• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Time for a new strategic realignment

Puppycow

Penultimate Amazing
Puppycow
Joined
Jan 9, 2003
Messages
32,025
Location
Yokohama, Japan
How could Pakistan not know bin Laden was hiding there?

Now that we've gotten bin Laden, I think it's time to start asking hard questions about our so-called allies in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and whether there is still any strategic interest for the US in maintaining these alliances.

In the case of Afghanistan, I heard that Gen. Petraeus threatened to resign over the lack of cooperation by Karzai. And the recent jailbreak of 500 taliban points to an inside job which lots of people who are supposed to be our allies. It seems we have two kinds of enemies: those that are overtly our enemies, and those who pretend to be our allies, but actually conspire with our enemies.

There's a similar problem in Pakistan. They pretend to be our allies, but it's obvious that they can't be trusted. Look where bin Laden was hiding. Besides, we have a natural ally to the south of Pakistan in India. 66% of Indians have a favorable opinion of the US compared to 24% unfavorable, but in Pakistan only 17% have a favorable view of the US and 68% hate our guts.

It's time to think about how to fully extricate ourselves from both Stans. We could save a lot of money too.

So, maybe the Taliban take over. Well, we'll just have to contain them and deter them like we do with North Korea, Iran or other hostile countries. It's not a new problem, and it's one we can afford to have. We will have a huge ally in India as a bulwark against them. Also, a little known fact is that Iran and the Taliban don't like each other. The taliban massacred Shiites and Iranian diplomats in the past. So the prospects of an Iran-Taliban Axis are slim. More likely they will fight each other.
 
Allies? I don't know that I would call them that. They are countries with which we share some mutual interests. They are unlikely (at this time) to declare war upon us but only a fool would call them reliable. But we have to play on our mutual interests to achieve our independent goals. I don't doubt that most of the Pakistan leadership would like for the Taliban to be gone, but they have "district" problems, in that many of their politicians come from Taliban-friendly districts. It is a delicate balancing act and one that, in the ObL case, yielded mutually beneficial results. But Pakistan cannot come out and praise the operation without alienating a lot of their citizens.

But that is their problem. The US walked the tightrope here and reached a really important goal. It wasn't without cost and it won't make all of Pakistan happy, but we played the cards were were dealt and we won a hand. Maybe Pakistan is an unreliable partner, but they are not an enemy. We need to keep them on the "not an enemy" side.
 
Puppycow said:
So, maybe the Taliban take over. Well, we'll just have to contain them and deter them like we do with North Korea, Iran or other hostile countries. It's not a new problem, and it's one we can afford to have. We will have a huge ally in India as a bulwark against them. Also, a little known fact is that Iran and the Taliban don't like each other. The taliban massacred Shiites and Iranian diplomats in the past. So the prospects of an Iran-Taliban Axis are slim. More likely they will fight each other.
Click to expand...

Shia Iran almost went to war with the Taliban back in the late 90s partly because the Taliban murdered Iranian diplomats in Mazar-i-Sharif and seemed to be stirring up Sunni militants in Iran to attack the government. Iran were also involved in the invasion of Afghanistan using one of their proxies, Ismail Khan, from Herat. I think the Hazara are also proxies of Iran when the need arises.

The thing is that Iran is not averse to making alliances of convenience when they feel it is in their interest. Let's face it, there should have been no reason for the participants of the Iran-Contra scandal to make alliances given their opposite ideologies and it wouldn't have made ideological sense for the US to co-opt radical Islamists such as Gulbuddin Hekmatyar in the eighties but they still did.

In fact, the very point you are making now, that the ISI are not natural allies of the US is pretty much a counterexample to your suggestion that "natural enemies" don't form alliances as in the case of Iran and the Taliban.
 
Maybe the best thing to do is to pull out of there entirely and let them all sort eacxh other out, just sending in a Predator now and then when we find that an al Qaeda cell is forming and training up. We can't afford to occupy the country any longer, and we have nothing more to gain there.
 
leftysergeant said:
Maybe the best thing to do is to pull out of there entirely and let them all sort eacxh other out, just sending in a Predator now and then when we find that an al Qaeda cell is forming and training up. We can't afford to occupy the country any longer, and we have nothing more to gain there.
Click to expand...

Somebody take a screenshot and bronze it. Lefty said something sensible!
 
America's two most "important" Muslim allies in the "War on Terror" are also the source of the ideology that drives Islamic Terrorism.

Just sayin'.
 
Tricky said:
Allies? I don't know that I would call them that. They are countries with which we share some mutual interests. They are unlikely (at this time) to declare war upon us but only a fool would call them reliable. But we have to play on our mutual interests to achieve our independent goals. I ...snip...
Click to expand...

The best summary of which was made by a gentleman a little ago:

Lord Palmerston

"Therefore I say that it is a narrow policy to suppose that this country or that is to be marked out as the eternal ally or the perpetual enemy of England. We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow"
Click to expand...

As true as the day he said it - it was what I expect from any sensible country.

At the moment some of the USA's interests are in line with some of the interests of countries such as Pakistan therefore both will use that to advance their countries interests.
 
I thought we were friends with Pakistan because a few decades ago we tried to be friends with China, but China was being mean to India so we couldn't be friendly with them so they turned to the Soviets so we had to make friends with India's enemy Pakistan or else we'd have no friends in that part of the world except China, and we knew damn well China wasn't entirely friendly and the only reason for us to be friends with them anyway was that we both hated the Soviet Union. Which is totally ridiculous because we wound up supporting an authoritarian dictatorship while the Soviets wound up helping the world's largest democracy. Foreign relations are weird. But they work out over time, because now Pakistan hates us too, except the dictator, and he's not too pleased either. Good times!
 
Pakistan does what is in Pakistans best interest. It would be silly to expect them to do otherwise. With such an overwhelmingly anti-US sentiment among the population, it isn't at all suprising that Pakistan does not act like a vasal of the US.

The US will continue to treet Pakistan as a favored nation because it is in our current best interests to do so, and the tiny matter of Pakistan having knowingly harboured Bin Laden will not (and should not) interfere.
 
I think the problem here is referring to them as, "They." Even if the head of state is Obama's BFF doesn't mean that person can exert the same influence over a nation like the head of state of a western nation.
 
Bilbo said:
Nah, it's way too soon. We should probably wrap up that "War on Drugs" first...wait, did we win that one yet?
Click to expand...

Let's combine them, and make war upon Terror Drugs. I hate Terror Drugs. Terror Drugs tore my family apart!!! Will nobody think of the drugged and terrified children?!?!!?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom