Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
^ lol @ Afghanistan...next question please...
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
how easy is it to lay the entire blame on Pakistan … whereas its VERY difficult for them to take action against militants in eastern province, action lia tu Pakistan ko blackmail or scapegoat nahi ker payeinge na!
dont they get sick and tried of these parrotic statements!
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
front line with Sheikh Rasheed- NATO SUMMIT AND PAK-US RELATIONS
nato routes have been resumed, without genuine spology and leadership is fooling the nation!
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
*KABUL: Afghanistan is expected to use the latest round of international talks on its future on Thursday to raise pressure on Pakistan over militant safe havens ahead of the departure of foreign troops. *
Next time a terrorist from Pakistan crosses over to Afghanistan why don't you use 'drone' on him? Why do you keep opposing sealing of the border? Wait, then it won't give you excuse to cry, it will be easier for you to blame someone else for your incompetence.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
This is what Iran said in the same conference:
Iran warns US over military bases in Afghanistan - geo.tv
KABUL: Iran on Thursday warned a key international conference that a long-term US military presence in Afghanistan would fan regional insecurity and could plunge the war-torn country back into further chaos.
Representatives from 29 countries gathered in Kabul for the conference, weeks after NATO agreed at a summit in Chicago to stick to plans to withdraw the bulk of 130,000 foreign combat troops from Afghanistan by the end of 2014.
The Taliban militia leading a 10-year insurgency against President Hamid Karzai’s government has begun the annual fighting season with a series of attacks which saw US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta admit that violence was rising.
Karzai sought to reassure neighbours that strategic partnership deals signed by Kabul with several Western powers – particularly the United States – to govern relations beyond 2014, would not damage ties.
But the foreign minister of Iran, an enemy of the United States that welcomes NATO’s departure from its eastern border, alluded to the Kabul-Washington pact by saying it added to security concerns among Afghanistan’s neighbours.
“A particular country intends to prolong its military presence in Afghanistan in pursuit of its extra regional objectives. This certainly adds to the security concerns of Afghanistan’s neighbouring countries,” said Ali Akbar Salehi.
The strategic partnership deal and efforts to establish foreign military bases in Afghanistan ran against regional and international moves to achieve peace, and “could turn this country once again into scene of security rivalries” he said.
Afghanistan has long been a focus of imperial rivalry and scene of foreign intervention, most recently since the 2001 US-led invasion but also in the 1980s uprising against Russian troops that ultimately helped bring down the Soviet Union.
Washington denies it is seeking to establish permanent military bases in Afghanistan, but American military sources say they envisage around 15,000 forces remaining in Afghanistan after the 2014 withdrawal.
Last month, Karzai warned that tough talks with Washington lay ahead over a security pact that would address the US presence in Afghanistan beyond 2014, including the crucial issue of the legal status of foreign troops.
At the one-day conference, he asked neighbouring and international powers to invest in economic growth and peace in his impoverished country.
He also called on Pakistan, one of the historic sponsors of the Taliban, directly to support nascent efforts to end the 10-year war in Afghanistan.
“Support from these global powers and our neighbours is very important to Afghanistan and to the continued progress of Afghanistan towards stability and economic development,” Karzai told delegates.
Karzai is keen to broker a peace deal with the Taliban, but the militants publicly refuse to talk to his government. Earlier this year, it also announced that it had pulled the plug on nascent contacts with the Americans in Qatar.
Karzai said the head of the Afghan High Peace Council would soon visit Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, but gave no dates, and urged Islamabad to support peace efforts.
Afghanistan’s relations with Pakistan have been clouded by mutual blame for Islamist violence plaguing both countries.
Karzai has consistently called on Pakistan to demolish terror sanctuaries in its semi-autonomous tribal belt.
Last week, Panetta also warned that the United States was running out of patience with Pakistan for not eliminating safe-havens of the Pakistan-based Haqqani network and other militants who attack US troops.
Islamabad denies any support for Haqqani activities and says it is doing everything possible to fight terrorism, saying no country has suffered more.
British Foreign Minister William Hague said he would use talks with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on the sidelines of the conference to press Moscow to use its influence to rein in the Syrian regime.
Monitors say more than 14,100 people have been killed in the 15-month uprising against the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, and Moscow, long an ally of Damascus, has refused to halt weapons sales.
The next talks on Afghanistan will be in Tokyo next month and will focus on ways to ensure social progress – governance, economic prospects, health and education. (AFP)
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
**Gilani seeks Google’s help in tracking cross-border movement
ISLAMABAD: While relations with the US remain on a sour note, with Foreign Minister Hina Rabbani Khar declaring in Kabul earlier that both Pakistan and US governments had done a ‘terrible job’ at working together, Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani sought to address the key issue of cross-border movement across the Durand line by reaching out to Google’s Executive Chairman Eric Emerson Schmidt.
**whts this new drama? The best thing to is fence and seal the border
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
Dunya News: Pakistan:-Obama administration damaged Pak-US relations: US …
**Senator John McCain accused the Obama administration of needlessly damaging the US relationship with Pakistan and “antagonizing the Pakistanis” with an “in your face attitude.”****In an interview with an American TV channel, McCain said that the administrations encouragement of India taking a more active role in Afghanistan while simultaneously criticizing Pakistan could be a recipe for disaster.
**
“To further antagonize Pakistan unnecessarily is not something I would particularly think is appropriate,” said the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee. “It s a very delicate situation, one in which I would be very careful what we say publicly,” especially because the Pakistanis “are supporting organizations that are killing Americans.”
“I would have nurtured this relationship with India sort of the way we have been for years, rather than sort of antagonizing the Pakistanis even more with this kind of in your face attitude,” he said.
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta told reporters in Afghanistan last week that the United States was “reaching the limits of our patience” with Pakistan, which he accused of providing a “safe haven” for the Haqqani network and other groups that launch attacks on U.S. forces.
A day before these remarks, Panetta stopped in New Delhi, where he encouraged the Indian government to take a “more active role” in training police and other reconstruction projects in Afghanistan.
McCain said that he has long supported a close relationship with India, but that he would “do it more quietly…(India) will be a very important ally to us in the future. And they are a democracy.”
McCain said that while the Pakistanis often act counter to US interests, it “doesn t mean that we also cut off all relations with Pakistan because then it could become even more unstable and we could have even greater challenges since they have a nuclear inventory, among other things.”
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
United States, Pakistan appear to have reached a stalemate on key issues - The Washington Post
**When Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta was asked on a visit to India last week why Pakistan had not interfered with the U.S. operation to kill Osama bin Laden, he answered with a grin.
“They didn’t know about our operation,” Panetta said as the audience of Indian defense experts broke into laughter. “That was the whole idea.”
The joke did not go over well next door. “I view it as an intended insult,” a senior Pakistani military official said of Panetta’s “ridicule” while on the territory of Pakistan’s traditional enemy. Panetta “let it rip again” the next day in Afghanistan, the official said, when he said at a Kabul news conference that the United States was “reaching the limits of our patience with Pakistan.”
“It is not the exclusive domain of the United States to lose its patience,” the Pakistani official said darkly.
**
Years of mutual mistrust and tactical mistakes, now complicated by upcoming elections in both countries, have brought the strategic relationship between the United States and Pakistan closer than ever to a dead end that neither appears able or willing to avoid.
The Obama administration considers Pakistan key to resolving the Afghan war and wants its nuclear arsenal tethered to a solid U.S. partnership. Pakistan remains dependent on U.S. military and economic assistance and wants a prominent role in whatever happens in Afghanistan.
Yet the two countries appear to have reached a stalemate on issues that have long divided them — from the U.S. use of armed drones on Pakistani territory to Pakistan’s continued harboring of the Taliban and other groups affiliated with al-Qaeda, and countless matters in between.
On Monday, a Pentagon team came home empty-handed from Islamabad after a months-long effort to negotiate the reopening of Pakistani border crossings for the transit of NATO supplies into Afghanistan. While nearly all elements of an agreement are in place, Pakistan has renewed a demand that the United States apologize for the incident that led to the border closing.
The administration has said it “regrets” the deaths of 24 Pakistani soldiers killed by U.S. airstrikes in an inadvertent border skirmish in November. But a Pentagon investigation found both sides at fault, and the White House, despite State Department urging, has refused to authorize the use of what one U.S. official called “the ‘sorry’ word.”
“It took us by surprise,” a senior administration official said of Pakistan’s renewed demand for an apology. The official said the matter is being debated again by President Obama’s top national security advisers, but there seems little cause for optimism. U.S. and Pakistani officials spoke on the condition of anonymity lest they be blamed for igniting yet another firestorm.
The November incident is only the most recent of repeated clashes and perceived slights over the past 18 months, none of which has been fully resolved. Last year began with the shooting death of two Pakistanis by a CIA contractor the administration insisted was a “diplomat,” continued with the U.S. Navy SEAL raid on the Pakistani compound where bin Laden was found to have lived unmolested for six years, and ended with the border air raid.
Electoral politics have made the long-running struggle for equilibrium even more difficult, as both governments face political and public opposition to their continued engagement. Despite the increasingly hard line taken by the White House, many U.S. lawmakers have accused Obama of coddling Pakistan despite its many perceived sins. Some have called for canceling major elements of the $3.5 billion in military and economic aid the administration has requested for fiscal 2013.
**Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, regularly criticizes Obama’s Afghanistan strategy, while saying little about Pakistan. But according to his campaign Web site, Romney would “not be shy” about using U.S. leverage there to attain desired aims.
**
**The Pentagon, under pressure to validate Obama’s Afghanistan troop withdrawals with demonstrable progress in the war, increasingly blames Pakistan for its woes. Several U.S. military officials drew a direct line between Panetta’s impatience and a June 1 suicide bomb attack on a large NATO base in eastern Afghanistan’s Khost province that was blamed on the Pakistan-based Haqqani militant network.
**
Assuming that Pakistani President Asif Ali Zardari remains in office until elections that must be held by March, he will preside over the first transfer of power from one elected leader to another since Pakistan’s 1947 founding. But Zardari’s economic advisers have warned that the country may go broke months before then and have urged a fall election that would allow the government under Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani to avoid taking full blame for the predicted financial debacle.
Pakistan’s constitution requires a transition government to take over three months before an election. That would give Zardari’s Pakistan People’s Party time to regroup before the campaign shifts into gear.
But aside from the economic aspects, the prospect of an early election has increased pressure on the government to remain steadfast against what Pakistani public opinion sees as U.S. arrogance and bullying. In the wake of the November deaths, Pakistan’s parliament drew up new guidelines for the relationship, including the demanded U.S. apology, an end to territorial violation by drones, and a new payment structure for the transit of NATO supplies.
Washington considers only the last of these within the realm of the possible, and has tried to separate the border negotiations from the far more difficult question of drones.
When it looked as if a transit deal was near this spring, the administration rewarded Zardari with an invitation to NATO’s May summit in Chicago. But after Obama refused to meet with him there, the deal was set aside as each charged that the other had once again reneged on promises.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
US pressure not to be accepted, says Gen Wynne | DAWN.COM
ISLAMABAD, June 15: In the strongest response yet to American strong-arm tactics, the Pakistan military on Friday said it would not accept any pressure to abandon the stance taken in negotiations with the United States.
“We will accept no pressure for standing up for our principles,” said Gen Khalid Shameem Wynne, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff Committee (CJCSC), at a graduation ceremony of National Security and War Course at the National Defence University.
The comments came amid intensifying tensions between Islamabad and Washington. While US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta’s ridiculing of Pakistani security forces in India and the remarks on presence of safe havens in tribal areas wasn’t helpful, what incensed the military top brass was his backing for restrictions on military aid for Pakistan.
Secretary Panetta had said that “We (US) are reaching the limits of our patience here” for what is said to be Pakistan’s tolerance for Haqqani network and other militant groups running insurgency from sanctuaries in tribal areas.
But Gen Wynne categorically denied this allegation in his speech at the defence university. “We are combating wholeheartedly the menace of extremism and terrorism so as to banish them from our society. The people and the armed forces of Pakistan have taken up this challenge and our soldiers as well as innocent civilians are sacrificing their lives for this cause. We seek nothing beyond secure frontiers and pose no threat to any country,” the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff committee underscored.
The general used the occasion to remind the Americans that there could be no peace without a resolution of the Kashmir issue.
“I must also point out that as long as regional disputes, especially Kashmir, remain unresolved, stability will remain a distant dream. We must therefore continue for a just solution of the Kashmir dispute as it is only fair to all the people who dwell in this region.”
Talks on a new transit agreement for Nato supplies, meanwhile, have been suspended since last week. Both Pakistan and the US have separately said that the negotiations stalled because of bigger issues in relationship and not just because of differences over transit fee.
Diplomatic sources in the United States now blame Pakistan for blocking the Nato supply route deal by raising afresh the apology issue, claiming that all issues had been settled during and after the Chicago summit.
The downward trajectory in bilateral relationship, which started in January last year, when CIA operative Raymond Davis shot dead two young men in Lahore, aggravated with the Osama bin Laden denouement and then the Salala border post attacks in which 24 Pakistani soldiers were killed.
The US disregard of demands for an apology over the Salala incident and cessation of drone attacks has made matters worse.
The Americans, on the other side, are frustrated with Pakistan’s perceived failure to act against the Haqqani network and other Taliban-affiliated terror groups based in the tribal areas. Conviction of Dr Shakeel Afridi, who helped CIA hunt Osama bin Laden, has added to the fury in Washington. The government’s clarification that Dr Afridi had been sentenced to 33 years for collaborating with the outlawed Lashkar-i-Islam failed to pacify US leaders.
In the backdrop of a rift with Pakistan, the US has encouraged India to play a bigger role in Afghanistan and has also launched a trilateral mechanism involving Kabul.
Although the agenda is limited to development, unlike the trilateral process with Islamabad that covers peace and security, the new arrangement is set to anger the Pakistani military, which has been sceptical of Indian involvement in Afghanistan
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
Qaumi Jirga calls for ceasefire in Afghanistan | The Nation
**PESHAWAR – Backing free trade and abolishment of Visa condition between Pakistan and Afghanistan, the Afghan Qaumi Jirga on Wednesday unanimously passed several resolutions calling for an immediate cease-fire and stopping military operations throughout the region including FATA and resolving the conflict through dialogue and negotiations.
**
The two sessions on the 2nd day of the Jirga was represented by nationalist leaders from Afghanistan and Balochistan. The first session was presided by Haji Din Mohammad from Afghanistan while the second session of South Pakhtunkhwa Balochistan was presided by Amanullah Kansi. Others who spoke on the occasion included Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Provincial Minister Mian Iftikhar Hussain, Provincial President of ANP Senator Afrasiab Khattak, Federal Minister for Railway Ghulam Ahmad Bilour, and Provincial Minister for Excide and Taxation Liaqat Shabab, prominent Nationalist Leader Doctor said Alam Mehsood and Aimal Khattak.
The resolution was tabled by ANP senior leader Latif Afridi which stated that Pakistan, Afghanistan and its neighboring countries should play there positive role in creating conducive environments for and facilitating the intra-afghan dialogue and they should extend there all-out support to this drive.
The resolution suggested and called upon the developed and prosperous nations to generously contribute and jumpstart reconstruction, rehabilitation and developmental programmes in the war-ravaged areas of Pushtoon-Afghans lands for alleviating poverty and overcoming backwardness and bringing them on a par with the developed areas of the region.
It was demanded that not only foreign intervention in the internal affairs of the Afghans be immediately stopped but also the foreign troops be withdrawn according to the already announced agreement and road map.
All parties to the Afghan conflict should develop a joint mechanism for the promotion and monitoring of these peace processes. In the light of the UN Sponsored tripartite agreements, the Afghan Refugees in Pakistan should not be maltreated.
All the Jirga participants, representing different political, religious, social and literary and cultural organizations, have to convey the Jirga message to all corners of Afghan lands and every Afghan.
A permanent committee headed by Muhammad Afzal Khan Lala is constituted and entrusted with the task to develop an action plan for restoration of peace on the Afghan lands through reconciliation. The committee on behalf of the Jirga, in coordination with the Afghan High Peace Council and contact all internal and external stakeholders of the conflict for its peaceful resolution.
To call upon all the Afghans, wherever they may be, whether they participated in this Jirga or not, to support the Jirga and its reconciliation efforts and play their due role in restoration of peace on Afghan lands.
The Jirga further stated that the present war fought for the last decades by state and non-stat actors, supported from abroad has led to the killings of millions of Afghans, leaving million wounded and displaced, and their properties destroyed.
It has left very negative and severe impact on political, economic, cultural and social lives of the Afghans on both sides of Durand Line.
Some of these negative, dirty and intolerable acts have tarnished the image of the Afghan culture and religion in the world.
Millions of people have lost their lives, millions of houses and the whole infrastructure got destroyed, while millions of people, including children, women and elderly displaced and forced to live in miserable conditions away from their homes. The prevailing sanctity and respect of masque, hujra, ulema, women and elders in the Afghan society has also been damaged.
Pushtoon were portrayed as terrorists who are basically enlightened, tolerant and moderate or were exploited by outsiders for their ulterior motives. So they were both killed and also taunted.
On the other hand, those external powers who are involved in this conflict are internally experiencing sever economic, political and social crisis and are under immense internal pressure for peaceful its peaceful settlement.
Earlier, addressing on the occasion The Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Minister for Information and Culture, Mian Iftikhar Hussain has said that being a pakhtun and son of this land, all his efforts were meant to take out the pakhtun nation from the critical situation which it was facing for the last 35 years. He added that he would not hesitate to offer any sacrifice for this sacred task.
This, he stated while addressing the Qaumi Jirga convened by the veteran politician Afzal Khan Lala at Nishtar Hall Peshawar on Wednesday. The Jirga besides the delegates from the entire world was also attended by the representative of political parties and people from all schools of thought in large number. The Jirga besides Afzal Khan Lala and Afghan delegate Din Muhammad, was also addressed by the Provincial Minister for Excise & Taxation Liaqat Shabab, Mufti Janan MPA, Abdul Majeed Kanju of Seraiki belt, Abdur Rasheed Jalili, Sherin Gardiwal, Dr. Said Alam Mehsood and Aimal Khan Khattak.
Participants of the Jirga were unanimous that Pakhtun unity was the only way for solution of all the problems of Pakhtuns. It was declared that the said Jirga was not being conducting against any particular nation but its only aim was to get rid of the existing terrorism and militancy.
Mian Iftikhar Hussain said that Jirga was an important institution of Pakhtun culture and we through this forum convey the voice of Pakhtuns to the entire world effectively. He added that we clarify to the world that Pakhtuns are peace-loving nation and hate terrorism but it was wrongly portrayed as terrorists. He said that playing a role against terrorism was not a favour to the nation but being a son of this land and responsible person of the government, it was his utmost duty which he performing to his entire satisfaction.
The Minister continued that if they were not the followers of Bacha Khan, they would never offered such sacrifices for this land but it was due to Bacha Khan that despite the martyrdom of our party workers, we continue our struggle against terrorism with full force. He announced that he was ready to pardon the death of his only son and start dialogues with terrorists for the cause of this land and its people. He was of the view that no problem could be solved with war or bullet that was why after coming into power they started negotiations with the terrorists of Malakand Division. But unfortunately it were not fruitful due to the arrogant attitude of the terrorists, he concluded.
Haji Din Mohammad who was representing the Afghanistan, thanked the Pakistan government for their cooperation with Afghan refugees and urged upon the ANP led Provincial Government to extend their deadlines for afghan refugees as there was no facilities in that war torn country of Afghanistan.
He said that Pakistan always cooperated with Afghan refugees and like other time they will not dismay their brother.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
President takes allies into confidence over Nato routes
**ISLAMABAD: President Asif Ali Zardari on Saturday took leaders belonging to ruling Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) and allied parties of the government over consultations and decisions with the military leadership regarding resumption of Nato supply routes, DawnNews reported.
President takes allies into confidence over Nato routes | DAWN.COM
isse kia hoga :halo:**
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
The problem is Pakistan wants people in charge of Afghanistan who dont represent the interest of the country but themselves. No one can for sure say what is going on but the end result will be that we will have a divided nation because our intelligence services have a mindset stuck in the 1980's. Too much meddling in Afghanistan will burn us in the end. If super powers cant defeat them how can we?
:)ake Pakistan on the board if they are sincere to peace in Af-Pak region.
[/QUOTE]
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
^ I agree and hope tht the strategic policy planners have learnt their lessons, we should be content with a friendly and peaceful Afghanistan and not a puppet. Besides somehow the destiny of both countries are tied together due to our history. Peace in Afghanistan will ensure peace in Pakistan and vice versa.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
Mullah Zaeef sent this letter to Obama in 2010.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
No such thing as peace in Afghanistan. They will be fighting for the next 20 years at least. Be ready to be left with a mess just like were in the 1990s.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
**1. Views of the U.S. and American Foreign Policy
**
Pakistanis continue to have overwhelmingly negative attitudes toward the United States. Eight-in-ten currently express an unfavorable view of the U.S. Among the 21 nations included in the spring 2012 Pew Global Attitudes survey, only Jordanians offer more negative ratings.
A 74%-majority of Pakistanis see the U.S. as an enemy, and most think U.S.-Pakistani relations have failed to improve over the last few years. Moreover, for a growing number of Pakistanis, enhancing the relationship between the two countries is not an important priority.
**Low Ratings for U.S., Obama
**
80% of Pakistanis have a negative opinion of the U.S., up seven percentage points from last year. This view has become more common over the course of the Obama era. In 2008, during President George W. Bush’s last year in office, 63% expressed a negative view of the U.S.
Throughout Obama’s presidency, few Pakistanis have held a positive view of the American leader. Today, six-in-ten say they have little or no confidence in him, down slightly from last year, but up from the 51% registered in 2009. Obama’s ratings are very similar to those received by President Bush in 2008, when 61% expressed a lack of confidence in the former president.
**U.S. Foreign Policy Distrusted
**
Pakistanis continue to believe the U.S. acts unilaterally in world affairs. Almost two-thirds (65%) do not think the U.S. considers the interests of countries like Pakistan when it is making foreign policy decisions.
Although this has been the prevailing view among Pakistanis for a decade, the percentage who say the U.S. does not consider their interests is up nine points since last year, and is now higher than at any point since Pew began asking this question in 2002.
American anti-terrorism efforts have also been consistently unpopular in Pakistan over the last decade. In the current poll, 61% say they oppose U.S.-led efforts to combat terrorism, essentially unchanged from 62% last year.
**Most Say U.S. an Enemy
**Nearly three-in four Pakistanis (74%) consider the U.S. an enemy to their country, while just 8% say it is a partner. One-in-ten believe the U.S. is neither a partner nor an enemy, and 8% offer no opinion.
The percentage describing the U.S. as an enemy has grown steadily since 2010 and is currently at its highest point since 2008.
Those who live in the Punjab province are especially likely to think of the U.S. as an enemy (85%).
Pakistani views about their relationship with China are quite different. Nine-in-ten Pakistanis consider China a partner, while just 2% say it is more of an enemy.
**Opposition to Drone Strikes **
Just over half of Pakistanis (55%) say they have heard a lot or a little about drone attacks that target leaders of extremist groups. Awareness is considerably higher in the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province (87%), which borders the semi-autonomous Federally Administered Tribal Areas (FATA) in northwest Pakistan where most drone attacks have taken place.
**Among those who have heard a lot or a little, nearly all (97%) consider them a bad thing.
**
Roughly seven-in-ten (69%) believe the U.S. government is conducting these strikes, while another 18% volunteer that they believe both the U.S. and Pakistan are responsible.
Those who are familiar with the drone campaign also overwhelmingly believe the attacks kill too many innocent people (94%).
Nearly three-quarters (74%) say they are not necessary to defend Pakistan from extremist organizations.
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
If we delve into the situation indepth it becomes clear that the situation in Kunar, Nuristan, Ghazni, Paktiya, Paktika and even Helmand and Kandahar (from the South) are not fully under control. In 2014, when the Americans leave its for sure that these areas will fall to taleban, it seems Americans have lost the war there. Another Vietnam...
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
you are right taliban will take over, the mess willl be left for us, same like what happend in 80's .
Re: Pak US relationship - Afghan War End Game
Its gonna be a cluster****. We are gonna have a huge amount of blow back due to this.