This blog explores the contemporary political and cultural trends from a distinct perspective
The documents reveal a faltering strategy
Published on July 27, 2010 By Bahu Virupaksha In Current Events

The Af-Pak War has finally found a dubious notoriety, in the same manner as the Vietnam War found its in New York Times  publication of the Pentagon Papers.  The founder of WikiLeaks Jackie Assange, the Australian founder of this web site, has declared that the documents revealed on his site make a strong case for war crimes. This statement is sheer hype and the real story lies in the sordid nexus between the Government of Pakistan and its Army under Genaral Kayani and the Taliban. During the recent Donor's Conference in Kabul the US Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton made a pointed reference to the involvement of the Pakistan establishment in fomenting taliban insurgency in the Pashtun areas of Afghanistan. In fact one senior US official has even state that the Pakistanis are aware of the hideout of Osama bin Laden. The documents expose the fact that the official denials not withstanding, the civilian and military establishment of Pakistan is running circles round USA by publically endorsing US positions and coverly supporting the insurgency.

WikiLeaks has exposed literally thousands of documents that very clearly establish the enduring links between the Taliban insurgents and the Pakistani Military establishment. A retired general named Hamid Gul seems to have set up the interface between the Taliban and the Pakistani Army. The US has confronted the pakistani officials over the involvement of the Army Intelligence in planning and attacking the Indian Embassy in Kabul in 2008. In fact the treasure trove published in WikiLeaks reveals that the NATO forces had advance information of the attack on the Indian Embassy. General Gul needs to be treated as a terrorist and thr Pakistani Government must hand him over to the US for trial.

WikiLeaks has also published material regarding the training and recruitment of suicide bombers. The documents show without a shadow of doubt that the US has built a very good human intelligence network in the region. This may be now compromised due to the publication of reports. In fact the interrogation of the US terorist David Headley has shown that the Pakistani Army was involved in training the attackers who carried out the strikes in Mumbai, India, on 26th November 2008.

The US administration is incensed at the expose. However, I must add that there is hardly anything in the 92,000 pages that was not known earlier. Except for minor details much of the happening in Afghanistan is known to the rest of the world.

 


Comments (Page 2)
2 Pages1 2 
on Jul 30, 2010

They could have done it themselves after the USSR left - as the Northern Alliance was firmly entrenched in 1/3 of the country, and the Taliban in another 3rd

Unfortunately the resistance strirred up by USA against the Soviets concocted a heady brew of Islamic fundamentalism and anti communism. The results is of course the frnkensteinian monster in the form of AL QAEDA and the USA is now battling the very demons it created.

on Jul 30, 2010

1. Obama gave less than the requested troops and waited 6 months to do it. I guess you forgot that.

Right.  So clearly, not giving in to every whim of the military represents 'playing politics' and not letting the 'generals fight the war'  their hands?

 

2. Show me where McChrystal requested an out? Or is that just another one of your DNC talking points?

So how do you explain it?  come on now.  Let's hear some independent thought.  You have a guy who has reached the highest echelon of military service.  Then one day he up and decides "you know what?  I'm going to bad mouth my boss in front of rolling stone".  Do you think that's just a coincidence?  Why does somebody do that if not to get fired? 

And please, show me where that's a DNC 'talking point'.  It's just common sense. 

 

3. I am on earth and from earth. I heard that DNC parrots are from Uranus, but that is just speculation I suspect.

YEAH YEAH DNC PARROTS YEAH YEAH ZOBAMA SOCIALISM. 

 

Please show me where I said the world was ending. As for destroying the country, that is a matter of opinion is it not?

Well, a great deal of what you say does seem to have this sort of fatalist zero sum twinge to it.  Such as: 

ny president that nationalizes 60% of the economy is destroying the country since we know that government cannot run business.

The answer is always divide. Why? Apparently because no one wants to work for anything any longer. They want to sit in eden and be spoon fed.

Stuff like that is just so delusional I imagine that you're married to Lula. 

 

Buy a Volt.

An American car?  they still make those? 

 

on Jul 30, 2010

Bahu Virupaksha

Unfortunately the resistance strirred up by USA against the Soviets concocted a heady brew of Islamic fundamentalism and anti communism. The results is of course the frnkensteinian monster in the form of AL QAEDA and the USA is now battling the very demons it created.

That is a common misconception.  And of course it is wrong.  Have you ever seen the Planet of the Apes series?  The last one is very telling.  The creators were trying to get out of the franchise and so it is sloppy, but has a great sub plot to it.

When the mutant humans attack ape city, the gorillas run away.  Cornelius, the Chimps and orangutans defeated them, and then were allowing the defeated humans to retreat to their city.  The gorillas, not having to fear a potent enemy at that point, attacked the remnants.

So it was with the Taliban.  They hid in Pakistan while the real Afghans died against the USSR.  While members of Al Qaeda were part of the fighters there, Al Qaeda was not (they came later).

So you have to rethink your whole supposition as it is based on false statements and incorrect logic.  The Taliban and Al Qaeda were the gorillas in the 80s, not the Chimps.

on Aug 01, 2010

 

That is a common misconception. And of course it is wrong. Have you ever seen the Planet of the Apes series? The last one is very telling. The creators were trying to get out of the franchise and so it is sloppy, but has a great sub plot to it.

 

So it was with the Taliban. They hid in Pakistan while the real Afghans died against the USSR. While members of Al Qaeda were part of the fighters there, Al Qaeda was not (they came later).

So you have to rethink your whole supposition as it is based on false statements and incorrect logic. The Taliban and Al Qaeda were the gorillas in the 80s, not the Chimps.

 

Oh.  My.  God. 

 

Yeah.  I guess it's not like the US was shipping equipment  to the anti-soviet war effort in Afghanistan, and it's not like that money was being distributed by the same Pakistani intelligence agencies that we know even today have a 'close' relationship with the bad guys in Afghanistan, and it's certainly not like any of that could possibly  represent the embryonic stages of both the Taliban and Al Quaada. 

on Aug 02, 2010

That is a common misconception. And of course it is wrong. Have you ever seen the Planet of the Apes series? The last one is very telling. The creators were trying to get out of the franchise and so it is sloppy, but has a great sub plot to it

It is a well known fact that the al-qaeda was formed, trasined and equpped by the USA during the days of Soviet occupation and the strategy was so successful that it has come back to haunt the very super power that launched the "BASE".

on Aug 02, 2010

Bahu Virupaksha
It is a well known fact that the al-qaeda was formed, trasined and equpped by the USA during the days of Soviet occupation and the strategy was so successful that it has come back to haunt the very super power that launched the "BASE".

No, that is the PR hype, but it is also false.  Al Qaeda was not formed or financed by the US during the Afghan campaign.  it was formed in response to the Gulf War and was never financed by the US.  That some members of Al Qaeda were a part of the Afghan resistance is a given.  But Al Qeada did not exist until the US established bases in the Middle east in response to Saddam Hussein.

I am a bit surprised at you.  Although your topics are usually left leaning, you normally do at least get the basic facts straight. You have failed in this case, and not even by a little, but by a whopping lot.

on Aug 03, 2010

I am a bit surprised at you. Although your topics are usually left leaning, you normally do at least get the basic facts straight. You have failed in this case, and not even by a little, but by a whopping lot.

I am not at sure about this. I stand by my argument that the al-qaeda was formed as part of the mujahudeen trained and supplied and also groomed by the US at the time of the anti-Soviet resistance. The al-qaeda did not play a role in the first gulf war against Saddam Hussain when his forces occupied Kuwait. If so how do yopu expalin the argument tritted out by Bush that Iraq has become a haven for the al-qaeda and he used this as a suggestification to launch the invasion. The fact is that USA created the conditions for the present crisis due to its strategic overreach.

2 Pages1 2