Article

2007-03-28 Afghanistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred 2007-03-28 00:00|| || Front Page|| [1 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 thx Fred, I took down the good bits.
~~~~~

Note name "Lieven" has the word lie in it.

The West has taken sides in an ongoing civil war in Afghanistan, according to an area "expert"

no shiite Sherlock,
Come to think of it Yes something Did compel us to Discriminate against OLB/ and his Arabs, and his Talib buddies, was that too gauche of us to do Lieven?

Lieven found it ironic that those who were the Wests friends in Afghanistan the 1980s, were its enemies today

We find reading "experts" works from you Lieven to be painfully ironic; as in the irony of having chronic hemorrhoids.

He said the Taliban are rooted in a genuine popular insurgency and are based on both sides of the Pak-Afghan border since Afghan refugee camps continue to exist in Pakistan.

That's full blown Taqiyya BS, [paid or Lieven's converted like Ben], or he's a full blown idjiot.
A popular sport on both sides of the Pak-Afghan border is to watch how long someone will retain possession of their head after they criticizes the Talibs. [i made that up to make a point]

Lieven, He said the West is trying to create an Afghan state that is inefficient, corrupt and an entity that is hated by the population since it does little for it.

yep we trying like hell with our precious blood and treasure to make A-stan a failure. jeebus how can any one call themselves an "expert" and write such stinkin trash.

Lieven, To make the clergy work, it has to be paid, he stressed. He also pointed out that while indirect rule of the tribal areas is not satisfactory, history shows that direct rule always failed. [how rich that BS] While Afghanistan is an important country in the war on terrorism, Pakistan is vital because of its size, composition and its nuclear capability. He expressed fear that if Western efforts in Afghanistan fail to achieve results, the tendency will be to blame Pakistan and to press it to stage crackdowns on radical elements, something that will lead to unrest in Pakistan and widen the conflict. The consequences for the war on terrorism could only be disastrous.

**Perv & Co. must have called in a favor for this article.

conclusion: PERV AND THE ISI WANT MORE MONEY. So they can line their pockets again and pay off their Islamic proxies.

Posted by RD 2007-03-28 03:35|| 2007-03-28 03:35|| Front Page Top

#2 What gave you the hint: x0000 NATO troops?

Posted by gromgoru 2007-03-28 06:09|| 2007-03-28 06:09|| Front Page Top

#3 From

Cappelli, Vanni. "Containing Pakistan: Engaging the Raja-Mandala in South-Central Asia."
Orbis 51 (Winter 2007): 55-70.

The strength of the Indian army in Kashmir limited the human toll of the ISIs operations there, but when Pakistan sought to fill the void that opened
in Afghanistan upon the fall of the communist regime, it became responsible for inter-Muslim bloodletting and destruction on a scale unseen in the region since 1971. Too often depicted in the media as simply an Afghan civil war, Rawalpindis forceful backing first of the Pashtun Islamist warlord Gulbaddin Hekmatyar and then of the Pashtun-based Taliban was essentially an act of international aggression. The successful conclusion of this effort with the
Talibans September 1996 entry into Kabul, which had been almost leveled in the fighting, provided Pakistan with a friendly regime there for the first time since independence. It was now free to concentrate on India with the confidence that comes with possessing WMD.

Posted by John Frum 2007-03-28 06:28|| 2007-03-28 06:28|| Front Page Top

#4 It must have been a very agreeable conference, with all in attendance stroking their beards in a reflective manner, and the tea divine. Bismillah.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-03-28 07:38|| 2007-03-28 07:38|| Front Page Top

#5 "West a partisan in the Afghan civil war". Coming up next on "PakiBabble"...

Posted by tu3031 2007-03-28 08:56|| 2007-03-28 08:56|| Front Page Top

#6 Lieven found it ironic that those who were the Wests friends in Afghanistan the 1980s, were its enemies today.

It has already been pointed out that this is nonsense but I'd like to ask, at what point did an act of betrayal against someone (I wouldn't say friend) that helped you turn into (a) the fault of those that were betrayed, aka we trained Bin Laden so it's blowback (b) Irony as if it was an accident?

A lot has been said about Islamic manners towards guests and I'd like to say in my opinion it's a lot of nonsense.

Posted by rjschwarz 2007-03-28 11:51|| 2007-03-28 11:51|| Front Page Top

#7 Good - we've got some more names to add to the our "little list" of idiots to be bumped off once we win the war. I hope someone is keeping a complete inventory of all the idiots, so we can do it quickly. I'm sure Rosie and Nancy will make the list, somewhere near the top. Cindy Sh$$can should be there, also, along with the complete staff of a few newspapers around the world. We've allowed such idiots to have too much airtime in the past, and we're still paying for it.

Posted by Old Patriot">Old Patriot 2007-03-28 13:14|| http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/]">[http://oldpatriot.blogspot.com/] 2007-03-28 13:14|| Front Page Top