ForumGarden

US concerned by Taliban expansion in Pakistan

AFP: US concerned by Taliban expansion in Pakistan

Forget korea and iran this is far more serious-Pakistan already has nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them.

Who would they nuke? If they bomb the places the Taliban have taken over in their own country then they would be bombing themselves. If they nuke Afgan they wouldn't change a thing in their own country.

YZGI;1178793 wrote: Who would they nuke? If they bomb the places the Taliban have taken over in their own country then they would be bombing themselves. If they nuke Afgan they wouldn't change a thing in their own country.


India for one-that's why india also has nuclear weapons. More to he point they can give a warhead to someone. Why do you believe religious fanatics will behave in a rational manner?

It's not what the Pakistanis might do it's what religious extremists like the Taliban might do given the opportunity. No thanks to musharif and western support for him Pakistan still managed to remain a democracy. But it is a weak one with a fragile government.

It is quite possible that the taliban can take over in Pakistan, it looks like they are going to try and it's going to take full scale warfare to stop them. If they get their hands on nuclear weapons do you really think they wouldn't use them?

gmc;1178812 wrote: India for one-that's why india also has nuclear weapons. More to he point they can give a warhead to someone. Why do you believe religious fanatics will behave in a rational manner?



It's not what the Pakistanis might do it's what religious extremists like the Taliban might do given the opportunity. No thanks to musharif and western support for him Pakistan still managed to remain a democracy. But it is a weak one with a fragile government.



It is quite possible that the taliban can take over in Pakistan, it looks like they are going to try and it's going to take full scale warfare to stop them. If they get their hands on nuclear weapons do you really think they wouldn't use them?
I see where your going now. Yes we do need to keep the Taliban from nukes at whatever cost.

gmc;1178812 wrote: India for one-that's why india also has nuclear weapons. More to he point they can give a warhead to someone. Why do you believe religious fanatics will behave in a rational manner?

It's not what the Pakistanis might do it's what religious extremists like the Taliban might do given the opportunity. No thanks to musharif and western support for him Pakistan still managed to remain a democracy. But it is a weak one with a fragile government.

It is quite possible that the taliban can take over in Pakistan, it looks like they are going to try and it's going to take full scale warfare to stop them. If they get their hands on nuclear weapons do you really think they wouldn't use them? I think this scenario has been on the cards for a long time. Maybe that's why so many extra troops are being poured into Afghan. The governments knew the risks all along.

oscar;1178814 wrote: I think this scenario has been on the cards for a long time. Maybe that's why so many extra troops are being poured into Afghan. The governments knew the risks all along.


It's the same old story-back up a dictator against democratic forces in a country just because you think they are on your side, ride roughshod over national borders dropping bombs and kill loads of civilians as collateral damage and then be puzzled as to why locals help terrorists who want to end democracy and impose an extremist regime. At least in pakistan democracy re-exerted itself but it's going to take full scale conflict in pakistan to stop the taliban now. If the army decide not to fight they're stuffed.

India comes in to this as well they won't exactly sit by and watch pakistan be taken over by islamists. India and pakistan have had several wars. They too have nuclear weapons but it's the pakistani ones you should worry about. So too does china-they have their own problems with separatists.

At least Obama might be a bit more thought out about these things than bush was.

gmc;1179132 wrote: It's the same old story-back up a dictator against democratic forces in a country just because you think they are on your side, ride roughshod over national borders dropping bombs and kill loads of civilians as collateral damage and then be puzzled as to why locals help terrorists who want to end democracy and impose an extremist regime. At least in pakistan democracy re-exerted itself but it's going to take full scale conflict in pakistan to stop the taliban now. If the army decide not to fight they're stuffed.

India comes in to this as well they won't exactly sit by and watch pakistan be taken over by islamists. India and pakistan have had several wars. They too have nuclear weapons but it's the pakistani ones you should worry about. So too does china-they have their own problems with separatists.

At least Obama might be a bit more thought out about these things than bush was.


Pakistan is a 'mortal threat' to world, says Clinton as Taliban surge towards Islamabad | Mail Online

Very worrying.

oscar;1179160 wrote: Pakistan is a 'mortal threat' to world, says Clinton as Taliban surge towards Islamabad | Mail Online

Very worrying.


The mainstream media is being very quiet about this. It was cnn I saw it mentioned on first. Pakistan has the sixth or seventh largest army in the world, nuclear weapons a modern air force (equipped with F 16s). The question is will the army fight against the Taliban?

Check out the videos.

The Roots of Pakistan’s Taliban Problem - The Lede Blog - NYTimes.com

The americans and the west have got to keep out of this imo.

gmc;1179273 wrote: The mainstream media is being very quiet about this. It was cnn I saw it mentioned on first. Pakistan has the sixth or seventh largest army in the world, nuclear weapons a modern air force (equipped with F 16s). The question is will the army fight against the Taliban?

Check out the videos.

The Roots of Pakistan’s Taliban Problem - The Lede Blog - NYTimes.com

The americans and the west have got to keep out of this imo. Interesting stuff and i agree with the guy that this has been overlooked for years.

I remember during the US campaign trail when it was asked what Obama would do when the Taliban siezed control of Pakistan's nucleur arsenal. Not such a dumb question now.

The US keep out of foriegn wars??????? :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl

oscar;1179289 wrote: Interesting stuff and i agree with the guy that this has been overlooked for years.

I remember during the US campaign trail when it was asked what Obama would do when the Taliban siezed control of Pakistan's nucleur arsenal. Not such a dumb question now.

The US keep out of foriegn wars??????? :yh_rotfl:yh_rotfl


It wasn't then either. what was his answer?

I remember before Obama was elected that Joe Lieberman spoke about the global crisis that would probably emerge within 6 months of his inauguration to the Whitehouse.

If the Taleban do end up taking Islamabad, then this may be the crisis.

The issue with the Pakistani Military and the ISI is how many have gone over to the Taleban already, as the Taleban couldn't have gotten this far without already having a lot of support from inside Pakistan, and that leave the question who are the remainder and are they prepared to fight.

It would seem that the Northwest of the country is probably lost to the Pakistani government now one way or another, and the option may be to accept a territorrialy smaller state, but one thats more viable. To be honest the Pakistani's are the authors of their own downfall, they played a dangerous game with the Taleban for years, and now it has truly come back to bite them, and may cost them their own country.

Of course the over-riding concern would be the location and security of the Pakistani's nuclear weapons stockpiles. It seems likely to me that a full scale conflict involving several nations and the Pakistani military against the Taleban is becoming inevitable now, but we shall see what happens.

Galbally;1179887 wrote: I remember before Obama was elected that Joe Lieberman spoke about the global crisis that would probably emerge within 6 months of his inauguration to the Whitehouse.

If the Taleban do end up taking Islamabad, then this may be the crisis.

The issue with the Pakistani Military and the ISI is how many have gone over to the Taleban already, as the Taleban couldn't have gotten this far without already having a lot of support from inside Pakistan, and that leave the question who are the remainder and are they prepared to fight.

It would seem that the Northwest of the country is probably lost to the Pakistani government now one way or another, and the option may be to accept a territorrialy smaller state, but one thats more viable. To be honest the Pakistani's are the authors of their own downfall, they played a dangerous game with the Taleban for years, and now it has truly come back to bite them, and may cost them their own country.

Of course the over-riding concern would be the location and security of the Pakistani's nuclear weapons stockpiles. It seems likely to me that a full scale conflict involving several nations and the Pakistani military against the Taleban is becoming inevitable now, but we shall see what happens.


Seems the taliban have pulled back. What they seem to do is push, get concessions, push get some more until they are in control. I think it will take full scale warfare to stop them but the pakistani army-as you say seem to be loathe to fight. IMO This is far more serious than iran and korea you've got china and india on the borders and I can't see india wanting to accept a militant, nuclear armed muslim state on their borders. China has it's own issues with muslim militants.

gmc;1179891 wrote: Seems the taliban have pulled back. What they seem to do is push, get concessions, push get some more until they are in control. I think it will take full scale warfare to stop them but the pakistani army-as you say seem to be loathe to fight. IMO This is far more serious than iran and korea you've got china and india on the borders and I can't see india wanting to accept a militant, nuclear armed muslim state on their borders. China has it's own issues with muslim militants.


If i remember correctly, Obama said the Taliban taking control of Pakistan's nucleur arsenal would never happen as he was commiting more troops to Afghan to finish off Taliban insurgents.

It tells me that they have know about this threat for a very long time.

oscar;1179949 wrote: If i remember correctly, Obama said the Taliban taking control of Pakistan's nucleur arsenal would never happen as he was commiting more troops to Afghan to finish off Taliban insurgents.

It tells me that they have know about this threat for a very long time.


Well yes. War in the middle east-apart from it's effect on oil prices doesn't really matter to us or have much effect. War in Pakistan can drag in china and India. As usual backing up a military dictatorship just because you thought the dictator was on your side has undermined the power of those who want democracy and what fills the power vacuum is as usual more extreme. It doesn't help when the democratic government once it gets back in can't stop bombing attacks on it's own people. Doesn't matter what you might want if someone bombs your house you tend to support anyone that is fighting whoever it is that bombed you.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/04/05-0

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/w ... 575883.ece