Large blast near Indian embassy in Kabul, 17 dead

RPK

Indyakudimahan
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2009
Messages
4,963
Likes
203
Blast heard near Indian embassy in Kabul, cause unknown

Kabul: A large explosion rocked the centre of Afghanistan's capital early Thursday, near the Indian embassy and the Interior Ministry. At least seven people are feared dead.

More information on casualties was not immediately available. However, reports claimed that no Indian was hit by the blast.
According to reports, the blast occurred shortly after 8:30 am (0400 GMT) in the heavily fortified centre of the city. Toyota Corolla was reportedly used in the blast.


A report further claimed that two sporty utility vehicles were badly damaged, one of them labelled as a United Nations vehicle. The centre of the blast appeared to be just outside the Indian embassy. Windows in surrounding shops were shattered.

Police officers on the site said they believed it was the work of a suicide bomber, but did not provide further details.

US and NATO spokespeople said they did not yet have any information on the explosion.

The Afghan capital has been hit numerous times in recent months by suicide bombers and roadside bombs. The attacks usually target international military forces or government installations, but Afghan businesses and civilians are also often killed or injured.

Most recently, six Italian soldiers were killed and another three wounded in a suicide attack on a military convoy on the road to Kabul's international airport on September 17.

The Taliban claimed responsibility for that attack, which also killed 10 Afghan civilians and wounded more than 50 in one of the worst single attacks on the more than 100,000 NATO and US-led troops serving in Afghanistan.

Foreign military deaths in Afghanistan are at record levels -- more than 400 in 2009 -- and the mounting number of Western troops coming home in body bags has sent support for the war plummeting in Europe and the United States.

On September 8, one attack in Kabul, home to significant numbers of Western officials, troops and aid workers, killed three civilians outside the city's military airport.

Two days before the presidential and provincial council elections, another suicide car bomb targeted a NATO convoy near a US military base in the capital, killing 10 people including a NATO soldier.
 

F-14

Global Defence Moderator
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
1,563
Likes
25
i say that we increse our persence in Afghanistan in civilan projects and military wise
 

F-14

Global Defence Moderator
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2009
Messages
1,563
Likes
25
It is not American mistake they are doing what it takes to keep the Khyber Pass under their control and that is geo-politics we India has to learn to suck it up i know i might sound in human here but in the persuence of National Intrest 7 dead in a minsiscule amount for National Intrest is always supreme and is built of the blood of patriots and citizens alike
 

ahmedsid

Top Gun
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
2,960
Likes
246
Tough call, In a Country like Afghanistan, No security is Enough Security. I mean, you put in more troops, the talibs get more recruits and gel in with the people.

The only way to stop this is to bring in some kind of development. Now what we see in Afghanistan is that its a brutally raped country. The talibs bombing, the Afgah security forces going on rampages, the Nato forces bombing! The people cant choose sides, and if at all they choose, they choose the talibs because they are in control in most of the country!!!

Some plan must be hatched to really win the Hearts and Minds, and not just some ploy in the name of development. When the people are above poverty and the children are safe in their schools and homes, then there wont be any scope for the Talibs.

Easier said than done I know, but still!
 

bhramos

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
20,310
Likes
20,541
Country flag
why cant NATO or US forces still could not prevent any sucide attacks.
with so many hitech gears shown in Discovery channel.
 

zolpidam

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
60
Likes
2
it will not stop until you will not do something who is providing them base and sympathy.
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
490
why cant NATO or US forces still could not prevent any sucide attacks.
with so many hitech gears shown in Discovery channel.
Mate, they protect their assets not Indian assets. Infact, ISI has always had a freehand when they are working against India.
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
490
Tough call, In a Country like Afghanistan, No security is Enough Security. I mean, you put in more troops, the talibs get more recruits and gel in with the people.

The only way to stop this is to bring in some kind of development. Now what we see in Afghanistan is that its a brutally raped country. The talibs bombing, the Afgah security forces going on rampages, the Nato forces bombing! The people cant choose sides, and if at all they choose, they choose the talibs because they are in control in most of the country!!!

Some plan must be hatched to really win the Hearts and Minds, and not just some ploy in the name of development. When the people are above poverty and the children are safe in their schools and homes, then there wont be any scope for the Talibs.

Easier said than done I know, but still!
But for anyone to develop that place, they need to control it first. If they cant control it, then they cannot develop it. If we think neutrally, only from Afghani perspective, who is the only outside power, that is sincerely interested in developing Afghanistan? India. And only India. US will fight till their homeland is threatened, then they will cut a deal with Taliban or Pakistan(both are same as far as Afghanis or Indians are concerned). And NATO will follow US. Iran and India are the only two neighbours who want to see, Afghanistan as a peaceful and developed nation. Pakistan and China want to use it as a terroist breeding factory. So, ideally India should be having a military base in Afghanistan, get the control of it and then develop it. But of course, the world is not ideal!
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
165
But for anyone to develop that place, they need to control it first. If they cant control it, then they cannot develop it. If we think neutrally, only from Afghani perspective, who is the only outside power, that is sincerely interested in developing Afghanistan? India. And only India. US will fight till their homeland is threatened, then they will cut a deal with Taliban or Pakistan(both are same as far as Afghanis or Indians are concerned). And NATO will follow US. Iran and India are the only two neighbours who want to see, Afghanistan as a peaceful and developed nation. Pakistan and China want to use it as a terroist breeding factory.
agree except that i doubt USA will walk away. it will be long while before that happens. that place gives them one hell of a vantage point. they can check china, russia, india and ofc encircle iran.
So, ideally India should be having a military base in Afghanistan, get the control of it and then develop it. But of course, the world is not ideal!
this is something i dread. remember how usa was welcomed when they bombed their way to baghdad. they were cheered and welcomed with open arms. it did not take much time for that to reverse.
no country likes a foreign force on their soil. even pakistan does not allow USA to operate on the ground. afghanistan is a proud country. even if they allow india to base its troops, it will turn against in no time. that is why i guess it is better to let USA and allied forces take care of the mess and let us concentrate on winning afghani hearts and minds.
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
490
agree except that i doubt USA will walk away. it will be long while before that happens. that place gives them one hell of a vantage point. they can check china, russia, india and ofc encircle iran.
I agree, thats a great vantage point. But to retain it is cost prohibitive. They could outsource this job of reining in India, Iran and Russia to Pakistan(which will be given aid to do his job) and Pakistan true to its form will be more than happy to do it. The Chinis will support the Pakis. Taliban will be back controlling Afghanistan.

Remember, US' is at its weakest right now, recession makes cost cutting important. Afghanistan will keep sucking life of US' soldiers, this unwinnable war is not popular domestically. So, US, IMO, will get out sooner than later. And their choice of handing over Afghanistan is only Pakistan(history tells us this). So, India must be prepared for that scenario. The last time Pakistan had control of Afghanistan, India had hard time. Taliban will supply endless footsoldiers to Pakistan for Jihad on Yindoos. US will give lots of aid to keep Pakistan afloat. China will be more than happy to prop up Pakistan for containing India. This is the worst case scenario for India. India needs NATO/US to stay in Afghanistan, if they cant, then we need to prop up a friendly regime there or have to set our own foot there. Afghanistan is too important for India to be left to Pakis.

this is something i dread. remember how usa was welcomed when they bombed their way to baghdad. they were cheered and welcomed with open arms. it did not take much time for that to reverse.
no country likes a foreign force on their soil. even pakistan does not allow USA to operate on the ground. afghanistan is a proud country. even if they allow india to base its troops, it will turn against in no time. that is why i guess it is better to let USA and allied forces take care of the mess and let us concentrate on winning afghani hearts and minds.
The problem with letting US and NATO to do the business, is that they only take care of their business. Just look at how Indian Embassies keep getting attacked. Why is US embassy or some other NATO embassy not getting attacked? US/NATO will only go after the terrorists who threaten them(bad taliban), they will be happy to negotiate with those who threaten Indian interests(good taliban). This is the problem if we depend on them. But this is still a better scenario then Afghanistan to be left to Pakistan. That is the worst case scenario for us. We need to avoid it at all costs.
As for Americans being cheered then shunned, IMO, it is because of the way US deals. They just are pursuing their own goals, not the goals of the common people. US is not interested in developing Afghanistan. It is only interested in cleaning those terrorists that could be a threat to US. So, afghanis dont find much difference between Taliban and US. Add to that, US is a foreign force. Not only are they from different nation, they are also from a different civilization. India is much closer to Afghanistan in this respect. Afghanistan and India share lot in common including geopolitical goals. So, ideal India is the right power to help Afghanistan for that India needs to maintain military presence in Afghanistan. But of course, there are other practical hurdles, the most important of it is the lack of guts of our rulers.
 

Sridhar

House keeper
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2009
Messages
3,474
Likes
1,041
Does the bombers don't want this to Happen ?


India announces foreign policy change: supports Afghan reconciliation with Taliban




India's Foreign Secretary, Nirupama Rao (pictured here) made the surprise announcement at a seminar in New Delhi on 7th Oct

For the last eight years, since the Taliban fled from Kabul in November 2001, India has staunchly opposed a dialogue with any section of the Taliban. India’s position has remained: there is no purpose in talking to the Taliban; there is no such thing as a moderate Taliban.


But now there is a shift. In New Delhi today, Foreign Secretary Nirupama Rao, addressing an international seminar on Afghanistan, declared that India would support the process of “reintegrating individuals with the national mainstream”, code for dialogue with the moderate Taliban who agree to renounce violence.


Ms Nirupama Rao stated that, “the existing process under (Afghanistan’s) National Committee for Peace for reintegrating individuals with the national mainstream must be both enlarged and accelerated. We support the Afghan government’s determination to integrate those willing to abjure violence and live and work within the parameters of the Afghan constitution…”


This change in stance came with a qualification. Pakistan, which is widely believed to support the Taliban and provide shelter in Quetta to its leaders, would need to cease assistance to the Taliban.


In words that echoed India’s earlier warnings to Pakistan on supporting terrorist camps across the Line of Control in J&K, Nirupama Rao said, “(India’s support for reintegration of the Taliban) should, of course, go hand in hand with the shutting down of support and sanctuaries supported for terrorist groups across the (Afghanistan-Pakistan) border.”


Since 2001, India has refrained from declaring political initiatives within Afghanistan. Instead, New Delhi has confined its visible diplomacy to drumming up international support and multilateral funding, even while coordinating its actions closely with President Karzai and his team. The bedrock of the India-Afghanistan relationship has been a $1.2 billion aid programme, India’s largest to any country. India is currently the 6th largest bilateral aid donor to Afghanistan.


Now, clearly, the MEA has concluded that an aid programme, howsoever successful and appreciated by the Afghans, cannot take the place of clear political initiatives. These initiatives are needed for protecting the infrastructure that Indian aid is creating in Afghanistan.


India’s aid programme in Afghanistan includes: a 218-kilometer road from Zaranj in Iran to Delaram in Afghanistan, inaugurated in January this year; the electrical transmission line from Pul-e-Khumri in northern Afghanistan to Kabul, which has brought regular power supply to the capital for the first time since 1992; one hundred small development projects in rural Afghanistan that have quick gestation periods; five medical missions that provide free medicines to 1000 patients per day; support to Kabul’s Indira Gandhi Centre for Child Health, and connecting it last month through a tele-medical link with two super-speciality child health facilities in India; a grant of one million tonnes of wheat, which is currently being distributed daily as 100 gram high-protein biscuits to two million school-going children across Afghanistan.


Besides declaring support for reconciliation, the foreign secretary also made clear that, as far as India was concerned, the results of Afghanistan’s vitiated presidential elections held in August was not yet a settled matter. Congratulating the Afghan people for participating in the elections in the face of Taliban threats, the foreign secretary accepted the possibility of a run-off between President Hamid Karzai and Dr Abdullah Abdullah, and of working with whichever of them was elected to power.


Ms Rao also declared that India had made up its mind that its regional interests lay in a continued United States presence in Afghanistan.

Broadsword: India announces foreign policy change: supports Afghan reconciliation with Taliban
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
165
But to retain it is cost prohibitive.
it is. but americans always look for a long term shot. the very strategic nature of the location will keep them there. plus they want to ensure(?) terrorists from afpak do not attack usa again. another point which will keep them put there. cost is short term gain is lonterm.
They could outsource this job of reining in India,
they asked for it. india did not take the bait wisely.



The Chinis will support the Pakis. Taliban will be back controlling Afghanistan.
with islamic insurgency in xinjiang, i doubt that.

Remember, US' is at its weakest right now, recession makes cost cutting important. Afghanistan will keep sucking life of US' soldiers, this unwinnable war is not popular domestically. So, US, IMO, will get out sooner than later. And their choice of handing over Afghanistan is only Pakistan(history tells us this). So, India must be prepared for that scenario. The last time Pakistan had control of Afghanistan, India had hard time. Taliban will supply endless footsoldiers to Pakistan for Jihad on Yindoos. US will give lots of aid to keep Pakistan afloat. China will be more than happy to prop up Pakistan for containing India. This is the worst case scenario for India. India needs NATO/US to stay in Afghanistan, if they cant, then we need to prop up a friendly regime there or have to set our own foot there. Afghanistan is too important for India to be left to Pakis.
cost has never been a problem for the americans when it comes to their strategic interests. why they maintain 100s of bases all over the world?



The problem with letting US and NATO to do the business, is that they only take care of their business. Just look at how Indian Embassies keep getting attacked. Why is US embassy or some other NATO embassy not getting attacked? US/NATO will only go after the terrorists who threaten them(bad taliban), they will be happy to negotiate with those who threaten Indian interests(good taliban). This is the problem if we depend on them. But this is still a better scenario then Afghanistan to be left to Pakistan. That is the worst case scenario for us. We need to avoid it at all costs.
we get the collateral benefit even if they do not fight for us. by keeping yourself away, you can use the same funds for developmental projects. so you kill 2 birds with one shot.
As for Americans being cheered then shunned, IMO, it is because of the way US deals. They just are pursuing their own goals, not the goals of the common people. US is not interested in developing Afghanistan. It is only interested in cleaning those terrorists that could be a threat to US. So, afghanis dont find much difference between Taliban and US. Add to that, US is a foreign force. Not only are they from different nation, they are also from a different civilization. India is much closer to Afghanistan in this respect. Afghanistan and India share lot in common including geopolitical goals. So, ideal India is the right power to help Afghanistan for that India needs to maintain military presence in Afghanistan. But of course, there are other practical hurdles, the most important of it is the lack of guts of our rulers.
americans may not be their in the interest of afghanistan. agreed. but in the american self interest lies the future of the afghani interest too.
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
490
it is. but americans always look for a long term shot. the very strategic nature of the location will keep them there. plus they want to ensure(?) terrorists from afpak do not attack usa again. another point which will keep them put there. cost is short term gain is lonterm.
Sure, but short term interests take priority some times. US is in a critical phase now and cannot spare the costs of empire maintance as it used to do. That is the reason US is bending backwards to please China and in the process giving it some of the empire.

they asked for it. india did not take the bait wisely.
You misunderstood me, bro. I was saying that US will outsource the job of reigning India, Iran and Russia to Pakistan(duely supported by China). US would never handover Afghanistan to India. Pakistan and China will not allow it. US is also not in favour of allowing India to control Afghanistan. US had only asked India to share some bodybags by allotting some men for the purpose of occupying the ground.


with islamic insurgency in xinjiang, i doubt that.
Pakistan will fall in line if China cracks the whip. It is sortable issue.


cost has never been a problem for the americans when it comes to their strategic interests. why they maintain 100s of bases all over the world?

That was before recession, mate. Recession has changed lot of things. And bodybags are not a good sight. Afghnistan makes sure many coffins reach US unlike other bases, this is the critical difference.


we get the collateral benefit even if they do not fight for us. by keeping yourself away, you can use the same funds for developmental projects. so you kill 2 birds with one shot.
True, we get benefitted from collateral damage. But it is too little to make much of the difference. Pakis have played their game well in this regard. All our development projects will then be used by the taliban to further their interests. For example, we built a road, if taliban use it, then what have we achieved? That is why I said we need military presence to ensure that people benefit from our development and this is important. Building infrastructure is useless if people are not given the power to utilize them. US is following its narrow interests, neither India's nor Afghanistan's goals are being fulfilled.

americans may not be their in the interest of afghanistan. agreed. but in the american self interest lies the future of the afghani interest too.
No, mate. All that the americans care for is whether they can somehow reorient the islamic terror towards someone else. If they could buy their way out of this problem, they would. This war has become a headache for US. This war sucks in resources and victory is not in sight. Media and people expect results. US would be happy to ensure that their mainland and interests are not threatened. If they are assured suffiecently of that, then there is every possiblity that they may get out of Afghanistan.
 

zolpidam

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 11, 2009
Messages
60
Likes
2
No, mate. All that the americans care for is whether they can somehow reorient the islamic terror towards someone else. If they could buy their way out of this problem, they would. This war has become a headache for US. This war sucks in resources and victory is not in sight. Media and people expect results. US would be happy to ensure that their mainland and interests are not threatened. If they are assured suffiecently of that, then there is every possiblity that they may get out of Afghanistan.
True American are very much frustrated with this war. They just want to get rid off it . This will change whole scenario in Af-Pak region. American troops in Afghanistan losing heart, say army chaplains - Times Online
 

ppgj

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,029
Likes
165
Sure, but short term interests take priority some times. US is in a critical phase now and cannot spare the costs of empire maintance as it used to do.
but that has not stopped them from shutting any of their bases!! infact they are trying to expand into the neighbourhood of russia.

That is the reason US is bending backwards to please China and in the process giving it some of the empire.
they are. but chinese are also wary. that is why they are thinking of replacing dollar as the currency. if US goes down, they will take down china too.:Laie_39:


You misunderstood me, bro. I was saying that US will outsource the job of reigning India, Iran and Russia to Pakistan(duely supported by China). US would never handover Afghanistan to India. Pakistan and China will not allow it. US is also not in favour of allowing India to control Afghanistan. US had only asked India to share some bodybags by allotting some men for the purpose of occupying the ground.
my bad. sorry. but that is not going to happen. infact the very fact USA is there is 'cos of the point you make.


Pakistan will fall in line if China cracks the whip. It is sortable issue.
china is already finding pakistan no more reliable as per the recent reports. plus they have to answer the rest of the world.


That was before recession, mate. Recession has changed lot of things. And bodybags are not a good sight. Afghnistan makes sure many coffins reach US unlike other bases, this is the critical difference.
right. as i said earlier they have not shut any bases 'cos of the recession.

True, we get benefitted from collateral damage. But it is too little to make much of the difference. Pakis have played their game well in this regard. All our development projects will then be used by the taliban to further their interests. For example, we built a road, if taliban use it, then what have we achieved? That is why I said we need military presence to ensure that people benefit from our development and this is important. Building infrastructure is useless if people are not given the power to utilize them. US is following its narrow interests, neither India's nor Afghanistan's goals are being fulfilled.
it is too little but it is better than seeing our own bodybags returning from afghanistan.
for the rest of your post, remember afghanistan is a complex country with war lords with allegiance to different coutries and wanting to be supreme. everyone is playing their part of the game. unless they unite for the good of their country, nothing is going to happen.


No, mate. All that the americans care for is whether they can somehow reorient the islamic terror towards someone else. If they could buy their way out of this problem, they would. This war has become a headache for US. This war sucks in resources and victory is not in sight. Media and people expect results. US would be happy to ensure that their mainland and interests are not threatened. If they are assured suffiecently of that, then there is every possiblity that they may get out of Afghanistan.
welcome to world of geopolitics.
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top