Pakistan helping Afghan Taliban - Nato

page: 1
2

log in

join

posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:10 AM
link   
The Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Pakistani security services, according to a secret Nato report seen by the BBC.

The leaked report, derived from thousands of interrogations, claims the Taliban remain defiant and have wide support among the Afghan people.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Oh dear, seems the secret is out...............Someone's nose is growing?




posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:20 AM
link   
Whoever made the secret NATO report is a little behind I think

It was kind of obvious when they found Osama Bin Hiding where they did,
amongst other things

Does this mean that Pakistan is our enemy now as far as these thing go?
edit on 1-2-2012 by LeLeu because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 02:36 AM
link   
reply to post by LeLeu
 


False flags false flag.......EVERYWHERE!!! It's only a matter of time!



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:01 AM
link   
When there is tens of thousands of Talban fighters crossing the border, then I think it is a safe bet to say the Parkistan leadership are some how supportting them. We need to get out of there ASAP. Russia couldnt break the nut. It was a embassing mess for the Ruskies. And now after 10 years the west are also failling. Either we stay there for ever fighting the Taliban. Or. We leave and the Taliban take back power. Leaving now or 5 years down the track , either way they will take back power.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 07:46 AM
link   
to many of our troops have died to let the Taliban retake control..If the leak reports are true and judging by passed form,America and Europe should be invading Pakistan as we speak right?? i think not...if the head lines read .".The Taliban in Afghanistan are being directly assisted by Iranian security services", according to a secret Nato report seen by the BBC. then we would be bombing Iran now right?? double standards?? i think so



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:13 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptainBeno
 
all of these supposed revelations surrounding the "war on terror" seem like kids picking sides on the playground.
The whole world knew that from the begining Pakistan was helping Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban. They are just doing it openly because they don't need our devalued dollars anymore, when they can chum up with China and Russia.
Team:1
USA
Europe (except Italy, they like to do their own thing)
Canada (The USA would find a way to cut them off of the continent.)
Australia
All the other smaller nations that still think they need our protection or have been recently over run.

Team2:
China/Russia (they can flip a coin to see who gets first billing)
Iran (practically China's own oil fields).
Somalia (pirates make good allies, arrrrghhh!!!)
The rest of the World that hates the USA.... Pretty much everyone else.

Switzerland..... As you were.

This tounge in cheek view of the situation is not far from the truth.
I just wish it wasn't!



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by redzareptile
reply to post by CaptainBeno
 
all of these supposed revelations surrounding the "war on terror" seem like kids picking sides on the playground.
The whole world knew that from the begining Pakistan was helping Osama Bin Laden and the Taliban. They are just doing it openly because they don't need our devalued dollars anymore, when they can chum up with China and Russia.
Team:1
USA
Europe (except Italy, they like to do their own thing)
Canada (The USA would find a way to cut them off of the continent.)
Australia
All the other smaller nations that still think they need our protection or have been recently over run.

Team2:
China/Russia (they can flip a coin to see who gets first billing)
Iran (practically China's own oil fields).
Somalia (pirates make good allies, arrrrghhh!!!)
The rest of the World that hates the USA.... Pretty much everyone else.

Switzerland..... As you were.

This tounge in cheek view of the situation is not far from the truth.
I just wish it wasn't!




I'm glad you left the UK out of this, does this mean we can get about fixing our country and not engaging in anymore warfare?




posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by redzareptile
 


the reason Pakistan are in dialogue with the Taliban as they don't want the repercussions when the major players finally give up on Afghanistan ..Pakistan know the Taliban will be around when the west finally tires of trying to defeat a culture they simply don't understand .. Mighty Russia her self could not defeat the Taliban,Pakistan are thinking long term when the Taliban finally retake control ..call it damage limitation ..i'm not saying its right , but it is what it is



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:18 PM
link   
The Paki ISI has supported the Taliban since they first surfaced in the mid-90's. They've always wanted a "friendly" regime in Afghan to serve as a "counterweight" to India.

This report is doing a good job of stating the obvious.



posted on Feb, 1 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   
It is unwise to operate under the assumption that Islamic Jihad and muslims can be divorced from each other, that the muslims will bargain in good faith with non-muslims, and that they will function in ways objectionable to their prophet Mohammed, and their deity, Allah.

Unwise and deadly.

One defeats Islamic Jihad or falls upon its blade. There is no middle ground with Allah; your submission or your blood spilled upon his altar is the choice presented.



posted on Feb, 4 2012 @ 05:22 AM
link   


Peter Dow's "no" to Taliban's surrender terms. Afpak strategy for victory in war on terror. (YouTube)


CBS News
CBS News: Divisions within Taliban make peace elusive

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta made news Wednesday when he said the combat role for U.S. troops in Afghanistan could end next year instead of 2014. On Thursday, he took a step back -- insisting U.S. forces will remain combat ready -- even as they transition into their new role of training Afghan troops.

Another part of the U.S. strategy involves getting the Taliban to hold peace talks with the Afghan government. CBS News correspondent Clarissa Ward spoke with some top Taliban representatives where they live in Pakistan.

They call Sami ul Haq the "Father of the Taliban," one of Pakistan's most well-known and hard-line Islamists.

Ward visited ul Haq at his religious school near the Afghan border. Many Afghan Taliban leaders and fighters studied there, earning it the nickname the "University of Jihad."

Ul Haq said that top Taliban figures are receptive to the idea of peace talks, but that three key conditions must be met first: The Americans must leave Afghanistan, he told Ward. Secondly, Taliban leaders should be released from Guantonamo. The third demand is there should be no outside interference in Afghanistan.

It's unlikely that American negotiators will accept these terms, though a release of some prisoners from Guantanamo Bay has been discussed.

While some elements of the Taliban's leadership may be supportive of peace talks, there are clear signs that divisions exist within the group. Many of the younger, more militant foot soldiers insisting that they are not ready to stop fighting.

At a small guesthouse on the outskirts of Islamabad, CBS News had the rare chance to sit down with a young Taliban commander from Helmand province. For security reasons, he asked that his face be not shown.

"If these talks in Doha are successful and Taliban leaders tell you and your fighters to put down your arms, will you do it?" asked Ward.

"No, it will not happen," he said. "And those who are talking to the political wing of the Taliban should understand that real peace is only possible by talking to the ground fighters."

"So the bottom line is you're not willing to compromise, you're not willing to collaborate? Is there any chance of peace?"

"If the Afghan government announced tomorrow that strict Islamic law would be reinstated, we would accept that," he said, "but those in power now will never go along with that."

For the moment, there is a huge gulf between what the Taliban and their backers want and what America would be willing to accept.


So the Deans of Jihad have dictated terms to the West, the terms they propose of the West's surrender to the Jihadis in the war on terror.

So what should the response of the West be? Should we surrender to the Jihadis, or should we fight to win?

This guy Sami ul Haq should be a prisoner at Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp along with his University of Jihad colleagues, his controllers from the Pakistani ISI and his financial backers from Saudi Arabia.

The US and Western allies ought to name Pakistan and Saudi Arabia as "state sponsors of terrorism".

There ought to be drone strikes on the University of Jihad. (Darul Uloom Haqqania, Akora Khattak, Pakistan)

We ought to seize control of Pakistani and Saudi TV satellites and use them to broadcast propaganda calling for the arrest of all involved in waging terrorist war against the West.

It just seems very poor tactics for our military to be risking life and limb in the minefields of Afghanistan yet at the strategic level our governments and businesses are still "trading with the enemy".


As the Star Trek character Commander Scott might have said -

"It's war, Captain but not as we know it."



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Bomb Taliban Jihadi indoctrination bases in Pakistan.




I want to tell you all how to beat the Taliban in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

So this is about "AfPak" military strategy and as well as direct advice for US, British & NATO generals, it is to inform the public so our political leaders know what can be done and what to ask of our military.

I am suggesting that our forces bomb the Taliban Headquarters known as "the University of Jihad" or Darul Uloom Haqqania, Akora Khattak, 50 kilometres (31 miles) east of the provincial capital, Peshawar.


More about the place in this BBC webpage

news.bbc.co.uk...

The significance of this place is that it is the main recruitment and command centre for the Taliban which must be known to our military intelligence officers and so it is a mystery why they have not advised our generals to bomb this place before now or if they did advise our generals to bomb it why they didn't actually bomb it?

It makes no sense in a war to give the enemy headquarters a free pass and immunity from being targeted. It just makes their commanders feel untouchable which is not how we want them to feel. We want them arrested or dead or in great fear that soon they will be arrested or dead and bombing their HQ gives them that idea.

Our forces do not have ground forces close enough to use artillery to destroy this target so that leaves NATO to use its aerial power - drones and bomber planes, to bomb the target from the air.

So apart from not wanting to use nuclear weapons on such a weak target which would be over-kill, I think bombing using the very heaviest conventional bombs, MOABs or heavy bombing from B52s or C130s is appropriate.

Heavy bombing could be used to totally level such targets, or turn the target site into one huge crater field - obliterate it. Give the Jihadis a demonstration that they won't ever forget!

Then if the Taliban and Jihadi leaders relocate to a new recruitment, indoctrination and command base, blast that to pieces as well.

Our forces will have to establish air superiority over the target areas to allow not only unmanned drones but piloted heavy bombers with a much heavier bomb load to over-fly the area reasonably safely.



posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:31 PM
link   

The risks of confronting Pakistan



If and when Pakistan objects to our plans to aerial bomb these enemy indoctrination bases we should tell them that because our view is that Pakistan does not control the ground there to our satisfaction - because Pakistani police or military have not arrested and handed over the likes of the Darul Uloom Haqqania and other Taliban leaders operating on the ground for removal to Guantanamo Bay Detention Camp and not closed down the University of Jihad and other Taliban bases then the Pakistan military don't deserve control of the air space over that ground which they don't satisfactorily control.

So we can say "Sorry" if the Pakistanis don't like this violation of their sovereignty but the needs of war mean this is something we must do. We wouldn't intend to permanently deprive Pakistan of control over its air space; this would be a temporary measure until the war on terror is won.

Pakistan had their chance to arrest or kill the Taliban leaders in their Pakistan bases but now it is too late so we are going to flatten the Taliban bases in that part of Pakistan from the air and we need total air superiority over the target area in order to protect our pilots.

The Pakistan government and military has complained about drone strikes in parts of Pakistan but Pakistan has not gone to war with us about it, thankfully.

Hopefully, the Pakistanis will not want to contest air superiority with their military but if they do decide to fight to resist our air-superiority where we need it to bomb the Taliban then we must be prepared to take out all nearby Pakistani ground to air missile batteries and any air fighters they send against us to contest air superiority.

If the Pakistanis decide to fight us over control of Pakistan's air space then of course there is a risk this could escalate to all-out war if the Pakistanis really want to make a casus belli out of the sovereignty issue and the matter of us requiring to destroy the Taliban so possibly we should make it clear to the Pakistanis that the US President or the NATO supreme commander have the option to use nuclear weapons against Pakistani military bases anywhere in Pakistan if that was necessary to win an all-out war with Pakistan.

That's not our aim to escalate to an all-out war with Pakistan here but Pakistan should be careful not to escalate the situation from one where we need to go after the Taliban only into one where the official Pakistan military gets dragged into a war with us unnecessarily.


The risks of not confronting Pakistan



This risk of having to fight and win an all-out war with Pakistan is a lesser risk than failing to defeat the Taliban, withdrawing from Pakistan having achieved little to secure Afghanistan and thereby giving encouragement to Jihadis the world over to commit more acts of terrorism and war elsewhere in the world including in our homelands. So Pakistan should not force us to make that choice of two risky options because their defeat is preferable to our own defeat in our opinion.

Pakistan should avoid war with the West by stepping back and allowing us to destroy the Taliban in Pakistan because it is the Taliban and the Jihahis who are the true enemies of the Pakistani and Afghan people. We are the friends of the people of Pakistan and we will prove that by defeating their and our enemy, the Taliban and associated Jihadis.

Hopefully the Pakistanis will back off and let us bomb the Taliban without threat from Pakistan's air defences. We should tell Pakistan that we are doing them a favour which they will thank us for in the long run though we appreciate the embarrassment for them in the short term.



posted on Jul, 17 2012 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Peter Dow

The risks of confronting Pakistan



The risks of not confronting Pakistan



This risk of having to fight and win an all-out war with Pakistan is a lesser risk than failing to defeat the Taliban, withdrawing from Pakistan having achieved little to secure Afghanistan and thereby giving encouragement to Jihadis the world over to commit more acts of terrorism and war elsewhere in the world including in our homelands. So Pakistan should not force us to make that choice of two risky options because their defeat is preferable to our own defeat in our opinion.

Pakistan should avoid war with the West by stepping back and allowing us to destroy the Taliban in Pakistan because it is the Taliban and the Jihahis who are the true enemies of the Pakistani and Afghan people. We are the friends of the people of Pakistan and we will prove that by defeating their and our enemy, the Taliban and associated Jihadis.

Hopefully the Pakistanis will back off and let us bomb the Taliban without threat from Pakistan's air defences. We should tell Pakistan that we are doing them a favour which they will thank us for in the long run though we appreciate the embarrassment for them in the short term.


WRONG. The enemies of the Pakistani people is the Pakistani government. Recent polls have shown that the Pakistani majority doesn't want a democracy anymore and that they want to live in a country ruled by Islamic law. Attacking the Taliban will cause nationwide anger. Let me give you some advice: Before you try to attack the Taliban, attack the government. They are the true evil people in Pakistan. They have taken all the aid given to them, used it for themselves and do not care one bit for the Pakistani people.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 01:56 AM
link   
yes i think so that Pakistan help Taliban. because if the Taliban not supported by Pakistan. then how it survive as long time.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by breet
yes i think so that Pakistan help Taliban. because if the Taliban not supported by Pakistan. then how it survive as long time.

The Taliban have had financial support from rich political jihadists in Arab kingdoms. In a poor country like Pakistan this money unbalances the politics inside Pakistan making those who support the jihadi politics more influential because they can bribe some Pakistani officials to get ahead.

Many in the Pakistani military high command and the ISI who believe in the old military dictatorship that used to rule Pakistan too supported the Taliban and used them as proxies to fight their neighbours but those in the military high command and the ISI have often not been honest about what they are up to even to their own soldiers and police officers whom too have suffered attacks from the Taliban.

So there is an evil co-operation between the Taliban and the bad elements in the military - and this makes it difficult and dangerous for the good elements in the military to take a stand and weed out the bad elements.

The ordinary Pakistani people have not had their wishes for peace, modernisation, prosperity and democracy respected by the Taliban and their supporters in the military. Some brave Pakistani politicians have tried to speak up for the Pakistani people and sadly many of them have been killed for their courage.

The West must intervene into Pakistan if only to undo the damage which the Arab jihadis have done to Pakistan.

If the West using its military NATO air power, smashes the Taliban from the air then the Pakistan people will be able to smash the Taliban from the ground easily enough. Then we will see healthy politics develop in Pakistan and much better prospects for the future for Pakistan.

edit on 19-7-2012 by Mr Peter Dow because: (no reason given)
edit on 19-7-2012 by Mr Peter Dow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 05:06 PM
link   
So Pakistan is playing both sides, nothing new here.



posted on Jul, 19 2012 @ 05:20 PM
link   
Targeting the University of Jihad, Akora Khattak

Here are the co-ordinates for Akora Khattak.

Geohack - Akora Khattak

34° 0′ 2.17″ N, 72° 7′ 18.06″ E
34.000603,72.121683

and if you look on Google Maps the co-ordinates for Akora Khattak seems to be centred right on the Darul Uloom Haqqania / University of Jihad.

That location is in a built-up area (of course the cowards would use civilian human shields) so using the MOAB is bound to do a fair amount of collateral damage to surrounding buidings and people. So the word should go out now - evacuate Akora Khattak and don't live within 5 miles of any such jihadi university otherwise you could be seriously inconvenienced.

A "MOAB" would be one of those -



Ultimate Weapons- Mother of all Bombs (YouTube)

It has a blast radius of 450 feet or 137 metres.


The target area of the campus of University of Jihad looks to be about 100 metres x 100 metres. Hard to guess from the satellite photo.

Here is the Jihadis' own website for the base International Islamic University: Darul Uloom Haqqania which has a number of photographs and is helpfully in English.

Anyway a MOAB on that lot is certainly going to spoil their day and their terror-war plans.

If anyone doubts whether that enemy base deserves targeting please read this -
BBC NEWS | South Asia | The 'university of holy war'


Here's some of that BBC webpage


The 'university of holy war'
By Haroon Rashid (October, 2003)
BBC correspondent in North-West Frontier Province


Its students and principal call it the University of Jihad (Holy War).

Last week the religious seminary of Darul Uloom Haqqania in Pakistan's North-West Frontier Province turned out another class of young Pakistanis and Afghans ready to wage holy war against the enemies of their religion.

Among them was 15-year-old Afghan refugee, Javed Ullah.

"I wish to fight the infidels," he said as he left the seminary in Akora Khattak, 50 kilometres (31 miles) east of the provincial capital, Peshawar.

Javed is among 600 students who have completed studies in different fields over the past year.

I will dedicate my whole life for jihad. I will kill enemies of Islam

Minhaj Uddin, student

Wearing white turbans and dress, all the new graduates looked satisfied and seemed to brim with hope for a bright future.

"I want to go back and fight the Americans," Javed said wearing a garland. "I can't wait anymore."

His Pakistani classmates had a similar desire.

"I will dedicate my whole life for jihad. It is compulsory for Muslims. I will kill enemies of Islam," said student Minhaj Uddin.

Mullah Omar's words

The whole convocation was full of slogans in support of Afghanistan's ousted Taleban regime, al-Qaeda's leader Osama Bin Laden and holy war.

Some of the banners adorning the seminary were decorated with pictures of Kalashnikov rifles and tanks.

In their speeches, teachers and religious scholars urged the students to put defending their faith before everything else.

"Being watchmen of your religion, you are naturally the first target of your enemies," said Maulana Sami ul-Haq, the principal of the seminary.

In the past, some Taleban officials, themselves graduates of the institution, have attended these convocations.

Even Taleban leader Mullah Mohammad Omar's messages have been read out.

The school's support for the Taleban has been no secret.

The principal previously sent a batch of 2,000 Afghan students back to their homeland to aid the then ruling Taleban in its fight against the warlords of the Northern Alliance.
edit on 19-7-2012 by Mr Peter Dow because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 8 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   
This 2-hour video is of a British TV programme which explains in great detail the role of the Pakistani state, via the ISI (Inter-services intelligence), has in supporting the Taliban's war against our forces in Afghanistan.



BBC Documentary - "SECRET PAKISTAN - Double Cross / Backlash" (2 hours)

WARNING! This video is classified "ABOVE TOP SECRET" in the USA. Any American caught watching this video and questioning "Why does the US government pay the Pakistani military billions of dollars every year?" will be deemed a "conspiracy nut"!

edit on 8-8-2012 by Mr Peter Dow because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
2

log in

join