ISLAMABAD, Pakistan"” Threats of U.S. military action inside Pakistan to counter Al Qaeda militants have highlighted the shaky relationship between these two key players in the war on terror and could escalate anti-American sentiments in this Islamic nation.
President Bush said this week that he would "absolutely" order military operations inside Pakistan if Usama bin Laden or other top terrorists were found to be hiding here.
Pakistan's leader, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, also said the United States had threatened to blow his Islamic nation "back to the Stone Age" if he didn't switch his support from Afghanistan's pro-Al Qaeda Taliban regime to the American-led war on terror following the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.
INTERESTING>?
This comes in the wake of the rhetoric spewing from UN speeches.
It will be interesting to see what comes out of the meeting with GW.
Your post appears to try and portray an assumption that we decreased troop levels and virtually abandoned Afghanistan to take on the task of invading Iraq. In truth, there are more U.S. troops in Afghanistan today "” 16,500 approx. "” than there were when we invaded the country "” 4,000 approx. Following the invasion, as we worked to root the Taliban out of their caves and mountain strongholds, the number of U.S. troops continued to climb "” even (SHOCKER!) after the Iraqi war began "” reaching as high as 18,000 before plans were announced in December 2005 to make some minor troop reductions in 2006.
If your surmise is that the Taliban is regrouping and strengthening its insurgency because we abandoned Afghanistan for Iraq "” and it certainly seems that this is exactly what your surmise is "” you are obviously mistaken. Just because the media isn't reporting what is happening in Afghanistan (actually, there was a very interesting piece in the American Journalism Review this month detailing how there are things happening every day in Afghanistan but the media is ignoring them because they don't want to sacrifice correspondents or airtime/column inches from Iraq) doesn't mean that they aren't actually taking place.
Actually, what happened in Afghanistan was and remains a shining success, militarily. One of the brightest moments in the history of our nation's armed forces. It was inevitable that the Taliban would regroup, however, and that's what we're now seeing. Our greatest hope was that we could see Afghanistan's military strengthen to the point that it was capable of squashing any insurgency before it reached pandemic levels and civil war broke out, and that we could see it strengthen to that point and us get out before the expected resurgence of the Taliban took place. Since the goal was for a force of 20,000 Afghan military fighters and they don't have near that many and the Taliban resurgence appears to be on in full, it looks like, unfortunately, we're going to be there for a while yet.
The big picture, though, should not be overlooked. The big picture is that, like the hunt for Osama bin Laden, the war in Afghanistan did not cease with the beginning of operations in Iraq. There have been things happening in Afghanistan every day since our 2003 invasion of Iraq. In fact, just since the summer of 2005 "” roughly one year "” some 60,000 former militia men in Afghanistan have been disarmed by the Afghans, with help from coalition forces. I'd say there is a lot of progress being made there.
What would be your solution to stamping out the Taliban entirely?
__________________
We must be the change we wish to see in the world -- Ghandi
http://www.rightminded.net
It has been said many times that the Pakistani Secret Service has stronge ties and sympathies with the Taliban. Since the indiviguals within the Taliban would no doubt have been involved with the fight against the Soviets and no doubt also the Pakistani Secret Service, I wonder what, if any help and support these people may have had from the CIA back before the Russian departure. Are the Taliban simply more blowback?
__________________
Have Fun
Take the Kids
Make it Fairchaise
Location: On an Island in the west coast of New England
Posts: 13,133
RE: The Taliban - Mission Not Accomplished
I wouldn't rely on Pakistan or any other Middle East Country to step up to the plate with America. Talk is cheap but IMO our cultures will always keep us apart when the going gets tough. If they have to chose between Islamic Terrorism or the West they will follow their heritage, which unfortunately means continuous wars. Sitting idly by while Hamas, Hezbollah or Taliban makes inroads into the military, and government is a way of life for them. The good Muslims do nothing while the Islamic Fundamentalists string their cancerous tentacles all throughout the country. It is a continuous cycle and unfortunately we can't stop it. Any opposition that will last will have to come from themselves and it won't be a result of a Democracy taking hold..
__________________
Too busy with fishing to spend much time here.
Your post appears to try and portray an assumption that we decreased troop levels and virtually abandoned Afghanistan to take on the task of invading Iraq. In truth, there are more U.S. troops in Afghanistan today "” 16,500 approx.
I think Iff's fundamental premise is that, had we not invaded iraq, we could have devoted more resources to afghanistan. that fact that we've increased troop levels in afghanistan is not germane to that premise.
the NATO commander has stated he needs more resources in afghanistan. those reasources would certainly be more readily available were they notoperating in iraq.
__________________
"Jesus answered and said unto him; Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the Kingdom of God" John 3:3
Ban Canned Hunting. If you don't speak up against it you are part of the problem.
[Deleted]
