Washington Has Created A Myth Of 'Talibanistan': Pepe Escobar

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Washington Has Created A Myth Of 'Talibanistan': Pepe Escobar stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 05- 3-09 01:23 PM   |   Updated: 06- 3-09 05:12 AM

What's Your Reaction?
Taliban

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.

Story continues below
advertisement

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.




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 corporat...
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 corporat...
Filed by Hanna Ingber Win  |  Report Corrections
 
Comments
93
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)

Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Wonder when most of you will wake up and realise that Obama is basically Bush 2.0

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:18 AM on 05/07/2009
- Bcasey11 I'm a Fan of Bcasey11 13 fans permalink
photo

I SUPPORt MORE SMART BOMBING!!! WE MUST FIGht terror

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:36 AM on 05/04/2009
photo

Right. The Taliban don't need tanks and an airforce. Explosives are the Islamic extremists' weapon of choice - suicide bombers and IEDs.

It would be very foolish to underestimate the Taliban. We've seen what Islamic extremists are capable of. They're not going to be happy with a little corner of Pakistan, they have an agenda for the spread of their ideology. They will just use whatever areas they control as a base of operations to expand. But the Pakistani army doesn't want to mobilize against the Taliban in any serious way because they both share a common enemy - India.

It was pretty clear that there was some Pakistani military involvement with the terrorist attacks in Mumbai. I'm guessing that the main reason why the army is not taking a tough stand against the Taliban is because they think they can use them against India or in Kashmir. That's a strategy that is sure to backfire. I just hope they come to their senses.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:53 PM on 05/03/2009
- Hirnlego I'm a Fan of Hirnlego 112 fans permalink
photo

They have never before shown any interest in spreading their ideology across the borders of Afghanistan. If they do it now, then its something completely new.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:21 AM on 05/04/2009

That's not true -- the notorious guerrilla Juma Numangi and his Uzbek Student Movement have received assistance from Taliban. Likewise, so have the Chechens, which is why so many of them were captured by US forces during the initial invasion of Afghanistan. You may remember the murder of CIA officer Mike Spann during an uprising by Chechen prisoners. There were people from a number of disparate ethnic nationalities brought to Guantanamo. It's hard to believe they were all innocently vacationing in Taliban-ruled Afghanistan.

Islamist fighters belong to China's Uighur ethnic minority have also received support for the Taliban in fighting Chinese authorities in Xinjiang province. There have been multiple incidents of attacks on Chinese personnel in Pakistan by Uighur militants.

There have been a number of Arab govts who have formally complained to Pakistan about their own nationals receiving militant training on Afghan and Pakistani soil and then returning back to their native countries to wage war.

Militants from the Moro Islamic Liberation Front in the Philippines have also received training in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

I'm sorry, but I find your "facts" to be very misleading.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:51 PM on 05/04/2009
- Palemoon I'm a Fan of Palemoon 152 fans permalink
photo

One thing the article writer needs to be aware of, the Taliban was formed/created in Pakistan by Pakistani's. The overwhelming majority of the Taliban that was in power in Afghanistan, were not Afghans. This is why everyone from Sharif to Musharraf to the ISI and Pakistani military, were all aiding and abetting the Taliban from their rise to power in 1994 until right now.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:46 PM on 05/03/2009

The preception that Pakistan created the Taliban is wrong, the Taliban was an indigenous
Afghan group that formed after the Soviets were evicted. Pakistan supported the Taliban in its proxy war with India and others.


Here are some quotes from declassified intelligence documents..


"Although Pakistan has reportedly assured Tehran and Tashkent that it can control the Taliban, we remain unconvinced. Pakistan surely has some influence on the Taliban, but it falls short of being able to call the shots."

Although "Pakistan has followed a policy of supporting the Taliban and [is] attempting to forge a military and political alliance among the Kabul regime's opponents"


"A January 1997 cable from the U.S. Embassy in Pakistan observed that "for Pakistan, a Taliban-based government in Kabul would be as good as it can get in Afghanistan," adding that worries that the "Taliban brand of Islam…might infect Pakistan," was "apparently a problem for another day"

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB227/index.htm#7

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:58 PM on 05/03/2009

Oh, I remember the 90s quite well, and I paid very close attention to everything about the Taliban back in those days. The Taliban were originally created by Benazir Bhutto's interior minister, General Naseerullah Babar. Pakistan had decided it couldn't afford to let the chaos in Afghanistan - which it had created - drag on for any longer, and that it had to conquer the country in order to open up a trade route to Central Asian oil riches to save it's faltering economy.

So Babar launched a trade convoy from Quetta to Kabul with great fanfare, and they proceeded out with an escort of "armed students" they called Taliban. These were really a combination of Pakistani commandos and Afghan commandos from the Pashtun faction of the toppled Afghan govt. That govt had been toppled by Pakistan's instigation of the Saur revolution, where it backed Pashtun communist factions to revolt against Najib's govt with the help of fundamentalist Pashtun mujahedin led by Hekmatyar.

So, my dear mesmorize3, you may be able to fool the people here with your cut-n-paste fiction, but I remember those days too well for you to pull any wool over my eyes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:09 PM on 05/04/2009

(cont'd)

As the convoy advanced, they naturally encountered armed resistance from warlords they came across, who were quickly and decisively defeated by these "Taliban". The convoy kept advancing, and the Taliban commandos kept magically defeating the poorly-trained warlord factions. The convoy then proceeded on to Kabul, while the Taliban consolidated control over Kandahar, mopping up the various warlord factions there and absorbing them.

Gradually, the Taliban then proceeded upto Maidan Shahr and Charasyab, where Hekmatyar was holed up. ISI then pulled the rug out from under Hekmatyar, arranging for his entire organization to abandon him, while he had to flee in his limousine, as Taliban took over his turf. You should've seen the shocked look on his face - it was like Hillary Clinton after she discovered all her loyal lefties were going with Obama after Idaho.

Because Taliban had defeated Hekmatyar's Hezb-i-Islami, this allowed Masood's Jamiat to overrun the positions of the Iranian-backed Shia faction Hezbi-i-Wadat in Kabul. The Taliban immediately offered the Wadat leadership help in evacuating by helicopter, but they later claimed the helicopter had a mysterious accident so that all aboard were killed. (Several years later, after the Taliban were ousted by the US invasion, the bodies of the Oriental-featured Wadat leaders were found in an unmarked grave with bullets in the backs of their heads. Courtesy of ISI.)

So you can make up any fake history you like, but I know every detail about your Taliban friends.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 PM on 05/04/2009
photo

Actually, they were created out of the remnants of the Mujahadeen, which we trained and armed to fight the Russians.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:00 PM on 05/04/2009

They were created by ISI.

The original mujahedin had put Afghanistan into a state of chaos. Pakistan/ISI decided to bring order to the chaos, so they created Taliban to take over the country. But they didn't have the muscle to do it all by themselves, so they had to import help from Arab friends. That's how AlQaeda came to be Taliban's right-hand men. Their elite enforcers.

Pashtuns only make up 40% of Afghanistan, and so Taliban don't have the muscle to conquer everybody to bring them under their rule. AlQaeda provided invaluable help in overcoming the opposition resistance. Pakistan can't afford to settle for only conquering the Pashtun areas alone with Taliban, because that would leave this large Pashtun bloc which would be in danger of consolidating and overcoming Punjabi domination. Therefore Pakistan has to maintain a constant offensive/­expansioni­st posture, to keep pushing northwards for a wider "Islamic revolution". They have to keep the war on, so that those boys don't come home. Otherwise, if they come home, then the sheriff's gonna have his hands full.

Oh, but lookie, they now are coming home. And they're moving out of FATA and taking over Swat, and Bruner, and other places soon to follow. The big master plan has really blown up in the faces of the Pakistani brass. Now they're really Allahu-FUBAR'd.

As ye sow, so shall ye reap.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:30 PM on 05/04/2009
photo

When the CIA agent warned Charlie Wilson about post Russian pullout issues, how did the US take it?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:32 PM on 05/13/2009
photo

Still reading but this Homeric line caught my eye and made me chuckle:

"which has already met the Indian colossus in battle"

Thank you Mr. Escobar. I love seeing words like this in print!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:30 PM on 05/03/2009
- Margary I'm a Fan of Margary 3 fans permalink

ha, ha , ha, the media's talking points, not Obama's administration! Huffo gotcha didn't they guys!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:58 PM on 05/03/2009
- vishix I'm a Fan of vishix 8 fans permalink
photo

It seems there are two camps to this debate of pakistan in danger:

1. The Deniers (like Pepe)
2. People that think Pakistan is on the verge of failure

How would you reconcile Pepe's article with the following (people INSIDE pakistan vs. Pepe):

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/30/denial-istan_n_192917.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/04/29/my-own-green-zone_n_187334.html

I think it's sad that people would rather hide behind conspiracies (9/11 truthers) and play games instead of facing the truth.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:15 PM on 05/03/2009
- rf-hawaii I'm a Fan of rf-hawaii 18 fans permalink

There is a difference between hiding behind conspiracies and staying informed.

The mainstream press is proven untrustworthy. Conspiracies happen all the time -- usually called something else.

Question authority.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:23 PM on 05/03/2009
- vishix I'm a Fan of vishix 8 fans permalink
photo

I don't watch the mainstream media. I get most my information from lectures and panel discussions and from people like Hussain Haqqani, Tariq Ali, Pakistani Generals, Indian Think-tanks and yes even Hamid Zaid etc. etc.

From that I draw my conclusions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:24 PM on 05/04/2009
- jeburr24 I'm a Fan of jeburr24 8 fans permalink

Thank you for linking to these two articles. They are among the most perceptive and most sobering pieces I have read here. Make no mistake -- the Taliban are a real threat to Pakistan and, potentially, to the rest of the world.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:08 AM on 05/04/2009

Am I the only one who noticed that your insider writers are no longer living in Pakistan? Remember the Iraqi insiders before the Iraq war?

Also note that Pepe was already reporting about Osama, Al Quaida among others at a time most of the people in the world knew what it stood for?
http://www.atimes.com/ind-pak/CH30Df01.html

You are right there is 1) and 2) but I will not draw a conclusion THAT fast

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:13 AM on 05/04/2009
- vishix I'm a Fan of vishix 8 fans permalink
photo

These writers don't have a political agenda.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:24 PM on 05/04/2009
- Bcasey11 I'm a Fan of Bcasey11 13 fans permalink
photo

I think its sad you ignore facts...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:35 AM on 05/04/2009
- vishix I'm a Fan of vishix 8 fans permalink
photo

Please elaborate instead of writing platitudes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:25 PM on 05/04/2009
- polaris12 I'm a Fan of polaris12 13 fans permalink

One of the articles you cite by Faruk Rehan states: "Some though, have a more sinister explanation for Pakistan's rapid descent into chaos. They whisper that the Pakistani army is orchestrating the bombings and ceding territory in Swat to ensure continued US attention and funding. How else can you explain the total capitulation of the vaunted 500,000 strong Pak army, which can't seem to battle a rag-tag force of a few thousand militants? But a counter theory gaining currency is that it's actually the United States that is simultaneously supporting extremists on the one hand, and launching drone attacks with the other. The purpose of such dastardly duplicity? Well duh, to break up Pakistan into pieces so that the US can take over its precious nuclear weapons." Sounds a little 9/11ish to me. It guess it's just a question of which conspiracy theories you choose to believe in the absence of any on the ground knowledge of the situation. One thing you can be sure of though, is that every intervention the US has made in Pakistan resulted in the further breakdown of civil government from Gen. Zia ul Haq (who introduced Islamic militarism) right down to the present. US policy has been a disaster from start to finish because we bounce form pillar to post with no clue of the impact we are having.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:50 PM on 05/04/2009

No Pepe, it's Pakistan which is constantly pitching itself to the US as teetering on the brink, in order to extract as much aid/assist­ance/armam­ents as possible from the US. Given the constant US acquiescence to Pakistan in doling out such aid without any questions asked, why would Pakistan have any motivation to present any other kind of image?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:59 PM on 05/03/2009
- Palemoon I'm a Fan of Palemoon 152 fans permalink
photo

Best Post Ever!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:48 PM on 05/03/2009

Too bad india don't adopt the same strategy receive aid to take care of the 800 million of it's citizen who are living in poverty.......

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:48 PM on 05/03/2009

Uhh, you mean to say it's too bad India didn't adopt Pakistan's strategy of begging and extortion? Why would any country want to imitate that?

Furthermore, India's poverty is due to the Congress Party and the Left, who are unfortunately more interested in cultivating their Muslim vote bank than in providing social progress or development. And unfortunately, the Muslim vote bank are more interested in being coddled than in improving their social development.

But now that parties like the BJP have moved India toward economic reform, India is begun progressing rapidly, and is making great strides. Millions of people move over the poverty line every month, and India's economy grows by a couple of Pakistans every year.

We've rapidly outdistanced you beyond any hope of you catching up. But your country has decided to go the other way, and is now rapidly deteriorating. You can't even survive anymore without international aid, which you noisily demand. Nobody owes you anything - you need to stop mismanaging your economy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 PM on 05/04/2009
photo

Trust me, we the Pakistani citizens are against any aid. Aids usually blackmail the nation, keeps it away from indigenous programs, self-sustainability and what not. So being a Pakistani, I am saying that we find aids insulting. However some of our leaders (conspiracy alert) will not shy away from it for politcial and power reasons. Pakistan has all the resources, natural and human to be self-sufficient and self-sustainable - Aids get int the way.

What I find funny is that when China bails US out with a Trillion+ Dollars, no one calls it AID? Why is that? Why does US still pretend to be the richest country in the world when its not. Falling and failing economy and yet all the fuss.

China is Pakistan's best and real friend. If need be Pakistan should be taking aid from China directly, not from China->US-­>Pakistan. But again, we rather not take any aid from anybody... I rather eat leaves and grass as a Pakistani and not answer to or be obliged to any.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:02 PM on 05/13/2009
- RRG64 I'm a Fan of RRG64 51 fans permalink
photo

So Pakistan was pitching itself as on the brink when the Reagan administration and Dick Cheney was helping them ARM themselves with nukes?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:16 AM on 05/04/2009

Umm, I don't know if you remember history, but back then Pakistan was pitching itself as the means to prosecute that war. That's not unlike how today it's pitching itself as the means to prosecute the war against Taliban, in order to similarly get aid -- even while it refrains from actually striking any severe blows at Taliban. They've got to prolong things, to milk it for all they can get.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:57 PM on 05/04/2009
- zaz33 I'm a Fan of zaz33 32 fans permalink

Pepe as usual brings some common sense to the issues. Juan Cole is also questioning the hysteria. The Taliban and the radicals just don't have the numbers or the weapons. The elections keep bearing it out,

There are many Americans that have been convinced by our government and MSM that our foreign policy is based unselfish benevolence. Not so. The geo politics for control of governments and resources passes from one administration to the next. They know what we want and they're patient.

Follow the money,

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:35 PM on 05/03/2009

Democrats, welcome to the Republican Party, circa 2001. Obama is a front man for the interests that really run this country; corporate banks, corporate media, Big Pharma, and the military-industrial complex.

Laugh and scoff all you like, call it a conspiracy theory - but you will laugh less and less as time goes on, with each press release of Obama reinforcing or strengthening the "Bush" policies. Obama is at least as dangerous as Bush, because like his predecessor, he will do anything that the truly evil people running Congress. Dick Durbin almost nailed it recently when the Senate kicked back the foreclosure protection bill - his focus was too narrow; banks do not own Congress by themselves. Do your homework, look at how the structure of the government has NOT changed, and how the Obama administration is chock full of Washington insiders; the real establishment that run the country. And you'll laugh even less when you realise that our civil rights are under direct attack from these evil, amoral people, who care only about the bottom line, and have no respect whatsoever for human life.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:18 PM on 05/03/2009
photo

It makes me want to cry. I don't think he intended this to happen, but the moment he sat in the chair, he was over taken.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 05/03/2009
- zaz33 I'm a Fan of zaz33 32 fans permalink

Pendragon2008 -

Whenever I have thoughts like yours I have remind myself that the American people are not dumb - They've just been dumbed down by government propaganda endorsed by the MSM.

And I don't see it improving.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:45 PM on 05/03/2009
- alexa07 I'm a Fan of alexa07 50 fans permalink

Pepe, Thanks for the thoughtful article. Seems like deja vu, doesn't it? Fareed Zakaria interviewed Robert Gates today & asked all the right questions. Gates produced ( I think) a very softshoe answer to the question about "empire." The rhetoric is toned down, but the intent is becoming clear that the US govt will continue to use force, if & when necessary. Gates talked about other means of persuasion being important too (like helping the govt to provide services, etc.), but an occupation is an occupation! How can we expect the Afghans or Pakistanis to look at our drones with anything other than revulsion?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:55 PM on 05/03/2009
- mommadona I'm a Fan of mommadona 160 fans permalink
photo

Uh.....sorry - until I SEE all these "sane Pakistanis" running these young thugs out of their country - I have to believe in the fact that "he who has the guns wins" in that area.

AND QUIT TREATING THEM LIKE A VALID ARMY/FORCE - treat them for what they are - a bunch of punks with guns brainwashed by ORGANIZED religious fanatics - it's a CRIME SYNDICATE, folks, and should always have been treated as an international criminal problem:

"officer krupky", do your duty...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pq28qCklEHc

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:43 PM on 05/03/2009
photo

Analysis close but still not close enough. More questions than answers - for example who is supporting the Talibans with weapons and finance, and how many flavors of Taliban are there? The Good, the bad and the ugly versions? And why Baitullah Mehsud wasn't ever targetted, or whether if he is still alive or not? One thing for sure Pakistan CAN NOT fall into Taliban hands, thats an overly exaggerated myth.

Its interesting to see Indian trollers in every Pakistan related posts hell bent on Anti-Pakistan comments...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:35 PM on 05/03/2009
- Strategy I'm a Fan of Strategy 2 fans permalink

Agreed !! Punjab can't fall into Taliban hands!!
Wait did I say Punjab?? I guess I meant present day Pakistan..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:16 PM on 05/03/2009

Haven't seen this kumar trolling in a long time. Were you banned?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:00 AM on 05/04/2009
photo

hahaaha! Oh wow my stomach hurts - you are so funny Strategy!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:25 PM on 05/13/2009
- UncleJimbo I'm a Fan of UncleJimbo 176 fans permalink
photo

If there is an area within a soverign nation in revolt or otherwise rejecting the authority of the duly elected government of that nation,then the armed forces of that country needs to see that they do! Get It? Got It! Good!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:30 PM on 05/03/2009
- jamiso I'm a Fan of jamiso 7 fans permalink

"democracy does not serve the interest of the US!"

How so? I mean, what is the motive?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:09 PM on 05/03/2009
- Kaviraj I'm a Fan of Kaviraj 42 fans permalink
photo

The motive is that only the army is able to secure the oil-pipeline planned to cross Afpak to the indian ocean. If there is a democratic government they will want a piece of the pie for the people. That cannot be, of course - cuts too much into the profits, because the army also needs to be paid. Why pay twice if you can get it by paying once?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:04 PM on 05/03/2009
- jamiso I'm a Fan of jamiso 7 fans permalink

Again, you are giving inference based on nothing.

"If there is a democratic government they will want a piece of the pie for the people"
Piece of what pie? The state would still own the pipeline, regardless.

How would it have any effect on the US? What would the US motivation be?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:06 PM on 05/03/2009
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect