Afghanistan: Part IX the Pakistan Connection

19 posts / 0 new
Last post
Afghanistan: Part IX the Pakistan Connection



Continued from [url=]h...


Babbler # 4790
posted 06 September 2008 02:35 AM

NATO supply cut by Pakistan:


BARA: In a major development, the federal government on Friday announced disconnection of supply lines to the allied forces stationed in Afghanistan through Pakistan in an apparent reaction to a ground attack on a border village in South Waziristan agency by the Nato forces.


Incursion into Pakistan are, predictably, raising the ire of the inhabitants. How far will Pakistan take this? Officially, Pakistan is a US ally but realisticly they are fiercely independent of any US connections.

[url=]Confront This Gangsterism[/url]


As the lawmakers were unanimously condemning the American troops’ thuggish raid on a South Waziristan village and calling upon the government to repel such future assaults “with full force”, an American drone was fatally striking at villages in North Waziristan on Thursday, in a blatant demonstration that the American warlords give two hoots to the sanctity of our territorial sovereignty. It is irrelevant who the Americans took out in their drone assault. What is critically pertinent is if we have leased out our sovereignty to them, auctioned off our national respect and dignity to them, and if we have abdicated all responsibility to safeguard our borders and territorial sovereignty. After all, what kind of a non-NATO ally of America are we and what kind of its partner in its so-called war on terror are we that it takes our sovereignty for granted so playfully?

How will Pakistan respond?



Originally posted by webgear:
I believe most organizations and historians agree that the Taliban did not become an organization until 1994 as the earliest. Why do keep stating they existed in 1980s?[/b]

The Taliban, like the mujahideen before them, didn't materialize out of thin air. I'm positive there is no abracadabra law of physics.

After the withdrawal of the Soviets in 1989, the maddrassas continued churning out highly skilled terrorists, to supply other armed insurgencies in regions such as Kashmir (lasting until 1999 war with India). CIA/Pakistani ISI camps were basically factories for creating terrorists, as they churned out successive armies of paramilitary units and terrorists. CIA/Pak/Saudi-funded maddrassas trained many of the Bosnian jihadis in 1992 and 1995, Chechens in 1994 and 1996, Taliban 1995 and 1996, and Kosovo Liberation Army 1998-99. Former graduate students of the terrorist camps went on to assassination attempts on Benazir Bhutto in 1993 (Yousef and KSM), bomb the World Trade Center the first time (Yousef), and bin Laden's attempt to murder Moamar Qaddafi in 2001?. Gulbuddin Hekmatyar was a stooge of the west in the beginning, and who immediately set about destabilizing the victorious Mujahedeen in Afghanistan by launching rockets on Kabul and lighting the fuse on the Afghan civil war. Mullah Omar received satellite intel from the CIA, revealing to him the location of a hidden convoy of Soviet trucks loaded with weaponry, giving him the upper hand in the civil war. - [url=]sourc...

According to [url='s embassy,[/url] Pakistan's terror network was comprised of:


"38 terrorist training centres from where recruits were regularly sent on "jehad" missions to Kashmir and other parts of the world...Facts and figures about Pakistan's role in fostering terrorism in India compiled by Indian security forces are as follows: Number of terrorist camps in Pakistan 37; number of terrorist camps in Pakistan-occupied Kashmir 49; number of Pakistan-run terrorist camps in Afghanistan: 22; total number of hardcore terrorists operating in Jammu and Kashmir: 2300; total number of foreign mercenaries operating in Jammu and Kashmir: 900; number of Pakistan terrorists killed by Indian security forces: 291; number of Indian civilians killed by Pakistan terrorists: over 29,000...Harkat-ul-Ansar, Al-Badr, Lashkar-e-Toiba and Tehreek-ul-Mujahideen, all associated with terrorist financier [b]Osama bin Laden."[/b]

[url=]Who is Osama bin Laden?[/url]


In 1979 "the largest covert operation in the history of the CIA" was launched in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in support of the pro-Communist government of Babrak Kamal.2:

With the active encouragement of the CIA and Pakistan's ISI [Inter Services Intelligence], who wanted to turn the Afghan jihad into a global war waged by all Muslim states against the Soviet Union, [b]some 35,000 Muslim radicals from 40 Islamic countries joined Afghanistan's fight between 1982 and 1992[/b]. Tens of thousands more came to study in Pakistani madrasahs. [b]Eventually more than 100,000 foreign Muslim radicals were directly influenced by the Afghan jihad[/b] 3. . .

In March 1985, President Reagan signed National Security Decision Directive 166,...[which] authorize[d] stepped-up covert military aid to the mujahideen, and it made clear that the secret Afghan war had a new goal: to defeat Soviet troops in Afghanistan through covert action and encourage a Soviet withdrawal. The new covert U.S. assistance began with a dramatic increase in arms supplies -- a steady rise to [b]65,000 tons annually by 1987[/b], ... as well as a "ceaseless stream" of CIA and Pentagon specialists who traveled to the secret headquarters of Pakistan's ISI on the main road near Rawalpindi, Pakistan. There the CIA specialists met with Pakistani intelligence officers to help plan operations for the Afghan rebels.4

[url=]The CIA's Intervention in Afghanistan preceded the Soviet Invasion[/url] 1998 Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski(one of many of the USSA's embedded bureaucrats)

[ 06 September 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


There is no Afghan resistance.

The CIA runs the whole world.

You call that a progressive viewpoint? A rational viewpoint?

Give subjugated people some credit for being able to fight back without having to be labelled CIA agents or terrorists.



Originally posted by unionist:
[b]You call that a progressive viewpoint? A rational viewpoint?[/b]

What are you talking about? I quoted an Indian embassy report on Kashmir and Pakistan's early efforts to Talibanize the border region. We're not interested in make-believe history, just the real thing.

[url=]VVAWA-I[/url] summarazing the book [b]Taliban[/b] by Ahmed Rashid Yale University Press, $14.95


The Taliban originated when the CIA with ISI (the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate) recruited radical Muslims from around the world to fight with the Afghan mujahadeen against the Soviet Union. The United States wanted to demonstrate that the entire Muslim world was fighting against the USSR along with Afghans and American benefactors. And in 1980, Osama bin Laden arrived in Afghanistan, bringing funds from the reactionary Saudi Arabian ruling class to the mujahadeen. When the CIA and ISI decided to train thousands of Muslims from around the world to fight in Afghanistan, Osama bin Laden was one of the key organizers in this effort. The author estimates that after 1982 more than 100,000 Muslims from dozens of countries received political or military training in the CIA-backed camps of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

[b]When the USSR disintegrated the U.S. said that this was a failure of communism, but many Muslims saw it as a victory for Islam. Many wanted to take on the U.S. with their new found strength. What followed the Soviet defeat were four years of mass rape, intense civil war-50,000 people died when the mujahadeen broke up into warring factions.[/b] Many of the leaders of that civil war are now the commanders in the Northern Alliance and have returned to power in the cities. The Northern Alliance is a group of mutually hostile forces united by their hate for the Taliban and their desire for foreign support. . .

Western popular perception has consciously equated Islam with the Taliban and Bin Laden style terrorism-but as we said: [b]Before the Taliban, Islamic extremism had never flourished in Afghanistan. The U.S. and its allies planted and nourished it.[/b] Bin Laden was "our boy" and our government didn't say a peep about the Taliban's atrocities or their war on women. In fact, most of the Islamic world never said a word about the Taliban's extremism. Pakistan, Saudi and Arab states did not issue statements calling for rights for women.

History is history, and it refuses to be altered by amateur historians.

[url=]Clinton Administration supported the "Militant Islamic Base"[/url]


[b]Give subjugated people some credit for being able to fight back without having to be labelled CIA agents or terrorists.[/b]

The Taliban are being waged war on by their own mothers, the CIA and Pentagon. They created the Taliban, and now they are using the Taliban and the "phony war on terror" as an excuse to occupy Central Asia militarily. Surrounding Russia and China and establishing U.S. military presence on that side of the world has been the long game for many years. Canada has no business participating in this immoral and illegal war on poor people. And, many millions of people in Central Asia are not agreeable with Taliban ideology, and this is entirely plausible and verifiable. The Taliban are not the Sandinistas or NVA or even Cuban campesinos of 1959. In fact, not all of the cookie cutters for creating Taliban jihadis and militant Islam in general were returned to the central factory for a refund. War and death rein merrily in the meantime.

[url= U.S. Military Officers Challenge Official Account of 9/11[/url]


[url=][... Commissioners[/b] for 9-11 Truth[/url]

[url=' families for 9-11 Transparency and Accountability[/url]

[url=]Canada Wants THE TRUTH![/url]

[url=][b]ND...'ers for 9-11 Truth[/url]

truth? You want the truth? You can't haaaaandle the truth!!![/A Few Good Men]

[ 06 September 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]


Interesting commentary on the difference between NATO and American approaches to Afghanistan by [url= Chayes[/url], who has lived in Khandahar since 2001.


NATO’s second advantage is continuity, despite its multinational makeup. I observed rivalry between American units lead to confusing policy reversals each time new troops came in. The best American commanders were those who understood that Afghanistan is no toy-soldier battlefield, that they would have to bone up on anthropology, diplomacy and civil engineering. But such commanders were rare, and their replacements — seeking to make their own mark — usually undid their work within weeks.

NATO has tried to reduce the disruption of replacing troops and officers en masse. Rotations are staggered. This may cause some logistical headaches, but it reduces abrupt changes in direction.

But if NATO is doing better than the United States, why is Afghanistan doing worse? The answer is twofold. NATO was brought in too late, and under false pretenses

American incursions into Pakistan will inflame Pakistani Taliban while American heavy-handed treatment of Afghans will encourage more Taliban support within Afghanistan.

The reaction from unofficial Pakistan may be a turning point in changing the Afgan War from a lost opportunity to build a functioning state into humiliating war of attrition that will increase casualties on both sides,not to mention the 'collateral damage'.

In this present election, I believe it important to press the Prime Minister to state how many casualties he is personally prepared to be held accountable for before enough is enough.

Maybe Jack can ask him point-blank.

George Victor

Expect our free and brave media types NOT to ask that and other pertinent questions for the duration of the electon campaign - so that they are not accused, like the CBC, of bias!


Another Canadian soldier dies.

The political influence of Canadian deaths will not be lost on the Taliban(or its enablers). It is possible that canadians will be targeted to enhance this influence.

George Victor

That will be the Conservative explanation.



Originally posted by George Victor:
[b]Expect our free and brave media types NOT to ask that and other pertinent questions for the duration of the electon campaign - so that they are not accused, like the CBC, of bias![/b]

Very true. neither can we expect the Hapless Hampster to spine up but Jack is in an excellent position to ask the hard questions - questions that will have repercussions if the PM weasels or avoids them.

George Victor

And from a period of babble when that PM was still Reform, not yet Alliance, working out of the University of Alberta, this prediction :

And Rasmus, while the usual Reform party hacks try to twist what we say, a more subtle study of events has its place. For example, in George Bush's speech yesterday, there was a suggestion that the war now begun
will not end in Afganistan. "Today we focus on Afganistan, but the battle is broader."

Today, there is a flurry of "informed speculation" that Iraq is next. The Toronto Star has an article on this.

As I pointed out on another thread, Charles Krauthammer, an inside-the-loop columnist for the Washington Post, is predicting
that Syria, Iraq, and Iran will have to have their regimes removed for this war to be a success.

We should be sure what we are signing up for before we sign.

From: toronto | Registered: May 2001


Iraq, Georgia,Afghanistan are all symptoms of the disease of imperialism. I wonder what effect American economic concerns will have on limiting any US response to Pakistani escalation of the insurgency?

Crazy George still has 4 months left stuck on stupid. I'm of the opinion that while he may not attack Iran, his administration will do something stupid to force the next administration into continuing what he started.

That person of the night, Cheney is in the Caucasus, talking loud and poking Russia with a stick. Any Pakistani actions to thwart the US in Afghanistan may result in similar actions by Iran and even Russia.


Obama and warmongering Liberal plutocrats have said they would complete withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by 2010. However with Brzezinski as an advisor, Obama promises tens of thousands of U.S. soldiers and marines to take out a resurgent al Qa'eda and Taliban in Afghanistan and Iraq.


[i]"We need more troops, more helicopters, more satellites, more Predator drones.” He reiterated that the US forces should be ready to cross into Pakistan without permission “to take out high-level terrorist targets like bin Laden if we have them in our sights”[/i]. - Barack Obama July 2008

[url=]Bill van Auken[/url] said:


There is no evidence that US forces are fighting Al Qaeda in Afghanistan or that the bulk of those attacking American and NATO forces are following orders issued by the remnants of the Taliban. The Pentagon has not reported the capture of Al Qaeda operatives in the stepped-up fighting that has claimed the lives of 69 US and NATO soldiers in the months of May and June.

The reality is that the resistance to the US-led occupation has grown dramatically as a direct product of the escalating slaughter of civilians, as seen in the July 6 US air strike that killed 47 members of a wedding party, the vast majority of them women and children. Anger has also been generated by the arbitrary detention and frequent torture of those picked up by US units and Afghan puppet troops, as well as by the gross corruption of the US-backed regime of President Hamid Karzai.

In the attack on a US base last Sunday that claimed the lives of nine US soldiers, local villagers reportedly participated, providing direct support to the insurgents who carried out the assault



In the attack on a US base last Sunday that claimed the lives of nine US soldiers, local villagers reportedly participated, providing direct support to the insurgents who carried out the assault.

The Frontier Post says that this attack was coordinated by a local mullah who asked other entities for 2 or 3 of their best fighters for this mission. The motive was revenge and no Taliban or other political ties were reported.

Considering that counter-insurgency experts state that a minimum of 120,000 fighting troops,not fighters and rear-echelon wallahs/doughnut peddlers are required to effect the nation building asperations of NATO,at least, Obama's 2 or 3 combat brigades will merely advance the rate at which the Americans manage to piss off the entire Afghan population.


The reason for the phony war on terror all comes down to this man. I'm afraid even a large contingent of the left were taken in by colder war imperialists.




Sabir said that American forces had violated Pakistan’s air space territory many times, but this time NATO forces attacked on ground and killed twenty innocent people. Sabir Hussain said the only way to combat this situation was Jihad against anti-Islamic forces, adding that the resolutions would do nothing to stop the territory violation from the American and NATO forces.

[url=]Jamat-e-Islami leader says 'Jihad'[/url]



It is an irrefragable fact that war on terror by now has become a tool in the hands of the US and the West to achieve their geopolitical objectives. One may argue that the US is a sole super power, therefore it is not advisable or possible to give adequate response, but one has to draw the line to put a full stop. If pushed against the wall, Pakistan will have to take recourse to quid pro quo, of course, taking into account pros and cons.

[url=]More Pakistani calls for Resistance[/url]


Except for one tiny difference - Pakistan has nuclear weapons

Pakistan is turning into another Afghanistan



Just as well I think, and for his own good as well.

Pakistan's Musharraf barred from May polls Pervez Musharraf in Karachi (31 March 2013) Pervez Musharraf returned from self-imposed exile to contest elections last month

Pakistan's former military leader Pervez Musharraf has been barred from standing in general elections in May.

An election tribunal disqualified him from running in Chitral in the north-west. Earlier, he failed in an attempt to stand in three other seats.

Mr Musharraf's lawyer says he plans to file an appeal with the Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, at least four people were killed in an attack on a convoy of the main opposition PML-N party in the south-western province of Balochistan.

Pervez Musharraf returned from self-imposed exile in Dubai and London last month saying he wanted to save Pakistan, hoping to lead his All Pakistan Muslim League (APML) party into the general election next mon