Trump Uses the K-word, Includes Bajwa in Talks with Imran

[hit&run]

You’re right- military expeditions aren’t zero sum games.

But Afghanistan flies in the face of everything that the US preached about not wanting to replicate another Vietnam-ish quagmire after the former chapter concluded.

It has nothing to do with “enterprise” or winning/losing what is or isn’t their possession.

When you go in with the brash and bluster of the most powerful military power in the world- and nearly 18 years later your generals are conceding that the war is un-winnable, that you are still locked in a stalemate, etc.....you know that sht has gone awry.

There were even Conservative online publications from former individuals who had served- a few months ago- who were wholly conceding that it was time for the U.S. to declare Afghanistan as a *military* defeat, explicitly.

Your rants do not qualify to pass the muster of an academic paper or even a genric defence blog. I read many tin pots here at DFI too who have not yet anything in their lives but develop compulsive hates for others just because they have used their dispensible capabilities to protect their interests.

People like you and the one who jumps in to appreciate your rants are like trolls who go spam forums like us with sweeping generalizations, pessimism and confirmation biases without any qualification whatsoever to make fallacious conclusions that add no value for readerships in India who are aspiring to expand beyond regional challenges.

In my first response, I already talked about what initiated War on Terror and how a messaging post 9/11 was delivered using Afghanistan to the rest of the world. The results are visible as mainland America who was never attacked since its inception came back more secure and brutal.

Sermons spouted by cheapesters who live in a luxury of 'nothing to lose' making comments on the ways of protecting self by an Economy that is 23 trillion GDP strong is same as a roadside beggar judges a Rich and successful person as corrupt.

If I have an overwhelming offensive capability I will use it disproportionately against my enemies. If I have the means to earn better than anyone around me I will have the luxury to gamble to win or lose.

People are sick of doom-predictors who have been predicting the doom of USA and China for that matter for last decades and so.

The real take-away for us is the application of assertiveness and adventurism that comes with capabilities.

For USA after delivering the strongest possible message and now expanding their ever-growing MIC and export regime in the backdrop of WOT their military defeat in Afghanistan has no meaning at all.

You want to cry about lose of Human lives and ruins of the war, please go to leftist media portals you will find many their to sob with you.

You talked about Vietnam. After Afghanistan, they knocked down Syria and few more are in line. Many of their so-called liberal and peaceful friends came in to help them. What a coincidence that somehow these same liberal nations join USA one or the other way when they go and attack other nations. Looks like a profitable affair to me.

If you can not see what they are doing and what actually transpires behind the propaganda articles and paid doom predictors catering the same MIC to calm certain groups and section of the population then I can only feel pity for you and likewise status-quoists.

China took the Gulf War 1&2 as a wake-up call and since then they are not blinking a bit on their MIC building and bringing about a paradigm shift to their military tactics, posturing and operations. The human race learns as the population learns by taking up the challenges. Chinese challenges are different from India's challenges.

For India, we are learning but learning very slow. The thick Skulls 23 pages down are still asking me what we will gain by military intervention in Afghanistan. They think it will tantamount as the slavery of USA. LOL

 

[Haldiram]

China took the Gulf War 1&2 as a wake-up call and since then they are not blinking a bit on their MIC building and bringing about a paradigm shift to their military tactics, posturing and operations. The human race learns as the population learns by taking up the challenges. Chinese challenges are different from India's challenges.

If China is such a wise-ass, and if Afghanistan is such a golden strategic opportunity, why aren't they deploying their troops in Afghanistan and denying India that opportunity? Pakistan is their friend, it'll co-operate too, given the prospect of keeping India out. Them Chinese, with all their Sun Tzu brain, decided not to deploy in Afghanistan, neither for the material resources, nor for the geo-political gains of containing India. No one wants to touch Afghanistan with a 20 foot pole; The ones who made the mistake of touching it are scrambling to get out somehow, with no material or political gains to show after 2 decades of deployment. That's why it's said, devils rush in where angels fear to tread, something something..

"Everyone is shivering in their Dhotis; Only I am wearing Jeans" - # @hit&run logic

 

[Vijyes]

That's why it's said, devils rush in where angels fear to tread, something something..

It is FOOLS rush in where angels fear to tread.

Are you saying that USA was foolish? What might be the reason USA went into Afghanistan? After all, USA had no intention of extracting any resources or using it for any higher purpose. What was the need to go to Afghanistan in such an all out manner? Is the destruction of World Trade Centre that big an event to simply rush everything for such long periods of time without any proper strategic thinking?

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Are you saying that USA was foolish? What might be the reason USA went into Afghanistan?

AfPak belt was surrounded by USSR in North, Iran in West and PRC & India in the east. These 4 were erstwhile or potential rivals to US hegemony in their regions and even world. No other country except them four could be a threat for USA. This is sufficient reason for US to be bothered about that region.

Afghanistan's own massive rare earth resources and it's location which connects oil fields (Middle East) to world's fastest growing economies (East, Southeast and Southern Asia) is secondary.

 

[Vijyes]

AfPak belt was surrounded by USSR in North, Iran in West and PRC & India in the east. These 4 were erstwhile or potential rivals to US hegemony in their regions and even world. No other country except them four could be a threat for USA. This is sufficient reason for US to be bothered about that region.

Afghanistan's own massive rare earth resources and it's location which connects oil fields (Middle East) to world's fastest growing economies (East, Southeast and Southern Asia) is secondary.

Have you really have some substantial evidence to talk of resources? As far as I know, they are speculation. We saw what happened when Pakistan started speculating of offshore oil and ended with nothing. Afghanistan too, till now has extracted 0 minerals. If Afghanistan really had plenty of minerals, why is there no mining? Even Taliban during their rule in 1990s didn't mine anything.

Secondly, Afghanistan didn't connect India. Iran has little to do in Afghanistan as Arabs were in control of Taliban (USA created Taliban by arming Arab funded militia). China has little presence in Afghanistan and only borders its sparsely populated territory of Xinjiang. Russia was anyways separated from USSR and Afghanistan is bordering other states like Kazakhstan, Tajikistan etc. Even under Taliban, Afghanistan never accepted to give transit to Russia, India, China or Iran as the Arabs were not on friendly terms with any of these countries and hence Taliban was also hostile to these countries.

So, why did USA enter Afghanistan? The reasons you gave are not consistent.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Have you really have some substantial evidence to talk of resources? As far as I know, they are speculation.

There's estimation about abundance, not speculation. Their existence is undisputed. Estimated reserves are second largest in world after China.

Case is different countries like Ethiopia & Afghanistan could never avail their full economic potential due to resources because of no industrialiazation (for whatever reason). Meanwhile other countries with no resources just add value to make finished products and become rich due to being industrialized.

Secondly, Afghanistan didn't connect India.

Read the statement again. AfPak belt is most immediate link between Indian Subcontinent and West Asia. Afghanistan is still at very high proximity with India even if separated due to PoK.

Iran has little to do in Afghanistan as Arabs were in control of Taliban (USA created Taliban by arming Arab funded militia). China has little presence in Afghanistan and only borders its sparsely populated territory of Xinjiang.

It was not about presence. It was about US needs to be present in Afghanistan & Pakistan to deal with 4 great powers.

Even under Taliban, Afghanistan never accepted to give transit to Russia, India, China or Iran as the Arabs were not on friendly terms with any of these countries and hence Taliban was also hostile to these countries.

That's why it matters. Things would have been totally different if Afghanistan could have acted as a transit route, geopolitical situations would have changed. Arabs backed Taliban to create their influence, Americans for theirs and Pakistan to increase its own value at cost of Afghanistan.

AfPak belt was surrounded by USSR in North, Iran in West and PRC & India in the east. These 4 were erstwhile or potential rivals to US hegemony in their regions and even world. No other country except them four could be a threat for USA. This is sufficient reason for US to be bothered about that region.

This reason is perfectly consistent.↑↑↑↑

So, why did USA enter Afghanistan? The reasons you gave are not consistent.

 

[Vijyes]

There's estimation about abundance, not speculation. Their existence is undisputed. Estimated reserves are second largest in world after China.

Case is different countries like Ethiopia & Afghanistan could never avail their full economic potential due to resources because of no industrialiazation (for whatever reason). Meanwhile other countries with no resources just add value to make finished products and become rich due to being industrialized.

Who did such detailed exploration? Do you know how difficult it is to explore? Which company would come to explore in Afghanistan if they don't have surety about getting contract?

Industrialisation is irrelevant to extract minerals. Afghanistan has lot of poor people who can be used as labourers for mines. Just like Africa extracts minerals, Afghanistan also can extract minerals.

As of now, the estimate of minerals is speculation.

Read the statement again. AfPak belt is most immediate link between Indian Subcontinent and West Asia. Afghanistan is still at very high proximity with India even if separated due to PoK.

How does this matter to USA? What has this got to do with USA camping in Afghanistan? The fact that it is separated with PoK ensures that India is cut off. Similarly, no other power can really use Afghanistan as connectivity is not straight forward.

It was not about presence. It was about US needs to be present in Afghanistan & Pakistan to deal with 4 great powers.

Deal in what manner? Don't tell vague things. Be specific.

That's why it matters. Things would have been totally different if Afghanistan could have acted as a transit route, geopolitical situations would have changed. Arabs backed Taliban to create their influence, Americans for theirs and Pakistan to increase its own value at cost of Afghanistan.

Afghanistan can't act as transit as PoK blocks it. In addition, Chinese mainland is too far away for the connectivity to work to China. The terrain is also hostile fr connectivity. Russia does not need Afghanistan as it is a major supplier of oil and gas itself and needs nothing from middle east. It can also connect to Iran via Caspian Sea.

What connectivity are you talking about? Be specific and give proper example. You are simply being too vague and arguing for the sake of arguing

 

[vampyrbladez]

Wahhabi lobby in U.S. fixed Imran’s meeting with Trump


M.D Nalapat

Published :
July 27, 2019, 7:32 pm

Updated :
July 27, 2019, 11:23 PM


Key policymakers say that a small cabal of pro-Pakistan elements still exists within the US Government. This includes US Ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad. They have been suggesting to the White House that ‘the key to Pakistan’s sincere cooperation with the US in Afghanistan is through India being made to make concessions on Kashmir’.




WASHINGTON: Despite advice to the contrary from a few realists within agencies such as the National Security Council (NSC) and the State Department, and analysts in the US Government (USG) who lost their earlier affinity for the Pakistan military as a consequence of the manner in which GHQ Rawalpindi has “repeatedly played the US for a sucker in Afghanistan”, President Donald J. Trump consented to a formal meeting at the White House with Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan on 23 July. The meeting took place as a consequence of an intense lobbying effort by the well-funded Wahhabi network in Washington, which roped in a close friend of President Trump, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, to lead their successful drive at persuading the President to agree to such a meeting despite the absence of any substantive assistance by Pakistan in reining in the Taliban. Instead, the extremist militia, which once sheltered Osama bin Laden and presently hosts several fighters of ISIS and Al Qaeda, has steadily picked up strength and territory since the Trump administration began to cosy up to GHQ Rawalpindi in mid-2018 in yet another effort at getting assistance from the Pakistan army for ensuring a safe withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan. After nearly two decades of promises by successive US Presidents about their “assisting moderates to prevail over extremists” in Afghanistan, the Trump White House now seems prepared to follow the example of President Bill Clinton, who facilitated the growth of the Taliban and its takeover of much of Afghanistan during his 1993-2001 tenure, thereby creating the conditions which resulted in the 9/11 attack in New York and Washington by Al Qaeda during the initial months of the George W. Bush presidency. Given that the Pakistan army has become a proxy of the People’s Liberation Army of China, expecting Prime Minister Imran Khan to assist rather than (as has routinely taken place since 2001) sabotage US efforts at securing Afghanistan from Taliban extremism demonstrates the extent to which policymakers within the Washington Beltway continue to live in a world of Alternate Reality. Additionally, especially since 2007, large clusters of the overwhelmingly Pashtun Taliban have turned against the Punjabi-controlled Pakistan army as a consequence of the effort by the latter to control and dominate the former. Such elements would anyway not heed any commands made by GHQ Rawalpindi, even assuming that these orders were such as would support rather than retard US objectives in Afghanistan.

CASH KEY TO LOBBY INFLUENCE

The Wahhabi lobby in Washington, which remains among the most influential in the city, is funded by those still adhering to this three centuries old ideology in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar. Senator Graham has been close to the Wahhabi lobby in Washington for decades, joining hands with it most recently to condemn Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who is the first Al Saud to seek to roll back rather than encourage Wahhabism. Because of its money power, this lobby is also on cordial terms with many others close to President Trump, and who are engaged in business, such as Thomas J. Barack, who has several contacts in the Middle East. For months, President Trump had declined to meet Imran Khan. It was only through the Wahhabi network in Washington that GHQ Rawalpindi was able to bypass normal bureaucratic channels and ensure a meeting between President Trump and Prime Minister Khan that has had the effect of angering two US allies, Afghanistan and India. The expectation of the generals is that the suave khaki-chosen Prime Minister of Pakistan will be able to establish a close personal relationship with Trump that could then be leveraged to get financial and other advantages for the Pakistan military

And so, after more than two years of President Trump pointing to the sorry record of the Pakistan army in honouring its commitments, the Wahhabi lobby finally broke through into the White House to try and get Trump’s endorsement for the shopworn formula of making India give concessions to Pakistan in exchange for Pakistan making concessions to the US. Although senior policymakers in the State Department and the National Security Council such as Lisa Curtis and Alice Wells are aware of the risks of the US once again placing its hopes on Pakistan (as was last done by President George W. Bush after 9/11), the reluctance of many domain specialists in the US to work in the Trump administration has resulted in several key slots being filled by relatively junior individuals unfamiliar with the ground realities within the regions they are expected to make policy on. The – it needs to be said, unwise – lack of willingness of many experts to work in the Trump White House and administration can be traced to the incessant negative publicity about the US President in much of the US media, which has led to many within the country ignoring the many achievements of the Trump dispensation, although of course there have been some policy errors as well. In several key agencies, the perceived future toxicity of associating with the Trump administration has resulted in a shortage of suitable first grade individuals to fill critical posts, thereby having them filled with second and third grade talent with minimal experience in the regions that they are assigned to analyse and to visit. Many such picks have been recommended by Senators and other Republican grandees who have the ear of those close to the 45th President of the US, especially his family members, who are active in the inner workings of the administration to a degree not seen since the Kennedy period. The Wahhabi lobby in Washington keeps a comprehensive database of all Trump appointees, and makes sure that those in relevant fields “accidentally” and “purely by coincidence” run into academics, businesspersons and others (who are often under deep cover that showcase a moderate persona that is shed as soon as a safe zone such as one’s house is reached) who are agents of influence of the Wahhabi lobby. These fellow travellers of the Wahhabi International build up relationships with the mostly youthful and unwary agency staffers who are newly recruited. They thereafter ensure that such staffers are made familiar with (and hopefully appreciative of) the thinking of the Wahhabi lobby. Over the past nine months, because President Trump has revealed several times his impatience to “get out of Afghanistan”, such staffers have been turning to the four-decade long GHQ strategy of trying to make the US put pressure on India to make concessions to Pakistan on Kashmir. Officials say that such Wahhabi-influenced advice may have been behind President Trump’s sudden show of eagerness to get involved personally in the Kashmir issue, a move that is diplomatic quicksand in the context of the US desire for a close security and defence partnership with India. As regards Afghanistan, assisting the Taliban to take power the way President Clinton did in the 1990s would destroy what little chances there are for a stable Afghanistan to emerge from the wreckage caused by the actions of Pakistan and the flawed US responses to them.

EFFORT TO LINK KASHMIR WITH AFGHANISTAN

It is obvious even to those whose powers of comprehension are less than good that China, Russia, Iran, Pakistan, Venezuela and a few other states have formed a close network of countries that oppose US objectives globally. Under President Xi Jinping, China in particular has been building up both its offensive as well as defensive capabilities, often in combination with the Russian Federation. Both Vladimir Putin as well as Xi Jinping consider each to be the other’s closest friend and ally in geo-strategic terms, and their joint effort first at primacy and subsequently dominance is designed to cover not just the Eurasian landmass but Africa and South America as well. Both are also collaborating in gaining primacy over the US in space as well as cyberspace, not to mention the oceans, including undersea. President Xi has focused on technologies of the future such as Artificial Intelligence, aware that the country that leads in such fields will be numero uno globally. Interestingly, Xi Jinping plans to make India his first overseas port of call after the 70th anniversary celebrations of the founding of the People’s Republic of China on 1 October. Since the 2018 Wuhan summit, both Xi and Narendra Modi have worked hard to re-calibrate the Sino-Indian relationship away from the tensions of the past. The second “personal diplomacy summit” of two individuals who jointly lead a total of 2.6 billion people is expected to take place on 12 October at Varanasi. In contrast, 2019 is unlikely to see a visit to India by President Donald J. Trump of the US. This may be fortunate, for months will need to go by before the sour taste of his recent gaffe on Kashmir gets forgotten by the Indian public. Senior officials in Washington are privately unhappy that President Trump, acting on the prodding of the Wahhabi lobby and its backers such as Senator Graham, offered himself publicly as a mediator between India and Pakistan on Kashmir, thereby following in the path of individuals such as Harold Wilson, who was politely asked to mind his own business by Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri. The UK Prime Minister had modestly volunteered to take over the role that Jawaharlal Nehru and the rest of the Union Cabinet had handed over to Lord Louis Mountbatten in 1947, that of being the effective overlord of Indian policy on Kashmir. While refusing to go on record, and speaking only on “deep background”, key policymakers warn that a small cabal still exists of pro-Pakistan elements within the US Government (USG). This includes US Ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, and this group has been suggesting to the White House that “the key to Pakistan’s sincere cooperation with the US in Afghanistan is through India being made to make concessions on Kashmir”.

A pro-GHQ Rawalpindi cabal has been active within the Washington Beltway since the 1970s in promoting the interests of the Pakistan military. When Barack Obama took over as the 44th President of the US in 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wanted her hand-picked envoy to South Asia, Richard Holbrooke, to repeat his success in curtailing elements of the Indian nuclear program during his discussions in previous years with successive administrations in Delhi, this time over Kashmir. Ambassador Holbrooke was known for his extensive relationships with the Pakistan military, and for holding the view that “the Kashmir issue had to be solved”, of course on the lines favoured by GHQ. Swift blowback from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh ensured that the plan was stillborn. India, especially Kashmir, was removed from the formal writ of Holbrooke, although he continued to meddle in matters relating to the state through his many high-level contacts in the Lutyens Zone. The effort to link Kashmir with the situation in Afghanistan has continued to the present, especially within the National Security Council and the State Department, both of which still contain voices echoing the GHQ argument in favour of a robust US role in ensuring that India make concessions on Kashmir that would put at risk our country’s interests and security. Although in the past, the Pentagon was the most aggressive proponent of a pro-GHQ line, since the experience of the aftermath of 9/11, that ardour has cooled substantially. In the Kashmir-related remarks that he made during his meeting with Imran Khan, Donald Trump fell into the trap laid for him by the Wahhabi lobby. However, senior officials say that the US President has “a very shrewd mind”, and hence that he “rapidly reversed course once it was made clear that the Wahhabi lobby was promoting policies that would damage the long-term US interest in a close and collaborative relationship with India”. It may be remembered that the Wahhabi lobby had in the past motivated Senator Lindsey Graham to seek to get US sanctions instituted against Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, the bête-noire of the Wahhabi International, who has had remarkable success in his efforts at ensuring the creation of a modern, moderate Saudi Arabia by 2030. In the recent past, pro-GHQ elements within the Trump administration have been lobbying officials in Delhi to bring the All Parties Hurriyat Conference back into the core of Indian policymaking in Kashmir, despite the (Clinton-created) APHC being apparently directed in its responses by GHQ Rawalpindi. Officials say that it is the pro-Pakistan cabal within USG that had been lobbying President Trump to insert himself in the Kashmir maelstrom on the side of Pakistan, “so that the Pakistan army will begin assisting and stop sabotaging US efforts at dis-engaging from Afghanistan”, a formula tried several times in the past by previous US Presidents without any success in stopping the sabotage of US objectives and boosting of terrorism by the Pakistan military.

‘TRUMP IS QUICK TO LEARN’

It was a surprise to those who have grown to respect Donald Trump to watch as he temporarily joined the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in wanting to force India to make concessions in Kashmir to Pakistan in exchange for the unrealistic hope of GHQ ever making genuine concessions to the US side against the very terror networks it protects. The good news for India is that senior officials claim that Trump has now “fully understood” the game played on him by the pro-GHQ cabal in USG, and has therefore kept silent even via tweets on the Kashmir issue ever since the meeting with Prime Minister Imran Khan. Just as the S-400 induction by India would be a deal-breaker in the ongoing efforts at crafting an India-US security alliance, resumption of Clinton-era White House pressure on India to make concessions to GHQ on Kashmir would kill the prospect of any such security alliance, something that the pro-GHQ cabal in USG well understands and seeks. The Wahhabi lobby is aware that such a torpedoing of the proposed India-US partnership in matters of defence and security would be warmly welcomed not just in Rawalpindi but in Beijing and Moscow as well. Those eager for such an outcome are disappointed that Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not fall into the trap laid for him by Opposition politicians in Parliament. They demanded that Modi condemn Trump’s remarks directly, something that would have damaged the existing warm relationship between President Trump and PM Modi to the detriment of US and Indian interests. As a consequence of the statesmanlike forbearance of Prime Minister Modi, President Trump reciprocated by quietly dropping any talk of mediation between India and Pakistan, to relief from the more experienced and first-class minds dealing with South Asia in agencies such as the State Department, the White House and the NSC. However, the cash-rich Wahhabi lobby in Washington will continue in its mission of promoting the aims of the Pakistan military, the only armed forces in the world that has “jihad” as its official motto, to the detriment of moderate and democratic forces in countries aligned to the US by a common tradition of freedom and democracy.


https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/wahhabi-lobby-u-s-fixed-imrans-meeting-trump

 

[Tamil TigerWoods]

The Taliban is not a homogenous group. It is America's attempt to create a sub-national organization whose top management is in America's pocket and the middle management is in ISI's pocket and the lower run jawans are freelance contractors. They want to create a false representative of the Afghan people, so that the elected leadership could be discredited. From time to time, the middle management becomes more powerful, being under the direct control of the ISI, and when money runs dry, their 'official' Taliban office at Qatar rings up Washington to top up those funds in exchange for making some re-conciliatory statements.

During the Cold War, all Taliban commanders were directly under CIA watch because it was a high stakes game for them. Presently, the US has deliberately shrunk their own footprint and outsourced the middle management of the Taliban to Pakistan with great foresight to give a certain kind of heft to Pakistan in the American attempt to maintain a certain power-balance in Asia vis-a-vis India. That's why the legitimate leadership of Afghanistan, i.e the Amarullah Saleh camp always keeps saying the Taliban must not be made party to any arrangement, because they know, the 'truce' is a farce, and the Taliban are essentially US puppets.

The top 25% management of the Taliban can issue a truce, but the bottom 75% freelance cadre is moving towards the Amarullah Saleh camp so this engineered truce is taking time, otherwise their air-conditioned Qatar office is happy to issue whatever statement the US wants it to.

Any power-sharing agreement between the Taliban and the legit Afghan leadership will basically be the US's backdoor entry into securing a permanent/unelected representative in Afghan politics which the CIA can use as a remote control after their troops leave, that's why they are so eager for a truce. They don't care who the truce happens with. They will prop up anyone who is willing to be a US puppet, claim that he was a top Taliban commander, give him agency and leave that new commander to be managed by ISI.


India backs the legit leadership of Amarullah Saleh. The CIA and ISI want Taliban. In whose support is India going to send troops? the goals of the US are diametrically opposite to ours.

What the hell are you even referring to? I never once brought up India’s role in Afghanistan vis-a-vis the American occupation. I never mentioned anything about Indian troop presence in Afghanistan.

I’ll address the rest of what you’ve detailed regarding the CIA/ISI later on.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

Who did such detailed exploration? Do you know how difficult it is to explore? Which company would come to explore in Afghanistan if they don't have surety about getting contract?

Afghanistan didn't get contract for reason I don't have tell you. Your life isn't very safe there.
Every survey to major estimates have confirmed that it has one of largest reserves of metalloids and rare earths. Spinning it around to say they don't exist won't change fact.
Even geographically, Afghanistan is in proximity to resource rich lands.

Industrialisation is irrelevant to extract minerals. Afghanistan has lot of poor people who can be used as labourers for mines. Just like Africa extracts minerals, Afghanistan also can extract minerals.

Industrialization and poverty don't exist by default. Poor socio economic development is a result of what's been ongoing inside country.

Africa & Afghanistan being unable to utilize resources have genuine reasons and not just because they are Africans or Afghans.

How does this matter to USA? What has this got to do with USA camping in Afghanistan?

The fact that it is separated with PoK ensures that India is cut off. Similarly, no other power can really use Afghanistan as connectivity is not straight forward.

Why are continuously chewing logic to ignore responses and vomit same questions over & over?

AfPak belt is a connector is its potential, it isn't is the situation.
Connectivity may or may not be straightforward, it has very high proximity and AfPak belt combined gives you access to border of these 4 directly.

Deal in what manner? Don't tell vague things. Be specific.

From spying on Soviets to funding insurgencies in Afghanistan and Pakistan to destablize their neighbours. Or a US military deployment at a very high proximity to Russia, China, India & Iran.

Afghanistan can't act as transit as PoK blocks it. In addition, Chinese mainland is too far away for the connectivity to work to China. The terrain is also hostile fr connectivity. Russia does not need Afghanistan as it is a major supplier of oil and gas itself and needs nothing from middle east. It can also connect to Iran via Caspian Sea.

I'm done shouting, open up the map.

What connectivity are you talking about? Be specific and give proper example. You are simply being too vague and arguing for the sake of arguing

No, it's you. You are simy ignoring, purposely closing eyes & brain and raising same question marks just to run argument with me. Geographical location of Af-Pak is enough even for an idiot to realize why US would be there but not you.
Simply ignoring potential and saying "I just can't understand, why why" is just dumbo drama.

 

[Vijyes]

Afghanistan didn't get contract for reason I don't have tell you. Your life isn't very safe there.
Every survey to major estimates have confirmed that it has one of largest reserves of metalloids and rare earths. Spinning it around to say they don't exist won't change fact.
Even geographically, Afghanistan is in proximity to resource rich lands.

Industrialization and poverty don't exist by default. Poor socio economic development is a result of what's been ongoing inside country.

Africa & Afghanistan being unable to utilize resources have genuine reasons and not just because they are Africans or Afghans.


Why are continuously chewing logic to ignore responses and vomit same questions over & over?

AfPak belt is a connector is its potential, it isn't is the situation.
Connectivity may or may not be straightforward, it has very high proximity and AfPak belt combined gives you access to border of these 4 directly.

From spying on Soviets to funding insurgencies in Afghanistan and Pakistan to destablize their neighbours. Or a US military deployment at a very high proximity to Russia, China, India & Iran.

I'm done shouting, open up the map.

No, it's you. You are simy ignoring, purposely closing eyes & brain and raising same question marks just to run argument with me. Geographical location of Af-Pak is enough even for an idiot to realize why US would be there but not you.
Simply ignoring potential and saying "I just can't understand, why why" is just dumbo drama.

Every single time you just tell the same thing - proximity to rival powers and connection to Middle east.

The point I am trying to make is that Afghanistan is not conducive to do any of these. It is only technical aspect only applicable on paper. There is no proper geographical advantage or geographical feasibility for this to happen. You simply are unwilling to give specific details of how the Afghanistan can disrupt USA hegemony. Vaguely stating something is not acceptable. Clearly define the method and implications of it.

 

[Neil]

F-16 never stood a chance to be in IAF fleet. Lockheed Martin messed it up so much

In many ways, F-16 is a microcosm of India-US ties. Imran Khan’s meeting with Donald Trump had little role in US resuming military sales to Pakistan.

f US President Donald Trump offering to mediate on the Kashmir issue wasn’t enough, he went ahead and exonerated ‘selected’ Prime Minister Imran Khan – implying that under Khan, Pakistani perfidy has stopped. To cap it all, the State Department announced a resumption of military supplies – specifically F-16 spares – to Pakistan. In many ways, the F-16 is a microcosm of India-US ties: oversell, unable to understand the other, stringing your lover along in spite of not understanding what he/she is saying, and a final rejection leading to bitterness.

Let us be clear, however, that the F-16 never stood a chance. Lockheed Martin (LM) screwed up on several issues: its primary weapon the AMRAAM; its sales pitch peddling a point the Indian Air Force (IAF) did not understand; a sales campaign that bordered on outright lies; and finally, Balakot, which proved to be the last nail in the coffin.

Avoiding F-16 in a dogfight
The moment India is offered the same equipment as Pakistan, you pretty much know it’s going to be rejected. Although, India had no hesitation buying the same manufacturer’s C-130 transport aircraft, which Pakistan also operates. However, the IAF, instead of looking at how its aircraft perform in combat situations, seems to be obsessed about fitting them with one particular missile: the European Meteor. The Meteor missile’s long range outclasses the F-16’s primary long-range air-to air weapon, the AMRAAM.

It is in fact a tribute to the F-16’s potency that the IAF wants to avoid engaging it in a dogfight and would prefer to take it out at longer ranges. In effect, it wasn’t the F-16 that irritated the IAF so much as it was the AMRAAM – after all, no matter how advanced an F-16 India was being offered, if the missiles were going to be the same as Pakistan’s (AMRAAM), the electronics differential of the launch platform wasn’t going to be much use to India.

F-16, upgraded to F-21
To counter this perception, LM had a clear case that the F-16 being sold to India (the Block 70 variant, since renamed F-21) was a whole different beast from the Block 50 that Pakistan has. Beyond the superficial exterior resemblance, there’s about 40 per cent difference in terms of equipment; and the electronics derive much from the F-35’s heavily network centric architecture. As such, the F-21s are a generation ahead from anything on Pakistan’s F-16 that could be better in terms of being able to see further, ‘talk to’ other networked assets, and jam enemy frequencies better. So, even if the F-21 and F-16 use the same missile, the F-21 can detect its enemy faster and shoot first and more accurately.

Sadly, given the hodgepodge of equipment the IAF operates, almost none of which talk to each other, the IAF simply doesn’t understand networked warfare, nor does it care. Stuck in the 1980s’ mindset, the IAF still believes in kinetics while the rest of the world has moved towards electronics. The simplest explanation for this is the scene from Indiana Jones and Raiders of the Lost Ark, where an Arab swordsman comes around flaunting his sword skills and Indy simply shoots him with a revolver. Here, the IAF is the Arab swordsman, who thinks a better sword could have won him the battle, instead of transitioning to a revolver; Lockheed Martin is the revolver salesman, who futilely tries arguing with the swordsman to give up his sword for the revolver.

US firm’s disinformation campaign
If LM’s sales pitch left the IAF confused, then LM’s disinformation left the IAF entirely not-amused. This disinformation campaign started off with the promise of F-16 production being shifted to India. This developed into a set of transparent lies that F-16 production would involve deep technology transfer and make India independent. Obviously, it didn’t take long for the lies to get called out, which was followed by a public retraction from Lockheed. The amount of damage this did to LM’s campaign is almost incalculable.

But Balakot was the last straw. The IAF is convinced that it shot down an F-16 using an obsolete MiG-21. The severe factual inaccuracies of the “IAF didn’t shoot an F-16” lobby, combined with an embarrassing set of tweets by the Pakistani DG-ISPR unable to explain two missing pilots, means the IAF is now convinced that its reliance on dogfights is valid (that is, the Arab swordsman can still win against Indian Jones’ revolver) and that the F-16 is a flawed product.

In the end, the overall problems of the India-US relationship explained earlier are distilled into India’s F-16 saga: India’s understanding of war and technology being different to the US, both talking a different language; disinformation from the US’ side; India giving false hope where there was none to begin with. In such circumstances, the resumption of military sales to Pakistan was a foregone conclusion, and would have happened regardless of whether there was a Donald Trump involved without anyone getting surprised.

The author is a senior fellow at the Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies. He tweets @iyervval. Views are personal.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

The point I am trying to make is that Afghanistan is not conducive to do any of these. It is only technical aspect only applicable on paper. There is no proper geographical advantage or geographical feasibility for this to happen. You simply are unwilling to give specific details of how the Afghanistan can disrupt USA hegemony. Vaguely stating something is not acceptable. Clearly define the method and implications of it.

Afghanistan can't disrupt US hegemony. It's just a potential place to further consolidate American strength and deployment against rivals.

If Afghanistan & Pakistan were that much integrated or were a single country, it was a perfect national/supranational body for USA to tie up with sit with weapons under the nose of four.
The same didn't happen, Soviets attacked Afghanistan, US with Pakistan tried to counter them with proxies but Taliban ended up destablizing the place to be nearly unrecoverable.

It's gone!
So, right now leaving Afghanistan will create a massive ruckus, hegemony of Taliban in Afghanistan, then expansion of Islamic extremism around. The proxies too will be used in Kashmir, against Hamas and so forth. US just doesn't want to be held blamed for another row of destruction like it was for mid-east.

 

[Indx TechStyle]

More than 36% of registered companies have 'closed' down in India

Photo: Shutterstock

More than 36 per cent (680,000) of registered companies in India have “closed” down as per the latest numbers provided by the ministry of corporate affairs (MCA) in Parliament. There are around 1.9 million companies registered with the government, the data shows.

While the percentage has moved up only marginally since 2017-18, it is a big jump from the 20 per cent share that closed companies occupied in earlier periods.

The reason for the jump is the inclusion of companies not filing financial statements or annual returns for two years into the category of “closed” companies. The government identified such companies and declared them defunct under the Companies (Removal of Names of Companies from the Register of Companies) Rules (along with amended Rules 2019), coined under Section 248(1) of the Companies Act, 2013.

Maharashtra and Delhi lead the pack of states in terms of absolute number, with 142,425 and 125,937 closed companies, respectively. This data was presented by Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman in a reply to a question in Parliament earlier this month.

Four states — Maharashtra, Delhi, Tamil Nadu, and West Bengal — constitute more than half the universe of registered companies. However, their shares of closed companies differ.

After the re-categorisation of non-compliant companies as “closed”, the share of closed companies in Maharashtra rose from nearly 15 per cent to 38 per cent. In Tamil Nadu, it rose from 24 per cent at the end of 2016-17 to 44 per cent in May 2019. The share of closed companies moved the slowest in West Bengal.

Apart from “closed” companies, the share of dormant companies, those under liquidation, and under the process of strike-off form less than 3 per cent of the universe.

Further, the MCA removed the names of nearly 220,000 and 110,000 companies from the list of registered companies in 2017-18 and 2018-19, respectively. These “shell” companies now cease to be part of the universe of registered corporates.

​

 

[Tamil TigerWoods]

What leadership .. Actually Northern alliance steal the power using US WAR on terror but majority Afghans not liked them.

Indians/Hindus voted the most filthy,disgusting/anti-hindu party Khangress for 60 years and here u are blabbering typical islamists(Pakthoons) opting for Taliban rule.

Some Pakthoons hates them but majority supports 'taliban rule' as i said earlier that is ethnic war b/w Tazik,Hazara,Uzbek Vs Pashtoons(which are majority).

Don't know why dumb Indians gloating about innocent Afghans are cheated/crushed by US&pakis but in reality they are far more worse than the porki mussies.
Afghans hating pakis defacto not become India's friends it is like ISIS hating Alkaida .... no sense at all.

What leadership .. Actually Northern alliance steal the power using US WAR on terror but majority Afghans not liked them.

Indians/Hindus voted the most filthy,disgusting/anti-hindu party Khangress for 60 years and here u are blabbering typical islamists(Pakthoons) opting for Taliban rule.

Some Pakthoons hates them but majority supports 'taliban rule' as i said earlier that is ethnic war b/w Tazik,Hazara,Uzbek Vs Pashtoons(which are majority).

Don't know why dumb Indians gloating about innocent Afghans are cheated/crushed by US&pakis but in reality they are far more worse than the porki mussies.
Afghans hating pakis defacto not become India's friends it is like ISIS hating Alkaida .... no sense at all.

One of favourite articles from RK Simha, til date one of the best:

What America can learn from India in conquering Afghanistan
https://www.esamskriti.com/author/Rakesh-Krishnan-Simha.aspx

Don’t let the American failures to subjugate Afghans distract you from the fact that the Hindus (Maharajah Ranjit Singh was a Hindu by lifestyle and practice) accomplished something of a scale they never could.

 

[Deathstar]

ummm ,u included Khalsa into Hinduism!!

Don't know why u bother about only Afghan there are more than 13 losses for Americans like that and victories for muslims.

Why has the US invaded,occupied or bombed 14 Muslim countries in 30 years

They invade your home kick/kill some of your family numbers and then one day they evict silently then u claim ''it is failure for them and victory for u".

Actually Americans just want to destabilize the middle east , if they want they can wipe it out but they don't want another Marshal plan on their head. To say Americans lost is BS because first of all they didn't attack to win

 

[Enquirer]

Wahhabi lobby in U.S. fixed Imran’s meeting with Trump


M.D Nalapat

Published :
July 27, 2019, 7:32 pm

Updated :
July 27, 2019, 11:23 PM


Key policymakers say that a small cabal of pro-Pakistan elements still exists within the US Government. This includes US Ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad. They have been suggesting to the White House that ‘the key to Pakistan’s sincere cooperation with the US in Afghanistan is through India being made to make concessions on Kashmir’.




WASHINGTON: Despite advice to the contrary from a few realists within agencies such as the National Security Council (NSC) and the State Department, and analysts in the US Government (USG) who lost their earlier affinity for the Pakistan military as a consequence of the manner in which GHQ Rawalpindi has “repeatedly played the US for a sucker in Afghanistan”, President Donald J. Trump consented to a formal meeting at the White House with Prime Minister Imran Khan of Pakistan on 23 July. The meeting took place as a consequence of an intense lobbying effort by the well-funded Wahhabi network in Washington, which roped in a close friend of President Trump, Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, to lead their successful drive at persuading the President to agree to such a meeting despite the absence of any substantive assistance by Pakistan in reining in the Taliban. Instead, the extremist militia, which once sheltered Osama bin Laden and presently hosts several fighters of ISIS and Al Qaeda, has steadily picked up strength and territory since the Trump administration began to cosy up to GHQ Rawalpindi in mid-2018 in yet another effort at getting assistance from the Pakistan army for ensuring a safe withdrawal of US forces from Afghanistan. After nearly two decades of promises by successive US Presidents about their “assisting moderates to prevail over extremists” in Afghanistan, the Trump White House now seems prepared to follow the example of President Bill Clinton, who facilitated the growth of the Taliban and its takeover of much of Afghanistan during his 1993-2001 tenure, thereby creating the conditions which resulted in the 9/11 attack in New York and Washington by Al Qaeda during the initial months of the George W. Bush presidency. Given that the Pakistan army has become a proxy of the People’s Liberation Army of China, expecting Prime Minister Imran Khan to assist rather than (as has routinely taken place since 2001) sabotage US efforts at securing Afghanistan from Taliban extremism demonstrates the extent to which policymakers within the Washington Beltway continue to live in a world of Alternate Reality. Additionally, especially since 2007, large clusters of the overwhelmingly Pashtun Taliban have turned against the Punjabi-controlled Pakistan army as a consequence of the effort by the latter to control and dominate the former. Such elements would anyway not heed any commands made by GHQ Rawalpindi, even assuming that these orders were such as would support rather than retard US objectives in Afghanistan.

CASH KEY TO LOBBY INFLUENCE

The Wahhabi lobby in Washington, which remains among the most influential in the city, is funded by those still adhering to this three centuries old ideology in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar. Senator Graham has been close to the Wahhabi lobby in Washington for decades, joining hands with it most recently to condemn Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman of Saudi Arabia, who is the first Al Saud to seek to roll back rather than encourage Wahhabism. Because of its money power, this lobby is also on cordial terms with many others close to President Trump, and who are engaged in business, such as Thomas J. Barack, who has several contacts in the Middle East. For months, President Trump had declined to meet Imran Khan. It was only through the Wahhabi network in Washington that GHQ Rawalpindi was able to bypass normal bureaucratic channels and ensure a meeting between President Trump and Prime Minister Khan that has had the effect of angering two US allies, Afghanistan and India. The expectation of the generals is that the suave khaki-chosen Prime Minister of Pakistan will be able to establish a close personal relationship with Trump that could then be leveraged to get financial and other advantages for the Pakistan military

And so, after more than two years of President Trump pointing to the sorry record of the Pakistan army in honouring its commitments, the Wahhabi lobby finally broke through into the White House to try and get Trump’s endorsement for the shopworn formula of making India give concessions to Pakistan in exchange for Pakistan making concessions to the US. Although senior policymakers in the State Department and the National Security Council such as Lisa Curtis and Alice Wells are aware of the risks of the US once again placing its hopes on Pakistan (as was last done by President George W. Bush after 9/11), the reluctance of many domain specialists in the US to work in the Trump administration has resulted in several key slots being filled by relatively junior individuals unfamiliar with the ground realities within the regions they are expected to make policy on. The – it needs to be said, unwise – lack of willingness of many experts to work in the Trump White House and administration can be traced to the incessant negative publicity about the US President in much of the US media, which has led to many within the country ignoring the many achievements of the Trump dispensation, although of course there have been some policy errors as well. In several key agencies, the perceived future toxicity of associating with the Trump administration has resulted in a shortage of suitable first grade individuals to fill critical posts, thereby having them filled with second and third grade talent with minimal experience in the regions that they are assigned to analyse and to visit. Many such picks have been recommended by Senators and other Republican grandees who have the ear of those close to the 45th President of the US, especially his family members, who are active in the inner workings of the administration to a degree not seen since the Kennedy period. The Wahhabi lobby in Washington keeps a comprehensive database of all Trump appointees, and makes sure that those in relevant fields “accidentally” and “purely by coincidence” run into academics, businesspersons and others (who are often under deep cover that showcase a moderate persona that is shed as soon as a safe zone such as one’s house is reached) who are agents of influence of the Wahhabi lobby. These fellow travellers of the Wahhabi International build up relationships with the mostly youthful and unwary agency staffers who are newly recruited. They thereafter ensure that such staffers are made familiar with (and hopefully appreciative of) the thinking of the Wahhabi lobby. Over the past nine months, because President Trump has revealed several times his impatience to “get out of Afghanistan”, such staffers have been turning to the four-decade long GHQ strategy of trying to make the US put pressure on India to make concessions to Pakistan on Kashmir. Officials say that such Wahhabi-influenced advice may have been behind President Trump’s sudden show of eagerness to get involved personally in the Kashmir issue, a move that is diplomatic quicksand in the context of the US desire for a close security and defence partnership with India. As regards Afghanistan, assisting the Taliban to take power the way President Clinton did in the 1990s would destroy what little chances there are for a stable Afghanistan to emerge from the wreckage caused by the actions of Pakistan and the flawed US responses to them.

EFFORT TO LINK KASHMIR WITH AFGHANISTAN

It is obvious even to those whose powers of comprehension are less than good that China, Russia, Iran, Pakistan, Venezuela and a few other states have formed a close network of countries that oppose US objectives globally. Under President Xi Jinping, China in particular has been building up both its offensive as well as defensive capabilities, often in combination with the Russian Federation. Both Vladimir Putin as well as Xi Jinping consider each to be the other’s closest friend and ally in geo-strategic terms, and their joint effort first at primacy and subsequently dominance is designed to cover not just the Eurasian landmass but Africa and South America as well. Both are also collaborating in gaining primacy over the US in space as well as cyberspace, not to mention the oceans, including undersea. President Xi has focused on technologies of the future such as Artificial Intelligence, aware that the country that leads in such fields will be numero uno globally. Interestingly, Xi Jinping plans to make India his first overseas port of call after the 70th anniversary celebrations of the founding of the People’s Republic of China on 1 October. Since the 2018 Wuhan summit, both Xi and Narendra Modi have worked hard to re-calibrate the Sino-Indian relationship away from the tensions of the past. The second “personal diplomacy summit” of two individuals who jointly lead a total of 2.6 billion people is expected to take place on 12 October at Varanasi. In contrast, 2019 is unlikely to see a visit to India by President Donald J. Trump of the US. This may be fortunate, for months will need to go by before the sour taste of his recent gaffe on Kashmir gets forgotten by the Indian public. Senior officials in Washington are privately unhappy that President Trump, acting on the prodding of the Wahhabi lobby and its backers such as Senator Graham, offered himself publicly as a mediator between India and Pakistan on Kashmir, thereby following in the path of individuals such as Harold Wilson, who was politely asked to mind his own business by Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri. The UK Prime Minister had modestly volunteered to take over the role that Jawaharlal Nehru and the rest of the Union Cabinet had handed over to Lord Louis Mountbatten in 1947, that of being the effective overlord of Indian policy on Kashmir. While refusing to go on record, and speaking only on “deep background”, key policymakers warn that a small cabal still exists of pro-Pakistan elements within the US Government (USG). This includes US Ambassador to Afghanistan, Zalmay Khalilzad, and this group has been suggesting to the White House that “the key to Pakistan’s sincere cooperation with the US in Afghanistan is through India being made to make concessions on Kashmir”.

A pro-GHQ Rawalpindi cabal has been active within the Washington Beltway since the 1970s in promoting the interests of the Pakistan military. When Barack Obama took over as the 44th President of the US in 2009, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton wanted her hand-picked envoy to South Asia, Richard Holbrooke, to repeat his success in curtailing elements of the Indian nuclear program during his discussions in previous years with successive administrations in Delhi, this time over Kashmir. Ambassador Holbrooke was known for his extensive relationships with the Pakistan military, and for holding the view that “the Kashmir issue had to be solved”, of course on the lines favoured by GHQ. Swift blowback from Prime Minister Manmohan Singh ensured that the plan was stillborn. India, especially Kashmir, was removed from the formal writ of Holbrooke, although he continued to meddle in matters relating to the state through his many high-level contacts in the Lutyens Zone. The effort to link Kashmir with the situation in Afghanistan has continued to the present, especially within the National Security Council and the State Department, both of which still contain voices echoing the GHQ argument in favour of a robust US role in ensuring that India make concessions on Kashmir that would put at risk our country’s interests and security. Although in the past, the Pentagon was the most aggressive proponent of a pro-GHQ line, since the experience of the aftermath of 9/11, that ardour has cooled substantially. In the Kashmir-related remarks that he made during his meeting with Imran Khan, Donald Trump fell into the trap laid for him by the Wahhabi lobby. However, senior officials say that the US President has “a very shrewd mind”, and hence that he “rapidly reversed course once it was made clear that the Wahhabi lobby was promoting policies that would damage the long-term US interest in a close and collaborative relationship with India”. It may be remembered that the Wahhabi lobby had in the past motivated Senator Lindsey Graham to seek to get US sanctions instituted against Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman, the bête-noire of the Wahhabi International, who has had remarkable success in his efforts at ensuring the creation of a modern, moderate Saudi Arabia by 2030. In the recent past, pro-GHQ elements within the Trump administration have been lobbying officials in Delhi to bring the All Parties Hurriyat Conference back into the core of Indian policymaking in Kashmir, despite the (Clinton-created) APHC being apparently directed in its responses by GHQ Rawalpindi. Officials say that it is the pro-Pakistan cabal within USG that had been lobbying President Trump to insert himself in the Kashmir maelstrom on the side of Pakistan, “so that the Pakistan army will begin assisting and stop sabotaging US efforts at dis-engaging from Afghanistan”, a formula tried several times in the past by previous US Presidents without any success in stopping the sabotage of US objectives and boosting of terrorism by the Pakistan military.

‘TRUMP IS QUICK TO LEARN’

It was a surprise to those who have grown to respect Donald Trump to watch as he temporarily joined the likes of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in wanting to force India to make concessions in Kashmir to Pakistan in exchange for the unrealistic hope of GHQ ever making genuine concessions to the US side against the very terror networks it protects. The good news for India is that senior officials claim that Trump has now “fully understood” the game played on him by the pro-GHQ cabal in USG, and has therefore kept silent even via tweets on the Kashmir issue ever since the meeting with Prime Minister Imran Khan. Just as the S-400 induction by India would be a deal-breaker in the ongoing efforts at crafting an India-US security alliance, resumption of Clinton-era White House pressure on India to make concessions to GHQ on Kashmir would kill the prospect of any such security alliance, something that the pro-GHQ cabal in USG well understands and seeks. The Wahhabi lobby is aware that such a torpedoing of the proposed India-US partnership in matters of defence and security would be warmly welcomed not just in Rawalpindi but in Beijing and Moscow as well. Those eager for such an outcome are disappointed that Prime Minister Narendra Modi did not fall into the trap laid for him by Opposition politicians in Parliament. They demanded that Modi condemn Trump’s remarks directly, something that would have damaged the existing warm relationship between President Trump and PM Modi to the detriment of US and Indian interests. As a consequence of the statesmanlike forbearance of Prime Minister Modi, President Trump reciprocated by quietly dropping any talk of mediation between India and Pakistan, to relief from the more experienced and first-class minds dealing with South Asia in agencies such as the State Department, the White House and the NSC. However, the cash-rich Wahhabi lobby in Washington will continue in its mission of promoting the aims of the Pakistan military, the only armed forces in the world that has “jihad” as its official motto, to the detriment of moderate and democratic forces in countries aligned to the US by a common tradition of freedom and democracy.


https://www.sundayguardianlive.com/news/wahhabi-lobby-u-s-fixed-imrans-meeting-trump

Almost everything is correct EXCEPT that Zalmay Khalilzad (US Special envoy on Afghanistan) is NOT pro-Pakistan (as Nalapat is suggesting).
At this point in time he's only being an opportunist.

His public congressional testimonies over the last several years are there for everyone to see. Even when US was giving Pakis full aid, Khalilzad was very vocal that Pakis have taken US as 'patsies' - taking money from US and playing them for fool.

Ever since Trump came to power, Khalilzad had been sending feelers that he could be useful and wanted some job in the administration (he was very careful not to criticize Trump's anti-Muslim policies etc).

As long as level headed Mattis & McMaster were in the administration, things were fine (putting pressure on Pakis....and US refusing to withdraw to let Taliban usurp power). But with the exit of the duo, there's no reasonable mind left in the White House - there're only folks sucking Trump's dick to keep him happy & keep their high profile jobs in return!

Trump is becoming impatient to get out of Afghanistan - as he intends to tout that as a promise kept during his upcoming re-election campaign! Khalilzad ditched his assessment of what is right for US, Afghanistan and the world - he too is now trying to please Trump and seek a shortcut to US withdrawal. So, he's trying to please Pakis (even though most of his career as US Ambassador to Afghanistan and later on he was staunchly against Pakistan)!

 

[Haldiram]

ummm ,u included Khalsa into Hinduism!!

Don't know why u bother about only Afghan there are more than 13 losses for Americans like that and victories for muslims.

Why has the US invaded,occupied or bombed 14 Muslim countries in 30 years

They invade your home kick/kill some of your family numbers and then one day they evict silently then u claim ''it is failure for them and victory for u".

Don't be so happy about a foreign power trying to set up a permanent base on top of your head. Forget the Afghan people. An American base with its radar, ELINT, AWACS and other paraphernalia sitting so close to Indian soil is de facto a containment of India. The low cost jihadis they train and send from Pakistan soil are just cannon fodder, but once a big power comes and sits on your neck, it will be like Vikram and Betal. The power differential between India and the US is too great. No one wants a superpower at their doorstep. Instead of grappling with them ourselves, India should do everything in its power to strengthen those who are already fighting with them to create an environment which expedites their departure.

Don't let your hate for Afghans cloud our own nation's strategic interests. They are risking their lives fighting with two of your enemies, even though it is out of their own compulsion > Pakistan on the East and US on the west. That makes them our 'friend' per Chanakya logic. Feed them some your ISKCON rasgullas and keep them alive. Don't celebrate their death, they are being killed by your enemies who are trying to destabilize the region and grab a foothold.

India is using Iran and Afghanistan as a buffer to keep American influence at bay. We can handle Pakistan within that perimeter as long as the US is stopped from resupplying and re-stocking Pakistan. The Kargil war only ended when the Indian Navy stopped the US from supplying their ammo at Karachi port. You want this power to prevail over Afghanistan? and somehow hope that the resultant status quo will be beneficial for India?

ummm ,u included Khalsa into Hinduism!!

All non-Abrahamics are Hindus. It is a 'panth', not a separate religion. Jain, Buddhist, Charvaka etc are all panths. Same goes for Sikhism. They branched out of Hinduism, they didn't separate out of it.

 

[Haldiram]

I happy because my second enemy is killing first enemy... many in DFI worshiped Russies and i said many times never trust one whitee because he hates another whitee,same goes to jihadis af-pak rivalry.

That's the same thing everyone on the forum has been saying. I've never found a single DFI member having Aman-Ki-Aasha type love for Afghans. We like them on a temporary tactical basis vis-a-vis their actions against the US and Pakistan.

 

[Vijyes]

ENEMY IS NOT OUTSIDE INDIA, we have 15% enemies live in India.

As far as US,Af,Pak etc
I always bark continuously on one thing from a decade (my old a/c too).

The enemy within is a part of outside enemy. But these enemies also serve as leverage as the external enemies don't have enough food to feed them and require India to feed them.

World has two enemies
1.Supremacist ideology-Islam
2.Supremacist race-White.

Not world, but truth has 2 enemies - Christianity and Islam. Being white is not being enemy. For example, Germans were not enemies to India and had no hostile intentions. Current whites are mostly english speaking christian with active support from Vatican.

I happy because my second enemy is killing first enemy... many in DFI worshiped Russies and i said many times never trust one whitee because he hates another whitee,same goes to jihadis af-pak rivalry.

Actually, Russians are friends because they gave up Christianity for atheism and hence are less of a threat. Entire slavic states had split from catholics to establish orthodox Christianity in 11th century and then went to communism-atheism in 29th century.

It is not white-ism that is the problem but Christianity. That is why Indians even trued to ally with Germans in WW2. Similarly, USSR sponsored atheism and its revolutionary zeal has made almost complete Russian slavic states as non-christian. In addition, USA sponsored war on Slavic states like Serbia to help Islam and even the support extended to USA by Vatican has enraged Russia and slavic states. As recently as 2 years back, a Serbian general committed suicide in international court as the West forced the court to convict him of killing muslims. This has even further widened Russian rift with Christianity and West.