Accept defeat by Taliban, Pakistan tells Nato

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
Telegraph | News | Accept defeat by Taliban, Pakistan tells Nato

Senior Pakistani officials are urging Nato countries to accept the Taliban and work towards a new coalition government in Kabul that might exclude the Afghan president Hamid Karzai.

Pakistan's foreign minister, Khurshid Kasuri, has said in private briefings to foreign ministers of some Nato member states that the Taliban are winning the war in Afghanistan and Nato is bound to fail. He has advised against sending more troops.

Western ministers have been stunned. "Kasuri is basically asking Nato to surrender and to negotiate with the Taliban," said one Western official who met the minister recently.

The remarks were made on the eve of Nato's critical summit in Latvia. Lt Gen David Richards, the British general and Nato's force commander in Afghanistan, and the Dutch ambassador Daan Everts, its chief diplomat there, have spent five days in the Pakistani capital, Islamabad, urging the Pakistani military to do more to reign in the Taliban. But they have received mixed messages.

Mr Karzai has long insisted that the Taliban sanctuaries and logistics bases are in Pakistan while Gen James Jones, the Supreme Commander of Nato, told the US Congress in September that the Taliban leadership is headquartered in the Pakistani city of Quetta.

Lt Gen Ali Mohammed Jan Orakzai, governor of the volatile North West Frontier Province has stated publicly that the US, Britain and Nato have already failed in Afghanistan. "Either it is a lack of understanding or it is a lack of courage to admit their failures," he said recently.

Gen Orakzai insists that the Taliban represent the Pashtun population, Afghanistan's largest and Pakistan's second largest ethnic group, and they now lead a "national resistance" movement to throw out Western occupation forces, just as there is in Iraq.

But his comments have deeply angered many Pakistani and Afghan Pashtuns, who consider the Taliban as pariahs and a negation of Pashtun values. Gen Orakzai is the mastermind of "peace deals" between the army and the heavily Talibanised Pashtun tribes on the Pakistani side of the border, but these agreements have failed because they continue to allow the Taliban to attack Nato forces inside Afghanistan and leave the Taliban in place, free to run a mini-Islamic state.

Gen Orakzai is expected to urge the British Army to strike similar deals in Helmand province. Meanwhile aides to President Pervez Musharraf say he has virtually "given up" on Mr Karzai and is awaiting a change of face in Kabul before he offers more help.

Many Afghans fear that Pakistan is deliberately trying to undermine Mr Karzai and Nato's commitment to his government in an attempt to reinstall its Taliban proxies in Kabul – almost certainly leading to all-out civil war and possible partition of the country.

To progress in Riga, Nato will have to enlist US support to call Pakistan's bluff, put pressure on Islamabad to hand over the Taliban leadership and put more troops in to fight the insurgency while persuading Mr Karzai to become more pro-active
.
 

skunkushybrid

New Member
Pakistan will not fight against the Taliban because they are the Taliban. All muslims revere the taliban, whether they declare it publicly or not. All muslims want to see the rest of the world under their power, just as they have done for 2, 000 years.

Muslims are just like the third reich, they must be stopped now before their technologies improve beyond our capability to crush them.
 

Dankdude

Well-Known Member
As you look through History not one coutry that has gone against an Islamic country has come out the winner, or at the very least not a clear winner.

BTW Islam has only been around since the 9th century, so it's only been around for 1200 years.
 

medicineman

New Member
Whats the alternative, other than "bombing them back to the stone age", which they're pretty much there already. They are not just going to go away, so would wholesale slaughter be the Christian thing to do? Or maybe bargaining with them? Besides, we've already tried the bombing thing and it didn't work, they even used the MOAB. The only thing that would clear them out is nukes, and I'm pretty sure no-one wants to open that box!
 

skunkushybrid

New Member
As you look through History not one coutry that has gone against an Islamic country has come out the winner, or at the very least not a clear winner.

BTW Islam has only been around since the 9th century, so it's only been around for 1200 years.
The profit Mohamed had his visions in the desert 100 years after the death of Jesus... unless I'm wrong.

Also, what do you mean by the term winner? Richard The Lionheart enjoyed many a conquest against Saladin. In the crusades we conquered half the muslim world. Even Napoleon had victories over the muslims.

If you want to talk of winners... The British Empire... a tiny little Island that robbed the muslim world of it's riches. Which is why we are sitting here enjoying a nice chat instead of dodging bullets and bombs.
 

medicineman

New Member
The profit Mohamed had his visions in the desert 100 years after the death of Jesus... unless I'm wrong.

Also, what do you mean by the term winner? Richard The Lionheart enjoyed many a conquest against Saladin. In the crusades we conquered half the muslim world. Even Napoleon had victories over the muslims.

If you want to talk of winners... The British Empire... a tiny little Island that robbed the muslim world of it's riches. Which is why we are sitting here enjoying a nice chat instead of dodging bullets and bombs.
Hey skunk, They're starting to shoot back (subway attempts)! some uncovered plots to blow up airplanes, If you wait long enough, some of them will succeed, they're pretty dedicated!
 
Top