Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

This is what incompetent generals have given to us, anarchy and chaos Taleban style.
I wish the generals would have done their professional duties instead of nurturing Taleban monster.
This monster has now turned 180 degrees to bite Military itself.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/world/asia/15isi.html?_r=1&bl&ex=1200546000&en=12ff1b1edeecb771&ei=5087 &oref=slogin

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — Pakistan’s premier military intelligence agency has lost control of some of the networks of Pakistani militants it has nurtured since the 1980s, and is now suffering the violent blowback of that policy, two former senior intelligence officials and other officials close to the agency say.

As the military has moved against them, the militants have turned on their former handlers, the officials said.

The growing strength of the militants, many of whom now express support for Al Qaeda’s global jihad, presents a grave threat to Pakistan’s security

The two former high-ranking intelligence officials acknowledged that after Sept. 11, 2001, when President Musharraf publicly allied Pakistan with the Bush administration, the ISI could not rein in the militants it had nurtured for decades as a proxy force to exert pressure on India and Afghanistan. After the agency unleashed hard-line Islamist beliefs, the officials said, it struggled to stop the ideology from spreading.

The threat from the militants, the former intelligence officials warned, is one that Pakistan is unable to contain. “We could not control them,” said one former senior intelligence official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “We indoctrinated them and told them, ‘You will go to heaven.’ You cannot turn it around so suddenly.”

some former American intelligence officials have argued that Mr. Musharraf and the ISI never fully jettisoned their militant protégés, and instead carried on a “double-game.” They say Mr. Musharraf cooperated with American intelligence agencies to track down foreign Qaeda members while holding Taliban commanders and Kashmiri militants in reserve.

In order to undercut major opposition parties, he wooed religious conservatives, according to analysts. And instead of carrying out a crackdown, Mr. Musharraf took half-measures.

Some senior ministers and officials in Mr. Musharraf’s government sympathized with the militants and protected them, former intelligence officials said. Still others advised a go-slow approach, fearing a backlash against the government from the militants.

Asked in 2006 why the Pakistani government did not move against the leading Taliban commander Jalaluddin Haqqani, and his son Sirajuddin, who are based in the tribal areas and have long had links with Al Qaeda, one senior ISI official said it was because Pakistan needed to retain some assets of its own.

Pakistani analysts and Western diplomats argue that the country will remain unstable as long as the ISI remains so powerful and so unaccountable. The ISI has grown more powerful in each period of military rule, they said.

Civilian leaders, including Mrs. Bhutto, could not resist using it to secure their political aims, but neither could they control it. And the army continues to rely on the ISI for its own foreign policy aims, particularly battling India in Kashmir and seeking influence in Afghanistan.

“The question is, how do you change that?” asked one Western diplomat. “Their tentacles are everywhere.”

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

PA you do know that this article is primarily anti pak army. by clipping isi pak defence suffers. by insinuating isi are helping bombers, pak weakens.

pakistan needs results, the aim is for peace. if the militant threat can dealt with it should but as we've seen its more unsettling then the war is worth.

if we talk of unity and anyone thinks that can be achieved by mass military action then think again. in World affairs its often been stated that military action alone is not the solution and now that lesson needs to be considered.

btw clipping isi (if they are involved or not) also means serious turbulence for the enitre country. more destabilisation and a possibility that things could get even more out of control.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

since the 80s? lets try 70's
and someone remind me who was sending weapons to these 'fanatics'
so yeah it was created and yes it has tuned on its handlers
but there were multiple masters.

if Ny times reporters actually reported instead of pretending they were at some place and have facts, we may have a more balanced view.

but then with US electionscoming, NYTimes has to serve its masters in democrat party as well as other special interests.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

To be on spot from 85, when Zia met Charly Wilson and offered his financial help instead of providing the refugees with food and shelter on the Pak-Afghan border. He went for money and fame not understanding what monsters he was about to create.
Fancial supports of 1 billion $ and more were offered to Pak and Mujahideen to fight for the just cause and demolish the evil's guard (the Russians) and then NY has the guts to call ISI ONLY to nurture fanatics. Ignorant Americans!

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

The ISI continued to build them up, long after the Soviets left

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

^Financial assistance (US and Saudia) was very well alive indirectly or directly to madrassas and poppy countrymen aka NA/Taliban.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

Already posted here: http://www.paklinks.com/gs/showthread.php?t=274958

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

Pakistan needs to do some strategic thinking here.

They are keeping these fighters in reserve as they can be used against India

That is the idiotic mentality of our Generals.

There is not going to be a war with India any more.

India has forged ahead, billions of dollars worth of investments have poured into India, the western powers won't allow a India-Pakistan War to destabilize their investments.

And thus it is no longer necessary to keep these Jihadists in reserve to counter India.

Pakistan needs to take these people out.

India is forging ahead while Pakistani Generals are dreaming of a war of conquest on Kashmir which the world will never allow to occur.

Such is the sorry state of Pakistan

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

well replacing ISI with CIA would make it more closer to reality

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

Everyone blaming US here is agreeing the kind of monster Taleban are. It's good that most Pakistanis agree on it.

Now question is, why did ISI continue to support the Taleban even when they had started to realize their devastating effect on Pakistan?
I know. It's because ISI and Pakistan army themselves had become Talebanic agencies.


People questioning NYT as source should see whether what NYT is saying is right or wrong. If it is right then stop condemning the source, and face the facts.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

^^ the Reason that Pakistanis supported them is because they could use them against India

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

I agree! the statement,
**"Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI" **echoes

"OBL and Al-Qaeda were raised by CIA"

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

^ Difference being that US didnot know what monsters it was helping, while Pakistanis knew it perfectly.
And Taleban is exclusively ISI's work based on Saudi ideology.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

^Not true, maybe the politicans didnt know well enough at that time, but trust me CIA knew exactly what they had created with help of ISI or/and vice versa.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

No problem in using anyone against India. Problem is with using wrong extremist ideology to fight.
These extremists are responsible for turning common Kashmiris skeptical of Pakistan's support to their cause.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

Taleban was created by ISI and army. Politicians were not controlling our foreign policy regarding Afghanistan.
This is what this threat is about. This is what is proved in this article.

[quote]
but trust me CIA knew exactly what they had created with help of ISI or/and vice versa.
[/QUOTE]

Personal opinions don't matter without evidence.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

I dont need to proof you what every little kid knows by now. There are enough sources do google your way to them (which is definately not my personal opinion and I'd rather not like making up stories. Im not that bored at home).
This article provides only the biased reporting like many others from NY Times.

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

CIA helped ISI in Afghan war, but not in creation of Taleban. Taleban were created exclusively by ISI/army, based on imported extremist ideology.

What do you recommend me to search on google?

What is biased in this article?

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

^Prince, what Is not so understandable in CIA helping in creation of Taleban? When you help ISI in Afghan war It is of no doubt that the Taleban was well known by CIA since CIA was also working very close with Saudi Intelligence, who also had helped ISI in creating these monsters. Every Intelligence is linked to each other in a way and none can be ruled therefore.

This article is biased in sense, It only speaks about ISI and Pak being the bad guys and having created the devils advocate while US of A had no part to play. Or do you see any blames and claims regarding USA/CIA/the Senate/neo cons/foreign ministers/Mr. wilson etc.?!?!

Re: Fanatics in Pak were nurtured by ISI - New York Times

Taleban was created in mid 90s, when America no longer was interested in Afghnistan. So there was no reason for CIA to help ISI create them.

People among Taleban were mostly same people who had fought with Americans against Soviets, but the JUI ideology they started following as Taleban had more to do with fanatic elements in ISI than Americans.

Like I said, Americans supported fanatics like OBL during resistance against Soviets, but they had no idea about the ideology fanatics were following. Americans were supporting them at that time only because they had a score to settle with Soviets.
Americans only inadvertently supported the fanatics. But our army/ISI knew exactly what these people were capable of. ISI first used this ideology in Kashmir starting 1989 (resulting in erosion of support to Pak among Kashmiris), and then used it against non-Pashtuns in Afghanistan in the form of Taleban starting 1994-5 (resutling in take-over of Pak by them).