Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

So you did not even take heed this topic is not about bangledesh so you carry on you make no sense by doing that. Ok no problem i will dismantle your argument even on topic diversion, Pakistan and the conflict with india over banglesdesh was a nationalistic war and had nothing to do with islam if it was about islam then both bangledesh and pakistan would have attacked the indian state.

Your quote that millions of people died is generic without times and dates, but based on your claim that mongol invasion of bagdad and halaku khan is muslim tells me you don't really have a grasp of history at all!

As for afghanistan and pakistan you would have to know about islam and how it unifies people and gives them tranquility as it has done in its 1400 year history, whereas without this islamic state you will have nationalism and secularism which divides the people and makes war between them.

Economy, technology,science will only develop in state with an ideology in place, so when the islamic state had the islamic ideology in place it was the best in technology, science and education where we had even the European elites coming to the islamic state to get their eduation. Without an ideology you can see states like egypt which is part socialist part cpaitalist in chaos and saudi which is just a monaarchy living off oil wealth none of these have a correct ideology which will help them progress.

This myth that islam comes with sword and if you not muslim you have your head cut off is so silly you should be embarrassed to even claim such cartoon images as fact, if muslims come to kill anyone not muslim why are you alive today why india has 1.3 billion population majority non muslim, where did this population come from the moon or the trees because according to your fairy tales they should all be dead right? under islam india had such wealth and prosperity it is the reason britian came occupied and stole it all.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

@Med911 & captain1:

There is a night & day difference between terms & conditions vs blackmail. taking the same example you took, in Kashmir India openly states it is India and stations our military there in response to attacks. but Pakistan instead of openly dealing with it, were training terrorists and were denying their involvement until they were proven otherwise. We had to literally capture regular military before pakistan would admit (example Kargil were Pakistan kept claiming 'mujahideen until army regulars were caught!).

In the current discussion about Afghanistan, Afghanistan want cooperation with India and sign a deal. Why should Pakistan make that difficult? What moral rights does Pakistan have to make everything so much more expensive and scarcer for people of Pakistan? India is as poor, if not poorer than Pakistan, but still leveraging the size, if we want to help Afghanistan people, why should that be objectionable?

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe? My point is, may be there is something ca

yes and they got independence with the rest of us

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

:smack:

you are a very very special case of islamic history, geography,technology ,science,economics and ideology , only a person equally enlightened can argue with you , i lay my arms before you , forgive me for i dared to argue with you. thank you.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe? My point is, may be there is something ca

You are hilarious REAALY ! ;)

And Pakistan does care because of past afghan history (pre-1979 commies and later where they kept sending in refugees). I want a neutral afghanistan, but morality lessons from an indian should not be forthcoming considering it is your country that was very vocal and still is about the "ISI boogeyman" in bangladesh and nepal, with ISI parrots and camels running spying missions for the "enemy". Just because america is overlooking these things for their own "interests", it doesn't mean that they they have disappeared into thin air.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?


keeping prior discussion in context, its the "puppet" that wants cooperation with India and not really the widespread majority. Pakistan is not making it any difficult, tell me if Pakistan has threatened or protested anywhere about it? Do you read your own words? Now, if India is really sincere in helping poor then why not start the charity from home? Once you are finished helping poor of India then you are very welcome to help out poor in rest of the world, until then it is nothing but trying to buy people/support against an enemy.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

i guess Pakistan would let ndia do the grunting and then swoop in like how imsurgents are doing with road projects in khost.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

road projects are not going to harm pakistan . then why would you like to kill like insurrgents are doing? idont think india will be dittered by such tactics.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

It is not case i know more than you or you know more than me it is about stopping misinformation that is all.

Example you mentioned bangledesh and pakistan you said where is islamic brotherhood? now these 2 are fought over nationalistic bond not islam. Where in islam is nationalism allowed find me 1 evidence and you will counter my argument that is all you had to do. I will save you time their is no islamic text that allows nationalism at all.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

We disagree. We believe India positions its troops to avert and suppress any movement towards freedom amongst the populous, unless you can prove otherwise.
Pakistan is in an odd position you see. Just as India has its interests, which owing to its size, it can take by force, as it has done in the past, Pakistan's interests are not so easily defended. In such a situation, Pakistan has taken clandestine means to achieve those objectives. Whether its right or wrong is debatable. However, to single out Pakistan as the sole nation to use such tactics is misleading and ignores the fact that many countries have used such methods in the past, including the US, USSR, Saudis, Iran, Iraq, Israel etc etc. . Black mail as you call it is not unique to Pakistan. India is also not above it, and has employed policies many in Pak would also consider blackmail.

Pakistan see's things, rightly or wrongly, through the prism of security vis a vis India. You have to understand the situation Pak is in. To have two potentially hostile neighbors in an invitation to disaster in the minds of those in power in Pak. Both Afghanistan and India have been hostile towards Pakistan from the day of its birth. So you can understand why Pakistan would have such reservations towards seeing two hostile neighbors on either side. India would be just as cautious. One of the main reason why India attacked in East Pakistan, beyond the obvious pretext, was that it did not want to be surrounded on either side by Pakistan. Having two wings of a hostile Pakistan one on the east side and one on the west had the potential to make things very difficult.

Pakistan see's "helping" Afghanistan as a way of India gaining influence and surrounding Pakistan. Its called a flanking maneuver. And ofcourse, although India doesnt say so specifically, but that is part of the intention. Do you think India is SOOOOO alturistic that it would just dole out cash? If it is so generous, why not dole out cash and "help" to Somalia, or any number of other countries that could use the help? India is obviously not stupid, so they see the advantage of having influence in Afghanistan, as have many empires before. To believe otherwise, is being naive.
Hope that makes it clear.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

foe

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?


well i don't think it will just be road projects, since india really doesn't have that much floating free money.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

Qouted and bolded for truth.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

It is objectionable because there are Indians who are very poor yet the state does nothing for them.

I do not agree with this Pakistani interference in Afghanistan . Thousands of people have lost their lives because of Pakistani Generals stupid ideas.

There is this idea on this forum that all Afghans ate the US presence when that is not true. Q uite a lot of Afghans are thankful that the US kicked the Taliban out. The Taliban were never the rightful rulers of Afghanistan.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

Hamid Karzais interview, don’t know what to make of it, he does not speak for the people of Afghanistan, he is just a puppet.

Video..below.. If anyone attacks Pakistan - Afghanistan will be there to help… Help who???

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/01/world/asia/haqqani-militants-act-like-pakistans-protected-partners.html?_r=1&hp

For Pakistan, Deep Ties to Militant Network May Trump U.S. Pressure
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and other senior administration officials visited Pakistan in October to demand that Pakistan’s spy agency either deliver the Haqqani network, a virulent part of the insurgency fighting American forces in Afghanistan, to the negotiating table or help fight them in their stronghold in Pakistan’s rugged tribal areas.

But there are any number of reasons the Pakistanis may disappoint the Americans. **Not least is that the Haqqani leadership — contrary to the American emphasis on drone strikes in the tribal areas — does not have to hide in Pakistan’s ungoverned fringes. So close are the Haqqanis’ ties to Pakistan’s military and intelligence service that one might just as well look for them around the capital, Islamabad, or in the closely guarded military quarters of Rawalpindi.
**

**Osama bin Laden was thought to have been hiding in the tribal areas, too, said a tribal elder reached by telephone in the Haqqani stronghold of North Waziristan. Instead, Bin Laden was killed by American commandos in Abbottabad, a small city deep in Pakistan that is home to a top military academy. Whether he was there with the knowledge of Pakistan’s spy agency is still unclear.
**
**“The Americans have taken the hell out of us through drones all these years trying to target O.B.L.,” said the elder, referring to Bin Laden, and not wanting to be named for fear of his safety. “But they found him in Abbottabad. The same will happen with the Haqqanis, too.”
**
**The freedom of movement the Haqqanis enjoy in Pakistan could be witnessed on a sweltering July day last year at a graduation ceremony at one of Pakistan’s largest religious schools, Darul Uloom Haqqania, well known for producing the ranks of the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban.
**
**Among the thousands who had gathered that day in Akora Khattak, just an hour from the capital, were top members of the Haqqani family. The family patriarch, Jalaluddin Haqqani, is a graduate of the school and draws his last name from it.
**
The Haqqanis stayed for several hours at the event, which was almost certainly monitored by Pakistani intelligence agents, and, after lunch, left in a car with Islamabad license plates.
The Haqqani family, which runs the network like a mafia, maintains several town houses, including in Islamabad and elsewhere, and they have been known to visit military facilities in Rawalpindi, attend tribal gatherings and even travel abroad on pilgrimages, say military and political analysts who follow militant activity in Pakistan.

**Among those present at the ceremony was Khalil Haqqani, a brother of Jalaluddin, and an important fund-raiser for the network who travels frequently to the United Arab Emirates. In February he was added to the United Nations Security Council’s sanctions list for having links to Al Qaeda.
**
With him were two of Jalaluddin’s sons. One was Nasiruddin Haqqani, often described as the Haqqani network’s liaison with Pakistani intelligence and the person in charge of channeling money.

Senior leaders of the group concerned with political and financial affairs, like Khalil Haqqani and another of Jalaluddin’s brothers, Ibrahim Haqqani, have long resided in Islamabad, said Vahid Brown, a counterterrorism expert at Princeton who is researching a book on the Haqqani network.

“My impression is they mostly live in the cities,” Mr. Brown said. He cited news reports and a tribal legislator as saying that Ibrahim Haqqani had lived in Islamabad for the past 20 years. Diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks last year also revealed that the two Haqqanis often traveled to the United Arab Emirates from Pakistan, Mr. Brown said. Ibrahim Haqqani even met an American official there for exploratory negotiations in late August.

Sirajuddin Haqqani, who manages the network for his father — and is the undisputed boss — travels freely around Pakistan’s northwestern province of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and the tribal areas, according to two Western analysts with extensive experience of Pakistan and Afghanistan.

“The fact that he is able to drive around means he is protected,” one analyst said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to avoid angering the Pakistani government.
**Kashmiri and Afghan militant groups have long been supported by the Pakistani military, and many of their members carry passes that allow them to go through any police checkpoint, he said.
**
**As much as Mrs. Clinton and other American officials would like the Pakistani leadership to make a definitive break with the Haqqanis, such free movement reflects the symbiotic relationship between the network’s members and Pakistan’s military.
**
The Haqqanis need a haven to train fighters and receive financial and material support, which they get from Pakistan, especially in North Waziristan, part of the tribal areas. Pakistan’s military, for its part, needs a proxy to extend its influence in Afghanistan after the Americans leave; that is what the Haqqanis give them.

**Pakistan’s biggest nightmare is a strong, centralized, nationalist Afghan state — just the kind the Americans have been striving to create. Such an Afghanistan, Pakistani leaders fear, will lay claim to the Pashtun areas that straddle a border that was drawn carelessly by the British and that Afghanistan has never fully accepted. They also fear that the Pashtuns might someday want a nation of their own. **

So in the thinking of Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment, the Haqqanis make sense. They are Pashtuns but not nationalists, and they are increasingly seen as being more reliable partners than even the Quetta Shura, the Afghan Taliban leadership council based in Pakistan. And they provide a hedge in Afghanistan against any encroachment by Pakistan’s chief rival, India.

**Even so, this policy is not without its costs. Also present at the graduation ceremony last year were members of both the Afghan and Pakistani Taliban, underlining the close connection among all the groups.
**
**The Pakistani military has always distinguished between the “good Taliban” — meaning those who fight in Afghanistan, like the Haqqanis — and the “bad Taliban” — meaning members of the Pakistani Taliban who are at war with the Pakistani state. Among the Taliban this distinction does not exist, however, said two militant insiders, one a former militant and one a current fighter.
**
**Most of the recent suicide attacks in Pakistan have been attributed to the Pakistani Taliban, who share the Haqqanis’ stronghold in North Waziristan. The Pakistani Taliban and the Haqqanis help each other with money, intelligence and suicide bombers.
**
**Some in the Pakistani military have acknowledged this merging of insurgent groups, yet the policy of support for the Haqqanis is unchanged. “We know that the Haqqanis are playing a double game,” a Pakistani military official in North Waziristan said last year. “We support them and they support our enemies, the TTP,” as the Pakistani Taliban are known.
**
But then, American intelligence officials and numerous observers have long suspected that Pakistan’s intelligence agency has played a double game, too. Though the full substance of the talks between American and Pakistani leaders during the Clinton visit was not revealed, “it looks less and less likely now that Pakistan is going to take any serious action against the Haqqanis,” Mehreen Zahra-Malik, an editor at The News International, Pakistan’s largest English-language newspaper, wrote in an e-mail.

Rather than respond to American demands, “as the pressure has built like never before, establishment circles have come pretty close to admitting the Haqqanis are assets, even if it’s couched in the language of ‘They’re very important for talks,’ ” Ms. Zahra-Malik wrote.

The reason the Pakistani military would take no action against the Haqqanis was simple, she added with a capital-letter emphasis that paraphrased the generals’ thinking. “The bottom line is: WE NEED THEM.”

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

True friendship between Afghanistan and Pakistan is impossible unless the issue with the Durrand line is not resolved.
As a Pakhtun I know how important it is for the afghans pakhtuns the durrand line issue or the Pashtunistan issue.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

http://www.dawn.com/2011/11/13/us-republicans-sharply-criticise-pakistan-in-debate.html

**US Republicans sharply criticise Pakistan in debate

****WASHINGTON: Pakistan took a lot of criticism in Saturday’s Republican US presidential debate, with a leading candidate saying it was nearly a failed state and another suggesting the United States cut its foreign aid to zero.
**
But it is unclear whether any of their ideas is likely to be imposed on a country that has nuclear weapons and whose cooperation is seen as vital to stabilising Afghanistan as the United States prepares to pull out from there by the end of 2014.

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney said Pakistan has multiple centers of power including the relatively weak civilian leadership, the military and the powerful intelligence agency know as the Inter-Services Intelligence Directorate.

“The right way to deal with Pakistan is to recognise that Pakistan is not a country, like other countries, with a strong political center that you can go to and say, ‘Gee, can we come here, will you take care of this problem?’” Romney said.

**“This is instead a nation which is close to being a failed state. I hope it doesn’t reach that point, but it’s really a fragile nation,” he said.
**
Polls point to Romney as the Republican who would be the most likely among the party’s crop of candidates to defeat President Barack Obama, a Democrat, in the November 2012 US presidential election. The Republicans begin choosing their nominee in state contests beginning in January.

Texas Governor Rick Perry suggested that every country, including Pakistan, should see its US aid eliminated each year and then should convince the United States why it deserves any money at all.

“Then we’ll have a conversation in this country about whether or not a penny of our taxpayer dollars needs to go into those countries,” Perry said in response to a question about whether Islamabad was playing a double game with Washington.

**“Pakistan is clearly sending us messages … that they don’t deserve our foreign aid … because they’re not being honest with us,” he added.
**
“American soldiers’ lives are being put at jeopardy because of that country … and it’s time for us as a country to say no to foreign aid to countries that don’t support the United States of America,” he said.

**‘FRIEND OR FOE’
**
**Businessman Herman Cain had difficulty offering a direct response when asked whether Pakistan was ultimately an ally or adversary. “There isn’t a clear answer as to whether or not Pakistan is a friend or foe,” Cain said.
**
US officials have long argued that the Taliban and other militants enjoy safe havens in Pakistan from which they attack US soldiers in neighboring Afghanistan.

They privately argue Pakistan plays a double game, taking billions of dollars in US aid while elements of its government tolerate militant groups such as the Haqqani network blamed for a September attack on the US embassy in Kabul.

Pakistan says it has made more sacrifices than any other country in the war against militancy, losing about 10,000 members of its military and security forces.

There have been growing questions in Washington about whether US troops should to go after Taliban safe havens in Pakistan, an idea sure to be deeply unpopular in a population already embittered by US drone strikes.

Some Republican candidates argued that the United States has little choice but to nurture relations with Pakistan, citing the fact that it has nuclear arms and that it has to be part of the solution in Afghanistan.

“Pakistan must be a friend of the United States for the reason that Michele (Bachmann) outlined. Pakistan is a nuclear power,” said former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum, referring to fellow Republican candidate Bachmann.

“It’s important for us, with a nuclear power with a very vast number of people in Pakistan who are radicalising, that we keep a solid and stable relationship and work through our difficulties,” he added.

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?


aaa


All the 4 federation in Pakistan are Islamic but they cannot agree on simple issues like KBD or making new states. Pakistanis use the religion only when there is something to be gained out of it. They are more concerned about Kashmir Muslims but ignore the plight of their own citizens. They are very concerned and friendly to Afghans and that is the reason they prepared Talibans and exported them to make a friendly Afghanistan (a colony of Pakistan). They supported US against USSR and get paid and now they are again supporting US on ‘war on terrorism’ on good remuneration. Religion is the best business for them and that is the reason they export religious jehadi all over the world without claiming their active role in it. So innocent ppl

Re: Pakistan in Afghanistan: Friend or Foe?

See this
US Republicans sharply criticise Pakistan in debate‎ DAWN
Read in Urdu also .

http://www.nawaiwaqt.com.pk/E_Paper/14-11-2011/Lahore/p1-9_9.gif