Dummies guide to Pakistan-Afghanistan destabilization

page: 1
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 17 2009 @ 10:26 PM
link   
Interview with Osama
Osama denies involvement:

UMMAT: You have been accused of involvement in the attacks in New York and Washington. What do you want to say about this? If you are not involved, who might be?



I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel. There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya and Bosnia? Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti-Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either rulers or enemies of Muslims.


America gives ultimatum

After the 11 September attacks and the PENTTBOM investigation, the United States delivered this ultimatum to the Taliban:

1. Deliver to the US all of the leaders of Al-Qaeda;
2. Release all imprisoned foreign nationals;
3. Close immediately every terrorist training camp;
4. Hand over every terrorist and their supporters to appropriate authorities;
5. Give the United States full access to terrorist training camps for inspection.

Source

Response to the Ultimatum by Taliban:

On 21 September 2001, the Taliban responded to the ultimatum, promising that if the United States could bring evidence that bin Laden was guilty, they would hand him over, stating there was no evidence in their possession linking him to the 11 September attacks.

Source

Beliefs


it is believed that the Taliban covertly offered to turn bin Laden over to Pakistan for trial in an international tribunal that operated according to Islamic Sharia law, but Pakistan refused the offer.

Source

Taliban once again trying to deal with the US

On 7 October 2001, before the onset of military operations, the Taliban ambassador to Pakistan offered to "detain bin Laden and try him under Islamic law" if the United States made a formal request and presented the Taliban with evidence.

Source

America arrogantly say no


This counter offer was immediately rejected by the U.S. as insufficient.

Source

The WAR BEGINES

Purpose


The stated intent of military operations was to remove the Taliban from power because of the Taliban's refusal to hand over Osama bin Laden for his alleged involvement in the 11 September attacks, and disrupt the use of Afghanistan as a terrorist base of operations.

Source

Even after the bombardment Taliban reasons and asks America once more

On 14 October the Taliban offered to discuss handing over Osama bin Laden to a neutral country if the US halted bombing, but only if the Taliban were given evidence of Bin Laden's involvement in 9/11.

Source

America wins so they thought


Finally, in early December, the Taliban gave up their last city stronghold of Kandahar and dispersed in various directions.

Source

The insurgency

the Pashtun tribal group, with over 40 million members, has a long history of resistance to occupation forces in the region so the Taliban themselves may comprise only a part of the insurgency. Most of the post-invasion Taliban fighters are new recruits, drawn again from that region's madrassas. The more traditional village schools are the primary source of the new fighters.


Pakistan, how do they come in to play?



The brown spot is all Pathan, Pashtoons who have always resisted occupation, and who are very close to Afghan Pashtoons.

Pakistan's involvement


Pashtuns are also an important community in Pakistan, where they are prominently represented in the military and are the second-largest ethnic group.



On 22 September 2001, the United Arab Emirates, and later Saudi Arabia, withdrew recognition of the Taliban as the legal government of Afghanistan, leaving neighboring Pakistan as the only remaining country with diplomatic ties.


Pashtun caricature


A failing war in Afghanistan has persuaded American policymakers to generate a make-believe caricature of the Pashtuns, the dominant ethnic group in Afghanistan. For all practical purposes, the Pashtuns are now subsumed under the title of the Taliban. The caricature is simple and compelling: It highlights the Taliban as the paramount enemy without ever mentioning the Pashtun resistance to the eight-year old occupation of Afghanistan. The Taliban fighters are presented as religious brutes addicted to oppression and violence, who wish to impose a barbaric version of Islam under which there is no concept of individual freedom, particularly for Muslim women.

To further distort the Pashtun resistance in Afghanistan, the Taliban are co-equated with the Al-Qaeda, an undefined terrorist group allegedly scheming to detonate weapons of mass destruction, particularly against the United States. Burqas, floggings, and beheadings are accentuated to paint a repulsive caricature of the Taliban. In this caricature, no mention is made that the American bombings of villages, extra-judicial killings, torture, and secret prisons have failed to subdue the Pashtuns in one of the poorest countries of the world.


Here we go, destabilization of Pakistan


With a willful caricature of the Pashtuns, who are successfully resisting the occupation of Afghanistan, Obama advisers are forcing Pakistan, a subservient ally, to help win the war in Afghanistan. This help is suicidal for Pakistan. The civil war will unleash intractable sectarian, ethnic, and secessionist forces. As the warfare intensifies in coming months, Pakistan will face economic meltdown. If the civil war spins out of control, Pakistan’s nuclear assets would pose a security threat to the world, in which case Pakistan might forcibly be denuclearized.

Source

Good luck Pakistan, I hope your people are not sold like the Afghans were in USSR days.

Thanks for your time

ooz

[edit on 17-10-2009 by oozyism]




posted on Mar, 12 2010 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Why has this got no responses?

Pakistan in recent events seems to have been co-operating in combating 'Terrorism' after threats from the US and India.

Still no-one has found Osama Bin Laden, maybe the US should just admit that he died in 2001-2002 from the lack of a kidney dialysis machine. But then the whole myth of al-Quida would fall apart I guess.

The fate of the future seems to be boiling down to Iran vs. Israel.

Foreign interests should remove themselves from the middle east, if they want the oil, pay a fair price, if they want regime change give scholarships to Arabs and let them do things their own way.



posted on Mar, 12 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Excellent thread.

Many people need to read this.

Very interesting indeed.



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
reply to post by ghostsoldier
 


No responses because I guess sometimes it is hard to swallow the truth.. Everything in this article has come true.. Pakistan is in a civil war.. Afghanistan is still fighting against the occupation..

Every one is called Taliban now, even Hezbi Islami. I remember when they regarded Hezbi Islami as a Taliban ally, which was complete rubbish, because Hezbi-Islami not long ago was fighting the Taliban..

The recent incident (clashes between Taliban and Hezbi-Islami fighters) has made it clear that they are not allies, just because they have the same enemy doesn't mean they are allies, it doesn't work like that in Afghanistan..

The non-Pushtoon resistance fighters are also called Taliban.. The situation is getting worse and worse as you can see the ongoing targeting of security forces in Pakistan, and the reach of the resistance within Afghanistan... They can easily target the capital.

Resistance fighters are pushing against the occupation in Afghanistan from all sides, once again, it is getting worse and worse.. As you can see they are popping up in the north, close to Uzbak border, from the south where the resistance was strong always.. From the West freshly resistance fighters are gaining momentum..

Karzai is scared because he knows what happens to country sellers in Afghanistan.. An example was Najibullah, he was torture and hanged, because he sold the country to Russia, this new leader sold the country to the US..

This post is my opinion on this issue.

Thanks for your time..

oz



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 07:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by ghostsoldier
Why has this got no responses?



S & F


For the thread.

No responses?

Maybe becuase he left out some facts.

1. The Taliban authorities were not the internationally recognized Government of Afghanistan. The UIF was.

Although recognized by most foreign nations as the legal government, it only controlled up to 30% of the country. President Burhanuddin Rabbani was the national head of the United Islamic Front, however the central government had little power and personnel changes were frequent. The exception to this was the post of Defence Minister, which was held by Ahmed Shah Massoud and Mohammed Fahim. Before the 9/11 attacks; Russia, China, the Central Asian nations of the Commonwealth of Independent States, India, Turkey and Iran were giving aid to UIF. However Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE were supporting the Taliban



2. The Afghanistan Northern Alliance actually kicked the Taliban to the street.

In late 2001, with assistance from U.S. air support and US Special Forces, the UIF succeeded in retaking most of Afghanistan from the Taliban. Despite fears of a return to the chaos similar to that of the Afghan Civil War (1992-1996), the UIF factions largely accepted the new order.



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 08:14 PM
link   
so effectively the term taliban is now on the same level as al-queda.
a generalised and demonised term for who ever the "good guys" feel they need to kill...



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Internationally recognized government of Afghanistan? Does a government have to be Internationally recognized? I don't know Slayer..

See if the world doesn't want to recognize a government, that is the world's problem, not the governments.. That is how I see it. For the world to bring chaos to that country due to their control freak habits is the world's problem, not that governments.

That Government, as I argued long ago, brought some form of stability to the country but the world, due to the world's mentality didn't allow this government to fully establish by supporting the NA ..

Thanks for your contribution




posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


The Taliban were primarily invaders from Pakistan supported by the ISI and the Saudis. They drove the rightful government, set up by the Mujahideen in 1992, out of power.

When they did that, the Minister of Defense and great Mujahideen hero, Massoud, formed the Northern Alliance.

Massoud, warned the West about September 11th in the Spring of 2001.

On Sept 9, 2001 he was killed by Al Qaeda assassins.

The Northern Alliance retook Kabul with the help of US air power and reestablished their government.

We were wrong for not fully supporting them after the Soviets pulled out in 1989. We have learned from that mistake. The Afghan army is now over 100,000 strong. The country is in the best shape it has been since the 1970s.

The Taliban are not good guys, they never were. I'm not saying we are angels. There are no angels, but we try our best.

In the long run, Afghanistan, will come out better. Japan, Germany, and South Korea are free countries with powerful economies. Iraq and Afghanistan will follow in their footsteps.

[edit on 13/3/10 by MikeboydUS]



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


First, looks like you made a good thread. Still going through your sources.

Flag and star.


Does a government have to be Internationally recognized?

See if the world doesn't want to recognize a government, that is the world's problem, not the governments..


Are you saying that governments shouldn't worry about what the world thinks about their government?



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 10:19 PM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


No, governments shouldn't get bullied in to doing things.. That is obvious isn't it.

[edit on 14-3-2010 by oozyism]



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 10:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by jam321
 


No governments shouldn't get bullied bullied in to doing things.. That is obvious isn't it.


In a perfect world your right, but the Taliban bullied their way in power. The history of government and civilization is a history of bullies. Its just the way things are.

I wish everyone could get along and peace would prevail, but its not going to happen. The best we can do is to be the nicest bully on the block.



posted on Mar, 13 2010 @ 11:05 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 





Obama advisers are forcing Pakistan, a subservient ally, to help win the war in Afghanistan. This help is suicidal for Pakistan. The civil war will unleash intractable sectarian, ethnic, and secessionist forces. As the warfare intensifies in coming months, Pakistan will face economic meltdown. If the civil war spins out of control, Pakistan’s nuclear assets would pose a security threat to the world, in which case Pakistan might forcibly be denuclearized.


Suicidal for Pakistan? I presume because Al Jazeera says so? Always a reliable source!


Al Jazeera on Pashtun code: (Pashtun= Taliban)


Nang (honor) is the founding principle of the Pashtun Code. Khushal Khan Khattak (1613-1689), a Pashtun warrior and a poet, summed up the nang principle in decisive words: “Death is better than life when life cannot be lived with honor.” Badal (revenge) is the integral part of honor. Badal requires that insult be avenged with insult, death with death, and no price is too high to seek revenge. Until the revenge is taken, the Pashtuns are restless, anxious, and uncomfortable with themselves. Forgiveness is available if the injury were unintentional. No forgiveness is rendered to invaders and occupiers. No enemy is too strong to deserve any exception to the Pashtun Code.


So they will never forgive the West or the US or the Russians till they kill us! Nice guys! Great way to live their vengeful lives!


Al Jazeera:


The Taliban fighters are presented as religious brutes addicted to oppression and violence, who wish to impose a barbaric version of Islam under which there is no concept of individual freedom, particularly for Muslim women


Most of the world would agree with that!


What good have the Taliban (Pushtans) done in Afghanistan? Have they supported and proliferated terrorism locally? Do the Taliban provide a base for world terrorism? What about the Taliban human rights record? Do they allow their women equal rights, education, jobs?
Do the Taliban allow religious freedom? Equal rights for homosexuals?



posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 03:12 AM
link   
I think we can all agree, the Taliban consists of nothing but barbaric uncivilized fundamentalists who will execute anyone who doesn't agree with them.



posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 05:12 AM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Like bullies in schools right? That is my point, bullying exist but how to reduce it. Wasn't the UN created to reduce bullying? But it has only increased it? OR was UN created to Keep the bullies happy, so they bully, but bully according to international laws? And so that Bullies don't Bully Bullies because that will cause a lot of collateral damage and by standers might get punched in the face for no reason ..

It is more complicated than you think..

The only difference between me and ATS is that ATS believes since the world didn't recognize Taliban, the occupation was legitimate, and that all those lives were in one way or another worth it.

I don't believe that, but that is my opinion, as I said in my second post..

But the OP is all based on facts.. You decide what to believe, I won't force anyone in to believing anything..



posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by GorehoundLarry
I think we can all agree, the Taliban consists of nothing but barbaric uncivilized fundamentalists who will execute anyone who doesn't agree with them.


That is propaganda at its best, generalizing.. Just because some Americans decide to go to universities and kill people for no reason, doesn't mean you generalize it and call all Americans vicious suicidal barbaric killers.

Although if you keep showing those images, and keep saying it over and over again on TV, people like you might actually believe it.

I'm just saying..



posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 05:26 AM
link   
reply to post by plumranch
 


You can already see the evidence of that statement, "suicidal for Pakistan"..

This was yesterday ..

news.yahoo.com...



posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


i can agree that pakistan has a large influence in afghanistan only through religious beliefs. i believe they have been pressured into this war because they are an able nation and in lose proximity but the real reason they were pressured in. i believe is for them to do the real dirty work in afghanistan...

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   
You can't just open a picture catalog of political/culture and ask them which they would prefer, and when they choose one, ram a war down a peoples throat so they can 'see the error of their ways'.

If we in the west have something better to offer them, like I said, offer scholarships to people en mass in subjects like governance, finance, the arts etc - let them go back home with their new knowledge and combat the ignorant in their own way, with their own culture.

If violence erupts - then that is a job for UN peace keepers.

It's not the right of a few countries to go to war to force another country into a certain way of being. Especially when the only freedom America wants for these countries is the freedom for foreign investors to create markets.

The UN needs to be radically redefined in terms of its scope & power.



posted on Mar, 14 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by oozyism
 


The UN was created to keep 5 bullies happy. Four of them were not too bad.

The bullying is somewhat kept under control to keep those Five from killing each other. Collateral damage isn't an issue.

Its global stability, its bad for the markets. Its bad for trade. Its bad for business.



posted on Mar, 15 2010 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by SLAYER69
 


Internationally recognized government of Afghanistan? Does a government have to be Internationally recognized? I don't know Slayer..

See if the world doesn't want to recognize a government, that is the world's problem, not the governments.. That is how I see it. For the world to bring chaos to that country due to their control freak habits is the world's problem, not that governments.

That Government, as I argued long ago, brought some form of stability to the country but the world, due to the world's mentality didn't allow this government to fully establish by supporting the NA ..

Thanks for your contribution



So a govt doesn't need to be internationally recognized, but a war has to be internationally approved? You liberals make no sense.

Also, you seem to be ignoring Bin Laden claiming responsibility for 9/11 many times.





new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2 >>

log in

join