Pakistan two weeks from collapse?

Discussion in 'Asia' started by Bootneck, May 2, 2009.

  1. Bootneck
    Offline

    Bootneck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,576
    Thanks Received:
    2,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,050
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +4,172
    Well, the rhetoric is being ramped up. Will Pakistan agree to allow US and NATO troops in to help oust the Taliban and foreign insurgents from north west Pak? They sure as hell are not capable of doing it themselves it seems. If not, what next? The ramifications don't bear thinking about.

     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 4
  2. Toro
    Offline

    Toro Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    50,728
    Thanks Received:
    11,051
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    The Big Bend via Riderville
    Ratings:
    +25,058
    I cannot imagine the Taliban could overthrow the government of Pakistan on its own. The only group that can do that is the armed forces, which are by far the most powerful institution in the country. There are elements within the army and secret service that are sympathetic to the Taliban, but its hard to see the army acquiescing to the Taliban. If the Taliban were ever to come to power in Pakistan, it could only be because the army has allowed it. And since the US doesn't want to see the Taliban gain power in Pakistan, its hard to see the army allowing it, since much of the weapons Pakistan buys are from the US.
     
  3. strollingbones
    Offline

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,610
    Thanks Received:
    15,614
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,911
    toro i think you are underestimating the numbers that will leave the army to join the taliban....its a whole different culture and they want the religious rules etc...
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. strollingbones
    Offline

    strollingbones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2008
    Messages:
    65,610
    Thanks Received:
    15,614
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    chicken farm
    Ratings:
    +31,911
    more importantly this will allow devastation of our troops in that area....its a rough geographic area and good for quick attacks and quick retreats....correct me if i am wrong bootneck...
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  5. Toro
    Offline

    Toro Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2005
    Messages:
    50,728
    Thanks Received:
    11,051
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    The Big Bend via Riderville
    Ratings:
    +25,058
    As I understand it, I don't think this would be the case. The Taliban-inspired part of the population is a minority in Pakistan. Most of the armed forces are not radical. Many who go into the armed forces do so because it offers a relatively stable life and a pathway to a career. Unlike Afghanistan, Pakistan is not anarchy. It is a difficult country to govern but it has a well-established commercial class and judiciary. It is not ruled by warlords fighting over control of the drug trade, as is the case in Afghanistan. The army is a central authority that keeps the country together. Many if not most Pakistanis have more faith in the armed forces as an institution than the civilian government, which is often seen as venal and corrupt, for good reason.
     
  6. editec
    Offline

    editec Mr. Forgot-it-All

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    41,427
    Thanks Received:
    5,598
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Maine
    Ratings:
    +5,617
    Here's the thing...I suspect that if the Pakistani cannot stop the Taliban, it's not for a lack of men or equipment...it's for a lack of will.


    And if it IS for that lack of will, then our entry into that fray isn't really protecting a nation from another nation, it's us involved in still another CIVIL WAR.

    We don't typically do well interferring in CVIL WARS, do we?

    What I think we're looking at is the outcome of our interference in that area of the world.

    We are destabilizing governments there by our very presense.

    WE are probably the motivation for people joining the Taliban to begin with.

    By giving these people an outside enemy, we give them purpose and unity they wouldn't otherwise have.

    Get the NUKES OUT and then do NOT, do NOT do NOT send in US troops.

    Seriously...if Obama sends troops into Pakistan it will be the biggest mistake we have made in a looooooooooooooooog line of mistakes in that area.
     
  7. Bootneck
    Offline

    Bootneck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,576
    Thanks Received:
    2,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,050
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +4,172
    Well, I don’t believe Pakistan is as close to falling as General Petraeus says. This is all part of ramping up the pressure on the Pak government. However, I do believe, given the current circumstances, that the government could topple within a year. And the Taliban wouldn’t have to take Islamabad to achieve that. They already control much of the Tribal Regions in the north west, but more than that, their influence covers almost the whole country. The Taliban have been very successful in projecting their mission as a class war and the poor and disaffected, particularly the unemployed youth, are flocking to their cause. I think we may find that when push comes to shove, the army would face problems in rather more than the tribal regions.

    Another significant factor is the degree to which the country is split. The government has lost the support of many of its people and with the militants feeding off the long neglect of its poor, military force alone ain’t going to halt the insurgency. The government will need to win back the support of the people, and that’s quite an ask. Incidentally, some recent research conducted by the US showed that 63% of the population was opposed to co-operating with the United States.

    The army and security force are also split. It’s no secret that the army and the ISI have a highly ambiguous relationship with the Taliban and Islamist militancy, but there is serious rift within the Pakistan army between the rank and file and officers; between senior officers and junior officers and within the officer class as a whole, between Islamist and moderate. Not a situation that bodes well for a quick victory over The Taliban and religious militancy.

    Remember also that the Pak army previously mounted a campaign against AQ and the militants after the assassination attempts on Musharraf. They got their arses thoroughly tanned. With the losses sustained by the army, Musharraf caved in and negotiated a peace accord that ceded Waziristan to the militants.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 3
    Last edited: May 2, 2009
  8. Bootneck
    Offline

    Bootneck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,576
    Thanks Received:
    2,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,050
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +4,172
    You're not wrong Bones. Tank country it ain't. Aerial bombardment and good old fashioned foot slogging.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  9. Bootneck
    Offline

    Bootneck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2008
    Messages:
    3,576
    Thanks Received:
    2,972
    Trophy Points:
    2,050
    Location:
    England
    Ratings:
    +4,172
    Yes. Partly. A lack of will due to an ideology problem.

    Having developed unconventional capabilities such as the covert arming and training of Islamic insurgents to fight in Kashmir and latterly, Afghanistan, they are now being asked to wipe them out.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  10. Mr.Fitnah
    Offline

    Mr.Fitnah Dreamcrusher

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2009
    Messages:
    14,480
    Thanks Received:
    2,673
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Paradise.
    Ratings:
    +2,673
    Seems the crisis has past.
     

Share This Page