How many of you think that for the supreme interest of our country WMD should be used against Taliban infested areas?
Are there other options that we could utilize?
Please come up with innovative ideas.
Peace.
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
LOL... that's silly. WMDs would be completely ineffectual against Taliban. Some people seem to think that WMDs are some kind of magic bullet solution. They are suprisingly limited. Against a dispersed enemy that does not concentrate forces, such as the Taliban, WMDs are utterly worthless.
Successful counter insurgencies operations, such as the Boer War, involve large numbers of soldiers to be deployed and an acceptance of large numbers of casualties on both sides.
What worked successfully in the Boer War was to invite and evacuate the civilian population of the areas to "safe zones", and then treat anyone who chose not to comply with the government's instructions as an enemy.
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
The only way we can eliminate taliban is through mass anti taliban propaganda scheme and target killing of their leaders very quickly and swiftly without giving them anytime to regroup. And in the meanwhile, establish rule of law and amend constitution to include La Iqraha Fiddeen that there is no compulsion in religion.
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
^ I agree, target killing is probably the best option. WMD is worst option as it destroys everything around it, huge (unacceptable) civilian collateral damage.
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
evacuate civilans, pass an ordinance that no one can carry any weapons. systematically take their leadership out, take out their communication, supplies and funding channels. limit their movements.
if this is not done effectively than u hve a huge issue.
the issue with large assaults is that these wimps hide behind civilians..
all of a sudden their rally cry that they are so mighty that govt has conceded defeat will turn into.... boo hoo zionist agent military is killing us because we talk about islam..
and lets just say the amount of military casualties required to contain this is increasing day by day, it was a very diff situation a year ago, its grown since, and the deeper they are into more and more civilian population centers the more exponentially it increases the bodycount that the military will have to deal with. unless u can cause a divide between the factions or make them irrelevent somehow..I think that is what the govt's plan was with the swat agreement although it seems to have backfired in a major way
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
@Mad Scientist: Yes, it could be silly but still we need to evaluate all options. And we can not rules out anything outright. Could you elaborate more on Boer war?
@Jeevay Pakistan: Actually I have also been thinking on these lines, taking out their leadership by target killing. But the moment it looks like the leadership is being protected and warned in advance, hence the likes of Mehsuds waling free and poking their noses just before our own eyes.
@Minister sinister: How about this idiotic media we have created in our country? This is spreading needless fear in our population, how to take care of this media? This is also very important before we go ahead with the target killing, any ideas how to achieve that?
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
you have private owned independent free for-profit media they will sensationalize things if that means selling additonal copies, the question is where is the balance between journalistic integrity and sensationalization for profit. However, if you cut through the spin and look at the facts, you can draw your own conclusions. the growth in influence of taleban and their allies, a while back people questioned the level of influence in swat that the newspapers were reporting.
as far as taking care fo media as you say, why does it have to be done 'before' the militants are contained?
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
you have private owned independent free for-profit media they will sensationalize things if that means selling additonal copies, the question is where is the balance between journalistic integrity and sensationalization for profit. However, if you cut through the spin and look at the facts, you can draw your own conclusions. the growth in influence of taleban and their allies, a while back people questioned the level of influence in swat that the newspapers were reporting.
as far as taking care fo media as you say, why does it have to be done 'before' the militants are contained?
Its waiting for law enforcement and free/strong/honest judiciary. Without it media is another mafia.
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
LOL... that's silly. WMDs would be completely ineffectual against Taliban. Some people seem to think that WMDs are some kind of magic bullet solution. They are suprisingly limited. Against a dispersed enemy that does not concentrate forces, such as the Taliban, WMDs are utterly worthless.
Successful counter insurgencies operations, such as the Boer War, involve large numbers of soldiers to be deployed and an acceptance of large numbers of casualties on both sides.
What worked successfully in the Boer War was to invite and evacuate the civilian population of the areas to "safe zones", and then treat anyone who chose not to comply with the government's instructions as an enemy.
I was just discussing the Boer War strategy with a colleague recently. A similar strategy was attempted in Fallujah, and was apparently somewhat successful. The general population will have to be prepared to accept a significant number of casualties. A press blackout is really the only way to do this effectively in today's age of instant information.
I am just not sure how much longer it will take for the government to stop the infighting and begin to treat this as a serious problem that must be immediately addressed.
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
In other words all pillars of the state working in harmony. But since we are far from reaching that point, question is what best under these circumstances can be achieved?
The best way to defeat these barbarians? And what we - you and me - can do?
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
In other words all pillars of the state working in harmony. But since we are far from reaching that point, question is what best under these circumstances can be achieved?
The best way to defeat these barbarians? And what we - you and me - can do?
**Use Food as weapon......................block all food shipments.......
then allow women and children to cross over!
**
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
@Jeevay Pakistan: Actually I have also been thinking on these lines, taking out their leadership by target killing. But the moment it looks like the leadership is being protected and warned in advance, hence the likes of Mehsuds waling free and poking their noses just before our own eyes.
This is because unfortunately, there is a significant amount of sympathy towards these Taliban in fractions of our Govt, ISI, Army and in our public as well. We as people of Pakistan are still divided over the ideology of Pakistan after 60+ years of its independence. Some people believe in democracy, while others call it un-islamic. We have no direction whatsoever. We have made these beasts and monkeys are leaders and expect them to lead us to prosperity. I mean, C'mon.
Re: Question: WMD on Taliban?
@Mad Scientist: Yes, it could be silly but still we need to evaluate all options. And we can not rules out anything outright. Could you elaborate more on Boer war?
A century ago in what is today South Afrika, Britain forcefully annexed 2 countries populated by Dutch settlers, known as Boers.
The Boer rose up in revolt. Unable to face the British in conventional battle, they resorted to a guerilla-style militancy, supported, fed, and protected by the Boer civiliant population, fighting without uniforms, and blending in with civilians.
In many ways, this is similar to the Taliban militancy.
The British found themselves unable to fight an enemy like this, just as the Pakistani army struggles.
In response, Britain issued orders for all Boer civilians to move into and live in designated camps. The entire Boer population was relocated to these facilities. They were warned that any Boers choosing to stay in the occupied territory outside these facilties were considered to be actively treated as being involved in the insurgency and were considered targets for the army.
Britain won the war.