- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
TGB
Israel's concern is the nuclear program falling into the extremist's hands.
This is exhibited in the article(s) you quoted.
Israel is not against Pakistan; but is concerned about the instability.
The Mossad operates similar to any intelligence operation - remove threats to ones country and collect information that is crucial to ones country about those that are agaisnt it.
Known Muslim activites are being claimed as Mossad operations.
Pan Am, Sept 11, Bali for one.
Claiming JFK and the Hotel in Kenya is another stretch - someone is taking a rumor and treating it as gospel.
The USS Liberty was considered by Israel to be self defense - not a Mossd operation.
The other operations, I have no knowledge on.
You also neglected to comment on the fact that Pakistan was created out of another country.
Palestine was being carved out of the Middle East - similar to Iraq, Syria and Jordan.
Israel was carved out of Palestine
Israel's concern is the nuclear program falling into the extremist's hands.
This is exhibited in the article(s) you quoted.
Israel is not against Pakistan; but is concerned about the instability.
The Mossad operates similar to any intelligence operation - remove threats to ones country and collect information that is crucial to ones country about those that are agaisnt it.
Given the last statement in your quoted article discredits anything written.
Known Muslim activites are being claimed as Mossad operations.
Pan Am, Sept 11, Bali for one.
Claiming JFK and the Hotel in Kenya is another stretch - someone is taking a rumor and treating it as gospel.
The USS Liberty was considered by Israel to be self defense - not a Mossd operation.
The other operations, I have no knowledge on.
You also neglected to comment on the fact that Pakistan was created out of another country.
Palestine was being carved out of the Middle East - similar to Iraq, Syria and Jordan.
Israel was carved out of Palestine
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
If one want what is offered and it comes with conditions; then decide which it is to be.
Take the sanctions if you do not want the strings that come with avoiding the santions.
yllus
Elite Member & Lifer
- Aug 20, 2000
- 20,577
- 432
- 126
Extent of Taliban control 4/24/09
It'll be interesting to see what happens Islamabad is rendered ineffective due to constant attack. Maybe that's the Pakistani military's goal all along - neutralize the democratic government through the Taliban bogeyman and assume control for another few decades?
It'll be interesting to see what happens Islamabad is rendered ineffective due to constant attack. Maybe that's the Pakistani military's goal all along - neutralize the democratic government through the Taliban bogeyman and assume control for another few decades?
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
We must never forget that Pakistan holds one ace card, they can simply terminate the lease to the road into Afghanistan that runs through their soil.
Leaving the US and Nato with few options. (1) Go hat in hand to Iran and beg for a land route in. (2) Air ship all supplies and personnel into Afghanistan and a huge increase in supply costs. (3) Go hat in hand to the Soviets, and aid them in building that not yet built rail link into the Northern Stans to eventually reduce the air supply costs.
Military 101, if your supply line is cut, there goes your ability to do anything. And the GWB invasion of Iraq was rendered far less effective when the Turkish legislature said nyet to using Turkish soil to invade Iraq from the North also.
Leaving the US and Nato with few options. (1) Go hat in hand to Iran and beg for a land route in. (2) Air ship all supplies and personnel into Afghanistan and a huge increase in supply costs. (3) Go hat in hand to the Soviets, and aid them in building that not yet built rail link into the Northern Stans to eventually reduce the air supply costs.
Military 101, if your supply line is cut, there goes your ability to do anything. And the GWB invasion of Iraq was rendered far less effective when the Turkish legislature said nyet to using Turkish soil to invade Iraq from the North also.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
The lease came with benefits.
Can the Pakistan government do without the benefits.
Also, while if may cost more by air, it can be done. The Berlin airlift was supporting a lot more people than what NATO has.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
Common Courtesy does ask the relevant questions buy asking, "The lease came with benefits.
Can the Pakistan government do without the benefits.
Also, while if may cost more by air, it can be done. The Berlin airlift was supporting a lot more people than what NATO has.
Sadly for the Pakistani government, those benefits are in the form of military aid. Which does the Pakistani people zero good. And when the US presence does far more harm than good in terms of the Pakistani people supporting their government while having to feed the refugees it gets when it plays step and fetch it for Uncle Sammy, its easy to reach a point where any US benefits are outweighed by the down sides.
Its a time will tell question, but air lifting in all supplies, while maybe doable, is extremely expensive.
As it is, there is a total disconnect between Pakistani and US interests. Pakistan was told that Nato would rapidly stabilize Afghanistan and Nato had two Taliban free years to do so, and instead Nato tried a totally inept occupation on the cheap that empowered war lords, corruption, and drug trafficing.
As a result the Taliban can capitalize on the misery of the Afghan people, while Pakistan is denied a stable Afghanistan. And meanwhile the Pakistani great satan is and remains India, and many within the Pakistani government and army count the Taliban, foreign fighters, and even Al-Quida as aces in the hole allies in their cold war with India.
Can the Pakistan government do without the benefits.
Also, while if may cost more by air, it can be done. The Berlin airlift was supporting a lot more people than what NATO has.
Sadly for the Pakistani government, those benefits are in the form of military aid. Which does the Pakistani people zero good. And when the US presence does far more harm than good in terms of the Pakistani people supporting their government while having to feed the refugees it gets when it plays step and fetch it for Uncle Sammy, its easy to reach a point where any US benefits are outweighed by the down sides.
Its a time will tell question, but air lifting in all supplies, while maybe doable, is extremely expensive.
As it is, there is a total disconnect between Pakistani and US interests. Pakistan was told that Nato would rapidly stabilize Afghanistan and Nato had two Taliban free years to do so, and instead Nato tried a totally inept occupation on the cheap that empowered war lords, corruption, and drug trafficing.
As a result the Taliban can capitalize on the misery of the Afghan people, while Pakistan is denied a stable Afghanistan. And meanwhile the Pakistani great satan is and remains India, and many within the Pakistani government and army count the Taliban, foreign fighters, and even Al-Quida as aces in the hole allies in their cold war with India.
Lemon Law,
That ace card was surrendered with one phone call from Colin Powell in 2001 and the Pakistanis offered their a*s in a platter to the Americans. The only ace that the Pakistanis have is nuisance value.
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: OCguy
Hopefully we devise a way to eliminate every racist like you
And what do you propose as your final solution to the "Israeli" problem?
Israel is a country not a race. Zionism is a religion. I don't wish to eliminate all Israelis or jews. I just wish that Jeruselum and the cities around were under Arab Muslim control like they were before. The final solution is the IDF disarm and there be an joint army. The government should also have Muslim and Jewish ministers. The president should be an Arab Muslim. That won't be easy and will take years.
First a UN force 200,000 strong made up of Western and Muslim armies should be deployed in Palestine. Then both sides should disarm and trust each other and the UN. Next, there should be a free; and fair election and a mixed government should be formed. The army can be made over the next 30 years when old grudges are finally settled and when the Arabs are finally as rich as the Jews.
A Pakistani beggar trying to be the chooser. You know, why don't you first worry about the tattered clothes your wretched country is wearing before you pass judgement on others?
Pakistan is going to be trouble! They spent the billions we gave them on training to fight India, and none of it on securing the Afgan/Pakistan border, now look whats happening. I bet they are begging for those drone attacks now!
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
TGB... so you have changed your mind now? You welcomed them into your nation, praised the contracts of peace but now they are moving towards you you're not so keen on the idea?
Well it's too late now, you have given up, the ISI has given up, there is only one way this will end if you want to end it at all and that is if people like YOU do something about it rather than pretend that you hate that other nations are in Pakistan trying to stop what you are letting happen.
I don't want to hear one whimper from you about it in the future if you are not doing sheit about it yourself, not one whimper.
Get the fuck out of our way and try to get your government to act in anyway you can, not ALL of the ISI are in Taliban hands and trust me, if we're not going to level Pakistan we need their support, sitting on their hands and making deals with the Taliban or even supporting the Taliban doesn't really work for anyone but the ISI officers who have an endless supply of pre pubescent girls to torture and rape.
Pakistan should have woken up 15 years ago, it's a fucking tad late now and since the ISI or the Pakistan government won't fix it others will, just get the fuck out of the way or there will be a LOT of civilian casualties.
Well it's too late now, you have given up, the ISI has given up, there is only one way this will end if you want to end it at all and that is if people like YOU do something about it rather than pretend that you hate that other nations are in Pakistan trying to stop what you are letting happen.
I don't want to hear one whimper from you about it in the future if you are not doing sheit about it yourself, not one whimper.
Get the fuck out of our way and try to get your government to act in anyway you can, not ALL of the ISI are in Taliban hands and trust me, if we're not going to level Pakistan we need their support, sitting on their hands and making deals with the Taliban or even supporting the Taliban doesn't really work for anyone but the ISI officers who have an endless supply of pre pubescent girls to torture and rape.
Pakistan should have woken up 15 years ago, it's a fucking tad late now and since the ISI or the Pakistan government won't fix it others will, just get the fuck out of the way or there will be a LOT of civilian casualties.
dud
Diamond Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 7,635
- 73
- 91
Green Bean, you began this thread with "The Battle of Swat ... Beginning of the End for the Pakistani Taliban?" and then lost any real credibility IMHO with bringing Israel into this. I'd be the last person to say that I am happy with the situation between the Israelis and Palestinians. Bringing that issue into the mess that is Pakistan is really bad form.
Your blind hatred will find no roots here.
Your blind hatred will find no roots here.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
Drone attacks are fairly useless even when directed, we need live air support, not spending weeks planning a drone attack so those who target on the ground can get in and out safely.
Drone attacks are probably the most retarded thing invented in this kind of warfare.
Sure, if it's a camp or two they are excellent, you have a ground crew (special forces) to target the area and an UAV to hit the target, move in and take out what is left as well as retrieving information. But we are way past that, we need troops on the ground with proper air support and bombings on certain areas and when i say bombings i mean leveling those areas to ensure no survivors.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
The above is what should have been done immediately instead of the govermnet welcoming the Taliban because they were afraid to challenge them.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
Keep that up and we'll take them from the other side, as a joint effort with your "known good" troops we could root them out and take them into an area where... Well there is no nice way to say it, kill everyone.
I give Pakistan 1 year before it falls apart.
*There is a civil war going on right now there (A sizable amount of the population is waging war against the government)
*Spent way to much on goodies to stay competitive with India (India makes Pakistan government look weak)
*Economy is rapidly declining (making it a breeding ground for new Taliban recruits)
*Government is viewed as weak (most of the population believes the Pakistan government is widely corrupt and a puppet of the U.S. government)
There are several other reasons this situation is escalating but these are some of the main points. I does not look good and I would not be surprised if the U.S. puts boots on the ground.
*There is a civil war going on right now there (A sizable amount of the population is waging war against the government)
*Spent way to much on goodies to stay competitive with India (India makes Pakistan government look weak)
*Economy is rapidly declining (making it a breeding ground for new Taliban recruits)
*Government is viewed as weak (most of the population believes the Pakistan government is widely corrupt and a puppet of the U.S. government)
There are several other reasons this situation is escalating but these are some of the main points. I does not look good and I would not be surprised if the U.S. puts boots on the ground.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
True but it was an error on more than one flank.
They shouldn't have take us among others out of there in the first place and there should have been proper air support FROM THE START, it's still not good but it's better.
I don't think there are that many solutions left, i think the valley way is the only way to fix this, air assaults move in, target, move out, air assaults, move in, target, air assault, move in, finish the job.
It's not nice but it works.
Total war is the only way you can win in either nation on the border in my opinion.
We will never do it, and i dont ethically condone it, but i think it's a lost cause otherwise (and it is).
We will never do it, and i dont ethically condone it, but i think it's a lost cause otherwise (and it is).
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
Stop reading the bullsheit rags you have been reading, you're wrong on all accounts.
1. there is no civil war, nada, zilch, none. PERIOD.
2. unimportant for this debate
3. It's actually quite the opposite, one of the few GROWING economies in the world is Pakistan
4. Government isn't viewed as weak, it's simply unwanted by most. The REASON Musharraf had to leave was because HE was seen as a puppet of the US, you're a few years late in knowledge it seems.
The reasons are such that you wouldn't understand, since you don't understand this situation AT ALL.
And lastly, there have been boots on the ground for YEARS, so you're a tad late on that too.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
Perhaps you are more educated on the situation than me, but no, the only way to win is to cooperate on both sides and use airforce, preferably on both sides along with special service platoons to clean it up.
What needs to be done will be done, the Taliban won't survive, you can trust me when i say that.
theflyingpig
Banned
- Mar 9, 2008
- 5,616
- 18
- 0
The Taliban must be slaughtered without mercy. If you do anything less you will not have victory against them. Everyone knows this.
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
JOS sounds like a broken record when he says, "What needs to be done will be done, the Taliban won't survive, you can trust me when i say that."
When are you ever going to learn, the Taliban as an idea can't be killed, and until it becomes in the interests of Pakistan and its people, Afghanistan and its people, and Nato and its people to all work together, a Nato only strategy is going to continue to flop as it has for the past eight years.
The JOS delusion is that this is a military problem with a military solution, its still very unclear at this point on the question of whom will benefit from this latest Pakistani military offensive in Swat, but its still quite possible that long term it will again benefit the Taliban in the end.
And if that is to be the end result, I have to ask JOS why he delights in his own pig headed strategy that cuts Nato's own ineffectual throat. And why he rejects many smarter strategies that are more likely to win against the Taliban. And more importantly aids Al-Quida that is the greater threat and the only real threat to the people of USA and England.
When the interests Nato, the government and peoples of Afghanistan, and the government and people of Pakistan are not exactly all on the same page, no alliance can be effective by insisting on a Nato only benefits strategy. Only when all benefit can Nato benefit. And when there are real disconnects in those varying interests, any unbiased observer has to admit the Taliban is much smarter than Nato in exploiting those disconnects.
When are you ever going to learn, the Taliban as an idea can't be killed, and until it becomes in the interests of Pakistan and its people, Afghanistan and its people, and Nato and its people to all work together, a Nato only strategy is going to continue to flop as it has for the past eight years.
The JOS delusion is that this is a military problem with a military solution, its still very unclear at this point on the question of whom will benefit from this latest Pakistani military offensive in Swat, but its still quite possible that long term it will again benefit the Taliban in the end.
And if that is to be the end result, I have to ask JOS why he delights in his own pig headed strategy that cuts Nato's own ineffectual throat. And why he rejects many smarter strategies that are more likely to win against the Taliban. And more importantly aids Al-Quida that is the greater threat and the only real threat to the people of USA and England.
When the interests Nato, the government and peoples of Afghanistan, and the government and people of Pakistan are not exactly all on the same page, no alliance can be effective by insisting on a Nato only benefits strategy. Only when all benefit can Nato benefit. And when there are real disconnects in those varying interests, any unbiased observer has to admit the Taliban is much smarter than Nato in exploiting those disconnects.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 23K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter