Pakistan is in danger of collapse within months

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: dphantom
Pakistan military reports appear to be exaggerated.

Link

This reporting is more in line with what has actually occurred in past operations. Very little is actually accomplished besides destroying some villages. The Pakistan military makes a show, more often than not using Frontier Corps troops and then declasres victory and leaves.

Meanwhile, the Taliban never really left and take control again when teh Pakistan troops leave.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I cannot disagree with the Bill Roggio take or the message dphantom takes away, Washington pressures Pakistan to take action, they stage a show, and as a result, a few villages are destroyed. No big deal, unless those two villages happen to be your home.

And what do we in the civilized? West really expect, if this was some sort of conventional war, both sides would eventually choose a battlefield and have at it, a test of strength where the winner gets to advance and the loser retreats as both sides rush men to the battlefield.

Sadly this is a guerrilla war, where the Pakistani army can occupy any spot it chooses, but in so doing, leaves itself weak every where else. And when the Pakistani army rushes in, the Taliban instead retreats, knowing full well, they can come back in a few days.

As the last paragraph of the link says it all, "The residents of Dir as well as in Buner, where a concurrent military operation against the Taliban is underway, fear that the security situation will deteriorate as it has throughout the Northwest Frontier Province, where the Taliban control much of the province and fighting in neighboring regions such as Swat and Bajaur has raged for years."

I do not know about you, but it must be hell on earth to live in the middle of a battleground
where fighting rages on occasion.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
The myth of Talibanistan


Apocalypse Now. Run for cover. The turbans are coming. This is the state of Pakistan today, according to the current hysteria disseminated by the Barack Obama administration and United States corporate media - from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to The New York Times. Even British Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said on the record that Pakistani Talibanistan is a threat to the security of Britain.

But unlike St Petersburg in 1917 or Tehran in late 1978, Islamabad won't fall tomorrow to a turban revolution.

Pakistan is not an ungovernable Somalia. The numbers tell the story. At least 55% of Pakistan's 170 million-strong population are Punjabis. There's no evidence they are about to embrace Talibanistan; they are essentially Shi'ites, Sufis or a mix of both. Around 50 million are Sindhis - faithful followers of the late Benazir Bhutto and her husband, now President Asif Ali Zardari's centrist and overwhelmingly secular Pakistan People's Party. Talibanistan fanatics in these two provinces - amounting to 85% of Pakistan's population, with a heavy concentration of the urban middle class - are an infinitesimal minority.

The Pakistan-based Taliban - subdivided in roughly three major groups, amounting to less than 10,000 fighters with no air force, no Predator drones, no tanks and no heavily weaponized vehicles - are concentrated in the Pashtun tribal areas, in some districts of North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), and some very localized, small parts of Punjab.

To believe this rag-tag band could rout the well-equipped, very professional 550,000-strong Pakistani army, the sixth-largest military in the world, which has already met the Indian colossus in battle, is a ludicrous proposition.

Moreover, there's no evidence the Taliban, in Afghanistan or in Pakistan, have any capability to hit a target outside of "Af-Pak"(Afghanistan and Pakistan). That's mythical al-Qaeda's privileged territory. As for the nuclear hysteria of the Taliban being able to crack the Pakistani army codes for the country's nuclear arsenal (most of the Taliban, by the way, are semi-literate), even Obama, at his 100-day news conference, stressed the nuclear arsenal was safe.

Of course, there's a smatter of junior Pashtun army officers who sympathize with the Taliban - as well as significant sections of the powerful Inter-Services Intelligence agency. But the military institution itself is backed by none other than the American army - with which it has been closely intertwined since the 1970s. Zardari would be a fool to unleash a mass killing of Pakistani Pashtuns; on the contrary, Pashtuns can be very useful for Islamabad's own designs.

Zardari's government this week had to send in troops and the air force to deal with the Buner problem, in the Malakand district of NWFP, which shares a border with Kunar province in Afghanistan and thus is relatively close to US and North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops. They are fighting less than 500 members of the Tehrik-e Taliban-e Pakistan (TTP). But for the Pakistani army, the possibility of the area joining Talibanistan is a great asset - because this skyrockets Pakistani control of Pashtun southern Afghanistan, ever in accordance to the eternal "strategic depth" doctrine prevailing in Islamabad.

Bring me the head of Baitullah Mehsud
So if Islamabad is not burning tomorrow, why the hysteria? There are several reasons. To start with, what Washington - now under Obama's "Af-Pak" strategy - simply cannot stomach is real democracy and a true civilian government in Islamabad; these would be much more than a threat to "US interests" than the Taliban, whom the Bill Clinton administration was happily wining and dining in the late 1990s.

What Washington may certainly relish is yet another military coup - and sources tell Asia Times Online that former dictator General Pervez Musharraf (Busharraf as he was derisively referred to) is active behind the hysteria scene.

It's crucial to remember that every military coup in Pakistan has been conducted by the army chief of staff. So the man of the hour - and the next few hours, days and months - is discreet General Ashfaq Kiani, Benazir's former army secretary. He is very cozy with US military chief Admiral Mike Mullen, and definitely not a Taliban-hugger.

Moreover, there are canyons of the Pakistani military/security bureaucracy who would love nothing better than to extract even more US dollars from Washington to fight the Pashtun neo-Taliban that they are simultaneously arming to fight the Americans and NATO. It works. Washington is now under a counter-insurgency craze, with the Pentagon eager to teach such tactics to every Pakistani officer in sight.

What is never mentioned by US corporate media is the tremendous social problems Pakistan has to deal with because of the mess in the tribal areas. Islamabad believes that between the Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) and NWFP, at least 1 million people are now displaced (not to mention badly in need of food aid). FATA's population is around 3.5 million - overwhelmingly poor Pashtun peasants. And obviously war in FATA translates into insecurity and paranoia in the fabled capital of NWFP, Peshawar.

The myth of Talibanistan anyway is just a diversion, a cog in the slow-moving regional big wheel - which in itself is part of the new great game in Eurasia.

During a first stage - let's call it the branding of evil - Washington think-tanks and corporate media hammered non-stop on the "threat of al-Qaeda" to Pakistan and the US. FATA was branded as terrorist central - the most dangerous place in the world where "the terrorists" and an army of suicide bombers were trained and unleashed into Afghanistan to kill the "liberators" of US/NATO.

In the second stage, the new Obama administration accelerated the Predator "hell from above" drone war over Pashtun peasants. Now comes the stage where the soon over 100,000-strong US/NATO troops are depicted as the true liberators of the poor in Af-Pak (and not the "evil" Taliban) - an essential ploy in the new narrative to legitimize Obama's Af-Pak surge.

For all pieces to fall into place, a new uber-bogeyman is needed. And he is TTP leader Baitullah Mehsud, who, curiously, had never been hit by even a fake US drone until, in early March, he made official his allegiance to historic Taliban leader Mullah Omar, "The Shadow" himself, who is said to live undisturbed somewhere around Quetta, in Pakistani Balochistan.

Now there's a US$5 million price on Baitullah's head. The Predators have duly hit the Mehsud family's South Waziristan bases. But - curioser and curioser - not once but twice, the ISI forwarded a detailed dossier of Baitullah's location directly to its cousin, the Central Intelligence Agency. But there was no drone hit.

And maybe there won't be - especially now that a bewildered Zardari government is starting to consider that the previous uber-bogeyman, a certain Osama bin Laden, is no more than a ghost. Drones can incinerate any single Pashtun wedding in sight. But international bogeymen of mystery - Osama, Baitullah, Mullah Omar - star players in the new OCO (overseas contingency operations), formerly GWOT ("global war on terror"), of course deserve star treatment.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
The above reads like a feel good story to booster the Pakistani moral.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
The above reads like a feel good story to booster the Pakistani moral.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sadly Common Courtesy also fools only himself when when ignoring the trust of the article, and the fact that what makes him feel good, does not advances the larger war for the hearts and minds of the residents of Afghanistan and the tribal areas of Pakistan, and in fact is what helps the Taliban win when these silly shows of force makes their lives artificially miserable.

Even the dimmest wit has to now question a Nato strategy that has only made negative progress for eight out of eight years running. Or the notion that the Taliban will finally make some sort of last stand against Nato military superiority if Nato can only shift the battleground to the tribal areas of Pakistan.

Widening the war did not work in Vietnam, why should it work there?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,589
5
0
The article covers all areas of the spectrum. Allows anyone to pull a point that meets one expectations and also critizes areas that may be a concern.

He states that the Pakistani military can easily defeat the Taliban; yet in practice, this has not happened. The political will does not seem to exist to win the war. (Ring a bell 1964-73)

The article trys to deflect the problems of Pakistan to the external world.
The US is not trying to replace the beloved patriot government - yet the article implies that NATO/UN will be pouring in troops to "liberate" the poor instead while using the Taliban as an excuse.
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Guys, Pakistan is NOT serious about disarming the fucking Taliban (I hate those bastards). If the beloved patriot government was serious, they'd send in 100k troops to the North West Frontier backed by gunships and tanks and forcefully disarm EVERY single person there, Taliban or not. The next step would be to single out who is Taliban by bribing and/or coercing the locals there and then imprisoning the lot of them Guantanamo Bay style. Waterboard those bearded fucks, gay pyramid them, whatever it takes for them to reveal other Taliban and/or Al Qaeda members. The US can tell Pakistan simply: Clean up your mess or we're gonna come in and do it for you and take over the territory permanently. Obama is on the right track, I just hope he has what it takes to push Pakistan into action and if they refuse, do the job ourselves. That butch dike Hillary is right, the Taliban are an existential threat to Pakistan at large, to Pashtun people in general, and to the rest of the world. I hope the US also makes a strong effort to keep Arabs out of Pakistan/Afghanistan--it's because of them that this stupid ideology has become so widespread.

Pakistan HAS to fix it's ethnic problems and as it's been mentioned in this thread already, one way for that is to end the feudal system that's prevailed in that nation since it's inception. If they don't do it NOW, that country will definitely face imminent collapse. If it does collapse, then I hope Western Pakistan is rightfully merged with Afghanistan again and the rest goes back to India (though i doubt they'd want it).
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/co...ross-north-karachi--10

It's happening a about one mile away from where I am. Hopefully it will cool down today. Apparently it has nothing to do with the Taliban. Why can't we have one year of peace!?


http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/co...-lives-in-april--bi-06


Looks like India is probably trying to foment more ethnic violence in Karachi. I'm sure tvarad and other Indians will deny this but it's pretty obvious (and sound) strategy. Pakistan is already facing instability in it's Western portion and now by killing some Pashtuns in Karachi and blaming it on the MQM, they're hoping they go at each other's throats there and the entire country crumbles. Hopefully some semblance of common sense prevails otherwise things could get really messy in Pakistan. The last thing Pakistan wants is the Taliban combined with the existing Pashtun population in Karachi to link up--it'll be the end of Pakistan for sure. Green Bean, hope you have a visa to another country to get out of there cuz they might come knocking on your door soon enough. Can't say I'm surprised though, Pakistan has been run to the ground thanks to Mahajir and Punjabis controlling 90% of the wealth. Just wait until the Balochis and Sindh people also jump into the mix.
 

5150Joker

Diamond Member
Feb 6, 2002
5,549
0
71
www.techinferno.com
The Pakistan-based Taliban - subdivided in roughly three major groups, amounting to less than 10,000 fighters with no air force, no Predator drones, no tanks and no heavily weaponized vehicles - are concentrated in the Pashtun tribal areas, in some districts of North-West Frontier Province (NWFP), and some very localized, small parts of Punjab.

To believe this rag-tag band could rout the well-equipped, very professional 550,000-strong Pakistani army, the sixth-largest military in the world, which has already met the Indian colossus in battle, is a ludicrous proposition.


Yeah I'm sure people said the same thing when the Pashtuns were dealing with the USSR (who's power eclipsed anything Pakistan could ever hope to achieve). As for the last part of the statement, did the author forget what happened when Pakistan faced the "Indian colossus in battle" 3 times?
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
oooo looky more bullshit america hating shit from TGB. whoot!

blame america for your fucked up primitive country. its all our fault your people still live like neanderthals in mud huts and caves and worship a pedophile.

 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: Citrix
oooo looky more bullshit america hating shit from TGB. whoot!

blame america for your fucked up primitive country. its all our fault your people still live like neanderthals in mud huts and caves and worship a pedophile.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all of Pakistans faults, at least it never elected a GWB. And even if you want to blame Pakistan for screwing up Afghanistan, you can't blame Pakistan for screwing up Iraq.

woot woot, GWB is two for two in starting screwed up wars.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Citrix
oooo looky more bullshit america hating shit from TGB. whoot!

blame america for your fucked up primitive country. its all our fault your people still live like neanderthals in mud huts and caves and worship a pedophile.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all of Pakistans faults, at least it never elected a GWB. And even if you want to blame Pakistan for screwing up Afghanistan, you can't blame Pakistan for screwing up Iraq.

woot woot, GWB is two for two in starting screwed up wars.

Well, for all his faults, we had to put up with GWB for 8 years. We've been putting up with Pakistan's BS in Afghanistan for 30 years and there's still no end to it.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: tvarad
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: Citrix
oooo looky more bullshit america hating shit from TGB. whoot!

blame america for your fucked up primitive country. its all our fault your people still live like neanderthals in mud huts and caves and worship a pedophile.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For all of Pakistans faults, at least it never elected a GWB. And even if you want to blame Pakistan for screwing up Afghanistan, you can't blame Pakistan for screwing up Iraq.

woot woot, GWB is two for two in starting screwed up wars.

Well, for all his faults, we had to put up with GWB for 8 years. We've been putting up with Pakistan's BS in Afghanistan for 30 years and there's still no end to it.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pakistan's bullshit in Afghanistan???????????????????????????????????????????????????

The Afghan occupation is the job of Nato!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Hate to tell you tvarad, Nato has been bungling its job in Afghanistan all by its little lonesome since day one, and need no inspired bungling instructions from Pakistan. Right now Pakistan is more of a place to deflect the blame to rather than an honest reason for Nato to self examine why it falls short.

The other delusion is that Pakistan only leased to Nato a land route into Afghanistan, nothing more and nothing less. Yet too many people just assume Pakistan sold itself into total Nato slavery for $24.00 of glass beads. And then feel betrayed when Pakistan does not play the proper step and fetch it role of slave.

Face the facts and get a clue, if Nato bitches because it can't control a wintering Taliban from filtering in across the Afghan Pakistani border because they don't have enough troops to control the border, Nato for sure for sure does not have enough troops to widen the war into the tribal areas of Pakistan where the people there are hopping mad at Nato as it is.

Even if we regard this as a military problem that its not, Nato is 500,000 troops short of enough to run an occupation of Afghanistan alone, and if Obama chooses to repeat GWB delusions, Obama will continue to get GWB results.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0

Western forces will leave the Afghanistan/Pakistan area with it fixed by bringing it into the 21st century or by bombing it back to the age of Mohammad (which should please the Taliban no end, no doubt). They have been shouting themselves hoarse over the past two years that Pakistan cannot run with the hares and hunt with the hounds. The Pakistani army top brass should stop deluding themselves that there will be one more Soviet invasion, or another 9/11 where Western aid will pour down like manna from heaven with few strings attached which they then can use to play their war-games with India while their territory is used to destabilize Afghanistan.

That's the reality, Lemon Law. Rant all you want. Afghanistan is no Iraq and certainly no Vietnam which you keep comparing it to in your delusions.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Lets just start with the first tvarad statement of, "Western forces will leave the Afghanistan/Pakistan area with it fixed by bringing it into the 21st century or by bombing it back to the age of Mohammad (which should please the Taliban no end, no doubt)."

Since Nato has failed to even bother to start to allocate the funding to bring Afghanistan into the 21'st century, tvarad other alternative is to bomb it back to the stone age. That will sure not make Nato welcome in other countries nor will it win the hearts and minds of the world.

And because Nato can't accept the fact that they don't know how to win hearts and minds, they shout them selves horse trying to deflect the blame to Pakistan.

That is the reality tvarad.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Lets just start with the first tvarad statement of, "Western forces will leave the Afghanistan/Pakistan area with it fixed by bringing it into the 21st century or by bombing it back to the age of Mohammad (which should please the Taliban no end, no doubt)."

Since Nato has failed to even bother to start to allocate the funding to bring Afghanistan into the 21'st century, tvarad other alternative is to bomb it back to the stone age. That will sure not make Nato welcome in other countries nor will it win the hearts and minds of the world.

And because Nato can't accept the fact that they don't know how to win hearts and minds, they shout them selves horse trying to deflect the blame to Pakistan.

That is the reality tvarad.

Hearts and minds, blah blah blah. Hearts and minds, blah blah blah. Hearts and minds, blah blah blah. This isn't a beauty contest, moron.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Tvarad, when Afghanistan has 31 million residents who now have a totally corrupt government, a totally corrupt police force, courts that function only by bribes, war lords ruling the country side, and when Nato does nothing to improve their lot, it sure the heck is a beauty contest.

There is not much 89,000 Nato troops can do to militarily stop the Taliban when they swim through the people like water with a simple message that their lives will not improve until the Western devils are expelled.

What you and I think is irrelevant, what the 31 million people in Afghanistan think is all important. The Nato problem is and remains, they have done nothing to make the lives of those 31 million Afghans any better. NOTHING NOTHING AT ALL.

I do not know about you tvarad, but I want to see Nato win, and if Nato wants to win, they are going to have to drastically change tactics. And Nato does not have many years left before they totally wear out their welcome.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
The real corruption is practiced by the venal pakistani army, that has foisted war after war that's drained so many resources desperately needed for the development of a desperate region. The U.S. is trying to ram the message of development down these guys' throats (including calling the recent meeting that's pledged billions in aid) but all they're interested in is access to the latest Western military gadgetry including, can you believe it, a request for their own squadron of Predator UAV drones!

As well, it is the Pakistani army that encouraged and keeps encouraging the medieval Taliban who blow up dams, roads and girls' schools, cut down electricity lines and anything else to do with development and are hell-bent on keeping Afghanistan's medieval lifestyle.

Someone like you with a third world mind and spouting first world morals just can't figure that out.

Heart and minds, my a*s!
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Until you get hearts and minds out of your ass and into your brain tvarad, Nato will continue to lose in Afghanistan. As it has for eight out of eight years running. Even if it seems to be the strategy you advocate, anyone who has an ounce of pragmatism has got to realize the results are unacceptable as that strategy continues to backfire.

As for Pakistan and its ISI, I am not trying to defend them. Pakistan is a side issue and citing wars lost 20 years ago is an even more irrelevant side issue when the Taliban is a recent problem. But in trying to avoid direct military conflict, at least Pakistan is not losing the hearts and minds battle as badly as Nato. And if Nato wants to help Pakistan, they need to aid them with economic and not military aid.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
The Afghans should count themselves blessed that a couple of nukes did not fall on their heads post Sept 11th, 2001. Next time they, along with the Pakistanis, may not be so lucky if Al-Qaeda and Taliban try something on a similar scale.

And your heart and mind is up your own a*s because only someone with that kind of anatomy can come up with your kind of arguments.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Even if I wanted to agree with you tvarad, Nato simply does not have the troops to make your idea work. So why do you so stubbornly resist changing what amounts to a proven losing strategy? Realists accept that certain things beyond their control will not change no longer how hard they wish for it, and make the most of what they have.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Originally posted by: piasabird
Who cares if they collapse? They are all a bunch of drug runners.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To start out, Pakistan is not exactly your average your average country, never forget they have nuclear weapons that can fall into the hands of terrorists. Therefore everyone has a big big stake in the stability in the Pakistani government.

Nor is the bird is the word take very astute in learning historical lessons. Because the USA made the Government of South Vietnam a very junior junior partner during the Vietnamese war, it had the net effect of making the South Vietnamese government totally destabilized
when Nixon declared peace with honor as we sailed home saying yipee we won.

Two years later it only took a troop of North Vietnamese boy scouts to push the whole rotten South Vietnamese government over without firing a shot. No, piasabird, we did not exactly win. And yes, we have big stakes in the stability of the Pakistani government.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: piasabird
Who cares if they collapse? They are all a bunch of drug runners.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To start out, Kakistan is not exactly your average your average country, never forget they have nuclear weapons that can fall into the hands of terrorists. Therefore everyone has a big big stake in the stability in the Pakistani government.

Nor is the bird is the word take very astute in learning historical lessons. Because the USA made the Government of South Vietnam a very junior junior partner during the Vietnamese war, it had the net effect of making the South Vietnamese government totally destabilized
when Nixon declared peace with honor as we sailed home saying yipee we won.

Two years later it only took a troop of North Vietnamese boy scouts to push the whole rotten South Vietnamese government over without firing a shot. No, piasabird, we did not exactly win. And yes, we have big stakes in the stability of the Pakistani government.

Kakistan (sic) can wave it's nuclear weapons around like they're just July 4th fireworks (which they've been doing ever since they were outed by India) but there will come a time when, instead of worrying about what might happen, the world will take a deep breath and say we've gotta fix this. For Pakistan, acquiring nuclear weapons has been like losing it's virginity at the cathouse so it can brag along with the big boys about how it scored. But after the initial euphoria it now has to worry about all the STDs it may have caught in the process.

The Vietnamese never threatened the West with 9/11 like catastrophes, so you may as well forget about your pet analogy, because the West ain't leaving Afghanistan without fixing it one way or another, however corrupt it's local stooges are.

 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Tvarad, Pakistan is somewhat like Iraq, when you have too few troops inside of a Country with a huge population, in this case only 25 million for Iraq and 165 million for Pakistan, its like being inside a building that is like a firetrap, if the place starts burning to the ground, Nato would be lucky to even get half of its troops out alive, much less be able to do anything.

Right now the Pakistani leader is not a very astute leader, more of an idiot by many estimates, and US meddlers are trying to replace him with Sharif who is hated by a majority. That alone could well collapse Pakistan. Tvarad, you may not think its a huge danger and that the US can manage the situation, I for one see it as a huge and uncontrollable risk that would play right into the hands of Al-Quida.
 

dphantom

Diamond Member
Jan 14, 2005
4,763
327
126
Originally posted by: Lemon law
Originally posted by: piasabird
Who cares if they collapse? They are all a bunch of drug runners.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To start out, Pakistan is not exactly your average your average country, never forget they have nuclear weapons that can fall into the hands of terrorists. Therefore everyone has a big big stake in the stability in the Pakistani government.

Nor is the bird is the word take very astute in learning historical lessons. Because the USA made the Government of South Vietnam a very junior junior partner during the Vietnamese war, it had the net effect of making the South Vietnamese government totally destabilized
when Nixon declared peace with honor as we sailed home saying yipee we won.

Two years later it only took a troop of North Vietnamese boy scouts to push the whole rotten South Vietnamese government over without firing a shot. No, piasabird, we did not exactly win. And yes, we have big stakes in the stability of the Pakistani government.

I simply cannot let this falsehood, outright lie go uncorrected.

The NVA attacked RVN with 20 divisions, superior in tanks and other armored vehicles, tactics and leadership. In early March, Thieu ordered the evacuation of the Central Highlands. This no doubt along with Congressional and Presidential refusal to come to the aid of RVN per the 1973 Peace Accords demoralized RVN leadership. Coupled with a corrupt civilian and military leadership, collapse was inevitable.

There were several notable exceptions to the ARVN collapse. Most telling was the performance of the ARVN 18th division at Xuan Loc standing off 3 NVA divisions for the better part of a month. The 18th Div was considered one of the worst ARVN divisions at the time. It shows what good leadership could do when fighting from prepared positions.

In the end, the ARVN could not stand up to the 5th largest army of the world at the time without promised US air and equipment support. The US governments public refutation of any intention to come to the aid of RVN was a direct contributing factor to the rapid disintegration of the country.