the people should naturally be thinking about the US failure in Afghanistan, but the US administration very cunningly directed the attention of their people from the real thing.Now the entire focus is shifted towards Pakistan and entire blame game is upon Pakistan.With this betrayal Pakistan should from now on wards stop giving them the defensive posture. Drones have to be stopped and NATO supply lines should be halted. That should be the only way to go forward, otherwise the US will keep increasing the pressure. Pakistan cannot make others realize by mere words now, The idea that you can just say that Iraq have weapons of mass destruction and you can attack them will not work here.

 

[karan.1970]

I don't see how you can argue that a group can regroup from 'two strikes a week', if its training camps, bases and HVT's are being targeted. This is an insurgent group, not a military with a vast infrastructure.

If we go by what USA's stand is , its an insurgent group supported completely by a sovereign nation's military infrastructure and human resources. and hence 2 strikes a week (all of them can not be successful) are no big deal...

A 'punitive expedition' will not eliminate the group either, since the group will merely scatter and regroup after the 'punitive expedition' is over, or regroup elsewhere in FATA.

Wont need to.. Will create enough disruption to drastically reduce their ability to attack Afg.. Kind of taking the battle to the enemy instead of always defending..

If the Haqqanis are as significant a threat as the US claims, then they number in the thousands, and they are well entrenched in local society and the tribes, which means that they will simply melt into the locals and surrounding areas in FATA. I don't understand why you think that somehow a tactic that will not work in Afghanistan will work in NW.

Simply because, in Afghanistan, this group is fighting against the govt. In Pakistan this group is allegedly flourishing with govt's help. So the attack though directly on Haqquani network, will be indirectly targeting the parts of Pakistani establishment who are supporting these groups.

Please understand, that unlike in Afghanistan, the objective of US forces will not be to liberate the local population from Taliban.. It will be to keep them off balance and scattered to prevent them from being an effective and hostile cross border force for Afghanistan.

Pakistan won't have to overtly oppose the US if it enters NW on a 'punitive expedition' because such an expedition would be doomed to failure - it would unite the tribes with the Taliban, and invite Al Qaeda and every other extremist group in Pakistan to join the fray, and essentially end up strengthening the Haqqanis. The group itself would relocate to other parts of FATA and carry out hit and run attacks against any 'punitive US expedition', and then the US would be calling for 'military operations against the Haqqanis and others' in other parts of Pakistan.

You are being overly optimistic in your assessment..

Firstly, PA wont be able to stay neutral, simply because it will be impossible to live down the fact that US forces are operating in Pakistani territory without Pakistani consent or resistance...

Secondly, if Pakistan allows the US forces to operate in NW, and even if you are right in assessing that the expedition is bound to fail, even then, the havoc wrecked by that operation on the Haqquanis will be large enough for them to not trust Pakistan administration again and be the asset that they were supposed to be for Pakistan in Afg.

And how would you determine the success or failure of the punitive expedition.. Its not a lot of army bases that Taliban can attack using hit and run.. It probably would be a series of ingress, attack and egress by fast moving forces with excessive air support.. That is the key difference between Occupation and interdiction forces..

Without Pakistani military support the only thing the US will accomplish is to make the problem much worse and even more intractable.

Even if I agree to this, who do you think its worst for?? USA or Pakistan??

 

[Patrician]

The attacks that happened in Afghanistan on the same day as there was a ceremony held in New Yorks about the victims of 9/11 the people should naturally be thinking about the US failure in Afghanistan, but the US administration very cunningly directed the attention of their people from the real thing.Now the entire focus is shifted towards Pakistan and entire blame game is upon Pakistan.With this betrayal Pakistan should from now on wards stop giving them the defensive posture. Drones have to be stopped and NATO supply lines should be halted. That should be the only way to go forward, otherwise the US will keep increasing the pressure. Pakistan cannot make others realize by mere words now, The idea that you can just say that Iraq have weapons of mass destruction and you can attack them will not work here.

You are confusing cause and effect here. Let me clarfy.

The US failing or seemingly failing in Afghanistan :Effect

Pakistan's habit of looking both ways : Cause

 

[deckingraj]

Look with all due respect i am not interested in showing you how naive you argument is...However etiquette say's i should try...so let me share my thoughts once again...b/w please try to understand the point and then reply...

strong statement from the top, right? here is another strong statement that came from as high atop as you'd get in american politcal system. January 2011, President of the United States Mr. Obama spoke on Raymond Davis case and declared him a diplomat who must be granted diplomatic immunity. You know what followed in the days latter of Mr. Obama's statement? RD was proved to be a CIA contractor who was in Pakistasn illegally and no diplomat.

So we know how "truthful" the american officials can get when things aren't going their way. Their lies aren't hidden from the world as much as some people would prefer to ignore them. And of course their biggest lie of WMD in Iraq which is now pinned on Iraqis for deceiving the Americans into believing they had WMD - dont wanna go off-topic here on this-

Their previous lies show how trustworthy the word is that come out of the mouths of highest American officials when their interest is involved. They can go to extreme ends to make it appear to be truthful. Majority of the world sees it as is, too. However, you guys being a confrontational neighbor will choose to believe any negative word which maligns Pakistan.

Did i even claimed if what US is saying is truth or lie??? How does it matter if their politicians are caught with their pants down and that too on multiple occasions????

Secondly why is everyone in Pakistan running from pillar to post if what their so called lier officials are saying something..??? Simply ignore the crap and move one...However that is not going to happen..

Look you folks are educated lot in Pakistan...You guys should be smart enough to understand that messing with US has its consequences....At the end of the day it is all about choosing what option is the least expensive for Pakistan....IMHO haqqani's are going to be targeted with or without Pakistan's help...How long US will show patience in this regard is the million dollar question...

 

[Devil Soul]

US senator says 'all options on table' on Pakistan
By Reuters
Published: September 25, 2011
WASHINGTON: The United States (US) will have to consider all options “including defending our troops” in confronting Pakistani support for militant networks fighting US soldiers in the region, a US senator said on Sunday.
“We need to put Pakistan on notice,” Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican member of the Armed Services Committee said on “Fox News Sunday.”
US military leaders said last week the Pakistani army’s powerful ISI spy agency supported the Haqqani militant group that Washington blames for an attack on its embassy and other targets in Kabul, Afghanistan. Pakistan denied the allegations.
Graham said Pakistan has to choose between helping the Haqqani network and helping the US fight al Qaeda in Afghanistan and border regions of Pakistan.
“The idea of Pakistan’s intelligence agencies supporting terrorism as a national strategy needs to come to an end,” Graham said
“It destabilizes Afghanistan. They’re killing American soldiers. If they continue to embrace terrorism as part of their national strategy we’re going to have to put all options on the table, including defending our troops.”
Graham said Washington should reconsider assistance to Pakistan and noted last week’s approval by a Senate committee of $1 billion to Pakistan for counterterrorism operations. The panel made that and any economic aid conditional on Islamabad cooperating with Washington against militant groups, including the Haqqanis.
The senator did not elaborate on what US military action he would advocate if the situation did not change.
“I am saying that the Pakistan is engaging in hostile acts against the US and our ally Afghanistan,” he said.

 

[Emmie]

I reckon Pakistan also has all options on the table..