Pakistan needs Afghan 'counter-measures': Musharraf

Pakistan needs Afghan 'counter-measures': Musharraf

WASHINGTON — Pakistan's former leader Pervez Musharraf warned Wednesday that his country's spies will need to take "counter-measures" in Afghanistan if US troops leave it unstable or it becomes too close to India.

On a visit to Washington, Musharraf described relations between the United States and Pakistan as "terrible" but defended the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) agency that American officials have accused of supporting extremists.

Musharraf, who has lived in exile since stepping down in 2008 but hopes to launch a political comeback next year, insisted that his country's historic rival India was working to turn Afghanistan against Pakistan.

"Since our independence, Afghanistan always has been anti-Pakistan because the Soviet Union and India have very good relations in Afghanistan," Musharraf said at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

I dunno. I trust this guy about as far as I can toss him. The ISI has had their hand in Afghanistan going back years if not decades. So seriously, who is this guy trying to fool? I wonder what rock he crawled under back in 2008.

He's like a bad penny if you asked me.

In a related but conflicting story on the subject...

Taliban commanders say Pakistan intelligence helps them

(Reuters) - Pakistan's security service provides weapons and training to Taliban insurgents fighting U.S. and British troops in Afghanistan, despite official denials, Taliban commanders say, in allegations that could worsen tensions between Pakistan and the United States.

A number of middle-ranking Taliban commanders revealed the extent of Pakistani support in interviews for a BBC Two documentary series, "Secret Pakistan," the first part of which was being broadcast on Wednesday.

Once you implicate Pakistan and the Haqqani network,which is tied to Chinese militants,then the game has changed completely.

The article describes the ongoing conflict in Northern Pakistan and Chinese involvment.

Source

The explosions provoked senior government officials in Xinjiang to publicly claim for the first time in recent years that the attackers had been trained in explosives in ETIM/TIP camps run by Chinese separatists in the Waziristan tribal regions of Pakistan.

The Chinese charge was made on the basis of a confession by a Uyghur militant arrested by the Chinese authorities. Pakistan swiftly extended all possible cooperation to Beijing against the ETIM/TIP network. "Terrorists, extremists and separatists in Xinjiang province constitute an evil force," said an August 1 statement issued by the Pakistani Foreign Ministry after Chinese President Hu Jintao rang Zardari to express his grave concern over the growing activities of "terrorists" belonging to the Pakistan-based ETIM/TIP network.

Okay, we really need to get our people OUT of there. Iraq and Afghanistan BOTH. If we must fight over there for any reason, let it be from the shores inward so we 100% clear our backs as we progress. I can't shake the feeling that if the United States somehow found itself unable to maintain the flow of logistics and air support...even for a couple weeks...our guys in Afghanistan would find themselves feeling mighty outnumbered and surrounded....much like Custer just before he realized the gravity of his mistake.

Unless Obama and Co. can clearly, intelligently and very QUICKLY articulate precisely what our troops are still there for and what the REAL goals are they are expected to accomplish, I have a new message OWS CAN be unified on. Get our troops home. ALL our troops and END ALL the combat operations WORLD WIDE.

Just my thoughts as a very frustrated and concerned Rabbit...

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Well according to this the US will be there a while longer than expected.

US negotiates its military presence in Afghanistan after 2014

The United States and Afghanistan are secretly discussing the conclusion of a new agreement to retain the US military presence on Afghan territory after the year 2014, writes the British daily The Guardian in a report.

According to the periodical, the talks have been on for more than a month now.

Earlier Washington made repeated public pledges that it would pull its troops out of Afghanistan by 2014. India, China and Russia are opposed to foreign interference in the region and opt for observing the sovereignty of all nations.

reply to post by SLAYER69


NATO is committed to training the Afghan army after the NATO - led (ISAF) leave the country in 2014.

NATO-led International Security Assistant Force (ISAF) spokesman Brigadier General Carsten Jacobson speaks at a press conference in Kabul, Afghanistan, on Sept. 12, 2011. NATO is committed to train and equip Afghan army even when the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) end their combat operations by the end of 2014, a NATO general said here on Monday.

Source

"The NATO Training Mission in Afghanistan (NTM-A) was only started in the late 2009 and as a consequence with mission going on to 2014, we are not even half way through on mandate on our task, and with the announcement of NATO of course we'll stay here past 2014," Major General Michael Day, Deputy Commander of NTM-A told a joint press conference with the spokesman of ISAF Brigadier General Carsten Jacobson.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Umm yea China and Russia of course wouldn't want that. India surprises me a little. Anything to irritate Pakistan that they don't have a hand in is to their benefit.

reply to post by SLAYER69

Maybe it's just me here...but haven't they now had 10 years to train their military? The United States went from a backwater, 3rd world military power in 1940 to a World Superpower 5 years later. No one was saying they needed to be made a regional super anything, right? We are just looking to leave them capable of supplying their own self defense and internal security needs.

I wonder... Why the heck didn't we build some huge training bases out in the isolation and solitude of the Nevada Test Site, where even the climate and terrain is very similar, to train up Iraqi and Afghani forces? They need never have been within 100 miles of a populated American city. They also could have been trained intensely without the fear of being blown to ribbons by some suicide bomber before they could even graduate as new guys to the meat grinder back home. Why oh why.... We spent 100's of billions on this sort of thing as it was...and got nothing!

Sorry..my patience is all used up. They had their chance. Bush and Obama both. Now it's cut bait time and head for the pier. Home is calling and the guys need to come in.

What a load of crapola if afghanistan was so "anti-pakistan" why was Bin Laden living there for so long?

Seems to me if that were true they would have given up Bin Laden long ago but they didn't.

Yeah don't trust this dude only a fool would.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Iraq has a modern standing Army in place. [Just how really capable they are?]
Afghanistan on the other hand are divided and corrupt.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Hamid karzai recently stated " that it would side with Pakistan and is strictly opposed to any U.S. attack on Pakistan.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai says that Afghanistan is strictly opposed to any US attack on Pakistan and will stand by Islamabad if Washington takes such an extreme step.

Source

"God forbid, if a war erupts between Pakistan and the United States, we (Afghanistan) will stand by Pakistan," Karzai told Pakistan's Geo television network in an interview broadcast on Saturday, Reuters reported.

Karzai also said that if Pakistan is ever attacked by another country and needs help, "Afghanistan will be there with you. Afghanistan is a brother."

The Afghan president stated, "Afghanistan will never forget the welcome, the hospitality, the respect, and the brotherhood showed by the Pakistani people towards the Afghan people.”

reply to post by Daedal


That's another guy I don't trust.
Him and his brother are up to their elbows in corruption