Thursday, November 20, 2008

Pakistan more integral to the so called war on terror, Latest events and remember how complicated and convoluted this part of the lie we're living is

Karzai offers peace to Taliban and security for Mullah Omar!

Afghanistan's Taliban insurgents rejected an offer of talks from Kabul yesterday and threatened for the first time to strike a target in the West. Washington also shot down the proposal by Afghan President Hamid Karzai and said it wouldn't support such an initiative. The Taliban said it wouldn't come to the negotiating table until all foreign troops left Afghanistan. It also vowed in a videotape to strike in Paris unless coalition member France withdrew its forces. Karzai on Sunday offered to hold direct negotiations with the leader of the Taliban, Mullah Mohammad Omar, and to guarantee him safe passage. Anticipating U.S. disapproval, he challenged the U.S.-led international coalition to "remove me, or leave, if they disagree."

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack slapped down the idea yesterday. "One can't imagine the circumstances where you have the senior leadership of the Taliban - that there would be any safe passage with respect to U.S. forces," McCormack said. There have been no reported sightings of Omar, a close associate of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, since the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001. The deputy leader of the Taliban, who calls himself Mullah Brother, scorned the proposal yesterday. "As long as foreign occupiers remain in Afghanistan, we aren't ready for talks because they hold the power and talks won't bear fruit," he told Reuters news agency by satellite telephone from an undisclosed location. Taliban will not talk to Karzai

Meanwhile A suspected U.S. missile strike hit a village well inside Pakistani territory Wednesday, killing at least six alleged militants in an attack that could raise tensions between the anti-terror allies, officials said. The missile struck a house in Bannu district, which is a part of northwest Pakistan where al-Qaida and Taliban have found refuge, but does not directly border Afghanistan. Two Pakistani intelligence officials said their agents reported foreigners from Central Asia were among the dead. The intelligence officials spoke to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to media.

The United States is blamed in around 20 missile strikes in northwest Pakistan since mid-August against al-Qaida and Taliban militants blamed for rising attacks against foreign forces in Afghanistan. The missiles are believed fired from unmanned planes launched in Afghanistan, where some 32,000 U.S. troops are fighting the Taliban and other militants. Pakistan has loudly protested the strikes as violations of its sovereignty, but the attacks have not stopped, leading to speculation by some analysts the two nations have a secret deal on the attacks. Bannu in 'settled area'All the attacks since August have been in villages in north and South Waziristan, two semiautonomous tribal regions where the government has a very limited presence. 20 missile strikes by US in Pakistan since...

We have been put in a hard position largely by Bush and his FU attitude and bullying! That is where Bin Laden and Omar are supposed to be and remember Obama's promise to go after them there! The majority of the Pakistani people are against us already and always will be because of the anti American religious fervor fostered in Madrasas. It is no secret and I am sure you know by now that Pakistan's ISI was paying some of the original 9/11 attackers and with the complicit CIA allowed and fostered Bin Laden's escape from Tora Bora, incidentally which the CIA built during the Soviet invasion.

There is so much and it is so convoluted! I have written on it extensively in the past in relation to the lie we are living in the United States that you can query anything on this site and find information on it! Or let me know and I will get you whatever you are looking for. Suffice it to say Pakistan hates us and I have been told by a writer /Politician in India that if we attack Pakistan they will unite to repel the infidel. Us! There is a convoluted relationship with Russia aiding them militarily as well.

It is also no secret we have 4 or 5 aircraft carrier attack Groups in the Gulf at any given time capable of attacking Pakistan, Syria, Iran or anywhere else at any given moment. Russia also has capabilities there ready to defend against us if we do something against there interest. This is not any easy situation Bush has set in motion for Obama and the world. Then there is the Bankrupting of America Bush has purposely allowed and the timing is no coincidence! Obama is in a tough position but will send American troops back into Pakistan on the ground if need be as they already have been. They have also already attacked in Syria which is also old news. The world must exercise great restraint Because of what Bush instigated and allow the righteous "peace loving future desiring Obama to work his magic. He is not the war mongering Decider. He will do the right thing for the US and the entire world if given the chance. Take care and stay in touch!

James Joiner
Gardner, Ma


One Fly said...

That's the key Jim -"if he's given the chance".

an average patriot said...

I know man! It is very scary knowing what has been purposely been set against him here and around the world and that Bush's team is working over time to thwart Obama and has until 1/20 to do it!


The whole picture is so messy and is convoluted as you say, James.

The Pakistani govt has very little control over the Afghan-Pakistani border tribes with whom Afghan refugees have lived for decades. Those tribes still live steeped in century old Islamic fundamentalism; impossible for those Afghans who now co-habit with Pakistani Islamic fundamentalists to change unless a massive education program is initiated -- but that is not forthcoming; the Pakistani mullahs in those regions won't have it.

In my opinion, the West's chances of attacking the Taliban is through Pakistan, with the help of Pakistani govt and their more moderate population. We cannot waylay Pakistan today or antagonise those moderate forces or those who are not really of Taleban descent in the region because they hold part of the key for the eventual defeat of the Talebans. When we go on airstrikes that kill or maim innocent civilians, we rouse the irrational in people and we produce more enemies.

That said, air and ground operations are very difficult to carry out in those mountainous regions so what do we do? Difficult, difficult...

Our "nation building" efforts in Afghanistan are failing and our security and peacekeeping efforts are at best achieving only mediocre results so it seems. We are seen as invaders when we shouldn't be, i.e., the Afhgan govt asked the UN to help and that is a legitimate, very bona fide reason for going into Afghanistan.

Perhaps, if we were to change tack and focus on doing better public relations initiatives worldwide... i.e., let the world know that we are only hunting out for Bin Laden and his lieutenants -- focus on that message.

There's one thing I do know, NATO's Secretary General is going at the message in a very wrong way. NATO, which is in Afghanistan, is receiving the brunt of the clumsiness of NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer (I used to think he was alright until he "thought" NATO was more important than the UN). His language betray the mission of NATO which is a UN mission, particularly when to point out something, he asks, "Is NATO winning or losing in Afghanistan?"

I thought that was the dumbest question to ask. It's not a question of whether NATO is winning or losing -- it gives NATO a totally wrong image, it's the UN THAT IS LOSING, it's the world, its' nations all over the globe if NATO, the alliance that's tasked to execute the mission, cannot do it. Jaap de Hoop Scheffer is way over his head -- he has lost sight of the fact that NATO is merely a tool and that the overall responsibility lies in the UN or the alliance of nations all over the world. That he should even equate or infer that NATO is independent of the UN with his clumsy pronouncement works against the mission in Afghanistan. And this is perhaps why NATO and its member states have been encountering resistance from within many political circles in the West.

Ooops, sorry about that... just went on and on but I am of the opinion that we should go back to the drawing board and re-focus on our mission. Our presence in Afghanistan was a request from the Afghan govt that's a legally elected govt (whether we like it or not, they have a judicial and legal status to call themselves a democratically elected govt) to the UN that resolved to send in NATO to help. That's the bottom line and we had better remind the world before we all fail.

an average patriot said...

Hi Hill Blogger
You are right it is a total mess! We have this so called waron terror like it or not and it is just beginning. Like it or not this is going to be hell and a few of my sons are in this. Pakistan is an integral part of this and on both sides of the issue!

I have posted on it a few times and I will dig up the report if you are interested but most do not remember or know that Bush was wooing the Taliban in Crawford and the White House as he wanted an oil pipeling through Afghanistan and he threatened to attack them if they refused.

What a surprise! When talks broke down and they told him to go to hell, 10 days later 9/11 happened and Afghanistan was attacked! Also rmember the CIA built Tora Bora and they watched Bin Laden's caravan leave there and go into Pakistan. Convoluted indeed!

an average patriot said...

Hill Blogger
Here you go man! we do not have clean hands in Afghanistan

Dave Dubya said...

Both US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were like throwing gas on the fire we were supposed to be fighting.

It's utter madness to do the very thing that makes us more enemies, not less.

If we stopped occupying Islamic countries they would no longer have their rallying cause to Jihad.

And the US government still thinks they alone know what's best.

I fear Obama will walk into the same trap.

an average patriot said...

You are exactly right about A and I and right on about Barack as he will now be forced like it or not thanks to forces set before him, he will at least have to react!

Years ago I said from the beginning Muslims wanted us off their land but Bush wanted their oil so he created the so called terrorist issue to use as an excuse to get on their land

It is all about oil! It has long been a war against Islam again like it or not though denied! After attacking Afghanistan then Iraq to get in the middle east the only way to beat them now is to isolate them in their countries and monitor them like a big Cuba and others will not go for that yet!

You also know Dave that those behind Bush as well as his see war as a good thing to be used for gain creating prosperity and ultimately forcing their will on other countries.
They have learned the lessons of the past well! Forever war has been his goal as I have said many times and at this point whoever is President is going to be forced to wage it! Nice to see you by the way!

opit said...

exMI at blogspot has written a serviceman's view of the forces at work there : though he is blind to the ongoing destruction the U.S. causes, I found it illuminating.
Opera is acting up and I can't fetch my first entry on my Links page under 'Documents' at the moment : Post-Saddam Iraq ...aka Desert Crossing. This study is something I view as a plausible blueprint for U.S. activities in Iraq, and is compatable with much of Tom Engelhardt's TomDispatch work. It also sets the scene for violent intervention throughout the oil bearing regions of Asia ... and perhaps Africa as well.
I don't think acquisition of the oil for U.S. use is necessarily the primary tactical objective : money/power opportunities and denial of a strategic war material to Russia would seem sufficient inducement. That doesn't explain spreading DU around the Balkans and Iraq - but if you think of that as 'scorched earth' warfare it's hellishly effective.

an average patriot said...

Welcome! Oil is only part of it! Our use of depleted uranium has ruined much of Afghanistan and the middle east but I just want to say in the end this is all about keeping the military industry fed and moving forward.
Funny but I just had this conversation this morning about how the military, those that feed off that industry, and the Government are the only ones doing well in this economy and you have to believe that is on purpose!


Thanks for the link James.

Will check it out illico.


Meanwhile, there's one man who's Washington bound who understands Afghanistan and the so-called war on terror: Gen James Jones.

I have no doubt he will help sort out the mess.

an average patriot said...

Hill Blogger
You are welcome! I do not know much about General Jones but I have heard nothing bad about him!
If Obama wants him you know he is the right man for the job and will do the right thing. I anticipate watching all of Obama's nominees perform!