Could Pakistan Use Nuclear Weapons in a Future Conflict with Afghanistan?

Zarvin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
302
Likes
54
Zarvin,

You are absolutely right in your reasoning that Pakistan would have profited if it would have backed a non-Pashtun entity and this entity would be ruling on the other side of the Durand line.

Do consider the possibility that Pakistan's leaders played a bad hand and backed the party that "could" eventually be inimical to Pakistan's interests!
Hi you are partially correct.

If Ahmed Shah Massoud the Tajik was in power, we would've closed and sealed our borders with Afghanistan a long time ago, that is all we wanted. An unstable or prosperous Afghanistan is not our concern in all honesty, every country looks out for its own interests and ours was that this Durand line issue will cause us problems for centuries to come if it is not resolved, and resolved doesn't mean it being overlooked as the Taliban did, it means we have totally sealed and closed borders with them and only a Non-Pashtun element can provide us that.

However, after Zias death, Bhutto and Shariff were more interested in plundering our country then dealing with the fighting parties in Afghanistan--- Massoud started getting help from others and took Kabul, we couldn't allow that and started backing Hekmatyar the Pashtun, both were our proxies but they had started fighting for power after defeating the soviets, both were brutal and merciless criminals. That is when the Taliban emerged out of nowhere and took everyone by storm.
 

Tolaha

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
2,158
Likes
1,416
Hi, I think that is quite possible that the Taliban does come into power.

What people don't realize here is though the Afghan Taliban were Pashtuns and didn't accept the Durand line, it was not for ethnical or Historic reasons. They didn't accept Durand line because of religous reasons. So speculating that the Taliban wanted to take over Afghanistan first and then move onto the Pashtun areas of Pakistan is wrong. The Taliban were Islamists who had Pan-Islamic ideas that Muslims shouldn't have borders.

This was both fortunate and unfortunate for Pakistan, since the Durand Line was the number one issue but at least they were not hostile to us and nor did they have a desire to invade our lands.
Even though I like your way of reasoning, I don't necessarily agree with the assertion! Yes, Talibanis were Islamists. However, blood being thicker, their next target after Afghan would be Pashtoonistan. Maybe they would target rest of Pakistan later, but your north western region would be the first/obvious/easiest one! And all this can only be a disaster to the idea of Pakistan.

So, Pakistani entities backing Taliban just because of ideological reasons, was a hara-kiri!
 

blank_quest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
2,119
Likes
927
Country flag
Neither! It would be something like the Islamic Caliphate! Atleast, that's what they would like to think it is!
:cool2: let them joint with Saudi Arab also and let Saudi impose Arabi as official language... this will be so much like Pak imposing Urdu on Bangladesh..:scared2:
 

Zarvin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
302
Likes
54
Even though I like your way of reasoning, I don't necessarily agree with the assertion! Yes, Talibanis were Islamists. However, blood being thicker, their next target after Afghan would be Pashtoonistan. Maybe they would target rest of Pakistan later, but your north western region would be the first/obvious/easiest one! And all this can only be a disaster to the idea of Pakistan.

So, Pakistani entities backing Taliban just because of ideological reasons, was a hara-kiri!
Hi

You are free to believe what you like but the facts remain, When we asked the Taliban to accept the Durand Line when they came into power, that is the reason they gave us, that Muslim brothers have no borders.

Afghanis have never had Al-Qaeda like Global Jihadi tendencies, they fought resistance wars against the the Soviets in thier own land and they are fighting the Yanks in their own land.
 

Virendra

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
4,697
Likes
3,041
Country flag
Yeah sure, like we never had any Afghans militants found dead in J & K encounters :rolleyes:
 

blank_quest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
2,119
Likes
927
Country flag
Afghanis have never had Al-Qaeda like Global Jihadi tendencies, they fought resistance wars against the the Soviets in thier own land and they are fighting the Yanks in their own land.
so,Al-Qaeda has no Afghan !! then who does Al-Qaeda have?? Pakistani or Arab jihadi's?? Who has the jihadi tendency because you said Afghans have no jihadi tendency?:confused:
 
Last edited:

Zarvin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
302
Likes
54
Yeah sure, like we never had any Afghans militants found dead in J & K encounters :rolleyes:
And we find Americans, French and other nationalities fighting us in our Tribal region, does that mean those countries are at war with us?
 

blank_quest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
2,119
Likes
927
Country flag
And we find Americans, French and other nationalities fighting us in our Tribal region, does that mean those countries are at war with us?
Pak can't even think of accepting the fact or announce of being at war with Amreeka! I think your govt has atleast this much intelligence! :pound:
 

Zarvin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
302
Likes
54
so,Al-Qaeda has no Afghan !! then who does Al-Qaeda have?? Pakistani or Arab jihadi's?? Who has the jihadi tendency because you said Afghans have no jihadi tendency?:confused:
Hi


If you are fighting a war of resistance in your own country you are doing Jihad, but the Afghans, apart from liberating their lands from foreign occupiers have not gone around the world like Al-Qaeda to kill 'kaafirs' and Muslims.

Al-Qaeda are global Jihadis, Afghanis are not.
 

Tolaha

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
2,158
Likes
1,416
If Ahmed Shah Massoud the Tajik was in power, we would've closed and sealed our borders with Afghanistan a long time ago, that is all we wanted. An unstable or prosperous Afghanistan is not our concern in all honesty, every country looks out for its own interests and ours was that this Durand line issue will cause us problems for centuries to come if it is not resolved, and resolved doesn't mean it being overlooked as the Taliban did, it means we have totally sealed and closed borders with them and only a Non-Pashtun element can provide us that.
Happen to agree with your points in this para!

Ahmad Shah Massoud probably would have been great for Afghanistan. And also, who knows, under him Afghanistan could have been both. Prosperous as well as not inimical to Pakistan (as it respected the sanctity of the Durand line due to Massoud's ethnicity)!


However, after Zias death, Bhutto and Shariff were more interested in plundering our country then dealing with the fighting parties in Afghanistan--- Massoud started getting help from others and took Kabul, we couldn't allow that and started backing Hekmatyar the Pashtun, both were our proxies but they had started fighting for power after defeating the soviets, both were brutal and merciless criminals. That is when the Taliban emerged out of nowhere and took everyone by storm.
This is where I have problem with.

Ahmad Shah Massoud, a great leader, was in his twenties when Pakistan had already started backing extremists like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (who hated the slightly younger Massoud). While Massoud was climbing up the power ladder, Pakistanis backing to Gulbuddin and radical extremists like him continued.

Its only when Pakistan realised that Gulbuddin had antagonised every other entity that would help them take complete control of Afghanistan... did they back off and instead support Taliban. Taliban, an equally virulent entity. But still, Pakistanis decided to place all their bets on them now.

Why do you think Pakistan backed the elements led by Gulbuddin and then later Talibanis? Think about the Army leadership at those times. They surely would not have backed someone like Massoud. Massoud just wasn't extremist enough to be of the liking of the Pakistani Generals at that time.

In their blind love towards a particular brand of Islam, Pakistani generals caused immense hardships to Afghanistan and then eventually, Pakistan as well!
 

blank_quest

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2012
Messages
2,119
Likes
927
Country flag
Hi


If you are fighting a war of resistance in your own country you are doing Jihad, but the Afghans, apart from liberating their lands from foreign occupiers have not gone around the world like Al-Qaeda to kill 'kaafirs' and Muslims.

Al-Qaeda are global Jihadis, Afghanis are not.
my ques still remains unanswered!
who does Al-Qaeda have?? Pakistani or Arab jihadi's?? Who has the jihadi tendency because you said Afghans have no jihadi tendency?
:confused:
 

Agnostic Muslim

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2009
Messages
517
Likes
144
I don't see nuclear weapons being used given the proximity of Afghanistan to Pakistan and the potential of Pakistan being affected by the fallout.

The scenario of a Pakistani military advance being stymied is itself highly unlikely without the Afghan airforce improving significantly, both quantitatively and qualitatively, or the Indians joining the Afghans.

Any Afghan 'massing of forces' (in a desert to boot) would offer a pretty good target to the PAF and Pakistani artillery.
 

Tolaha

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2009
Messages
2,158
Likes
1,416
so,Al-Qaeda has no Afghan !! then who does Al-Qaeda have?? Pakistani or Arab jihadi's?? Who has the jihadi tendency because you said Afghans have no jihadi tendency?:confused:
blank_quest,

Al-Qaeda, the leadership and all its mujahideens to start with, were predominantly Arabs!
 

Virendra

Ambassador
Joined
Oct 16, 2010
Messages
4,697
Likes
3,041
Country flag
And we find Americans, French and other nationalities fighting us in our Tribal region, does that mean those countries are at war with us?
Now you're mixing people with countries. I never said Afghanistan was at war with India.
I said Afghans were among the militants involved in terrorism at J & K.
 

Zarvin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
302
Likes
54
Happen to agree with your points in this para!

Ahmad Shah Massoud probably would have been great for Afghanistan. And also, who knows, under him Afghanistan could have been both. Prosperous as well as not inimical to Pakistan (as it respected the sanctity of the Durand line due to Massoud's ethnicity)!




This is where I have problem with.

Ahmad Shah Massoud, a great leader, was in his twenties when Pakistan had already started backing extremists like Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (who hated the slightly younger Massoud). While Massoud was climbing up the power ladder, Pakistanis backing to Gulbuddin and radical extremists like him continued.

Its only when Pakistan realised that Gulbuddin had antagonised every other entity that would help them take complete control of Afghanistan... did they back off and instead support Taliban. Taliban, an equally virulent entity. But still, Pakistanis decided to place all their bets on them now.

Why do you think Pakistan backed the elements led by Gulbuddin and then later Talibanis? Think about the Army leadership at those times. They surely would not have backed someone like Massoud. Massoud just wasn't extremist enough to be of the liking of the Pakistani Generals at that time.

In their blind love towards a particular brand of Islam, Pakistani generals caused immense hardships to Afghanistan and then eventually, Pakistan as well!
Hi

Don't fall into the trap that Hekmatyar was bad and Massoud was an Angel, both were merciless criminals who raped and ravished their country in order to get power. Pakistan did not back Hekmatyar initially during the Afghan civil war, that is a false perception. Pakistan had been backing both Hekmaryar and Massoud during the Soviet war and stopped after the death of Zia and the end of that war. We left the Afghans for themselves. However, it is well known that Hekmatyar was amassing weapons and hiding during the last years of the war, he had seen in hindsight that the Soviets would leave soon and when they did, he was the most equipped at the time to take Kabul. Pakistan really should've got them onto the table and helped them overcome their differences, but like I said before, the infighting of Bhutto and Shariff made us focus elsewhere. That is when Massoud started recieving funds from India and he joined up with Dostum to take Kabul. We couldn't allow such a scenario and then started backing Hekmatyar.

There was no use in us inventing the Taliban, if we were so influential with the Afghans in order to invent a proxy group the size of the Taliban, then why didn't we just tell them to join up with Hikmetyar who was already our proxy.
 

Zarvin

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2012
Messages
302
Likes
54
Now you're mixing people with countries. I never said Afghanistan was at war with India.
I said Afghans were among the militants involved in terrorism at J & K.
So what are you trying to prove by saying Afghanis were in J & K?
 

ajtr

Tihar Jail
Banned
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
12,038
Likes
724
And we find Americans, French and other nationalities fighting us in our Tribal region, does that mean those countries are at war with us?
Yes they are at war with pakistan.Thats different thing that PAK army ang Govt is helping them in this war on pakistan.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top