Don’t mention the Afghan–Pakistan war

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Skynet, Jul 24, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Don’t mention the Afghan–Pakistan war
    Fraser Nelson Wednesday, 23rd July 2008

    Both Britain and America are reluctant to admit it but, says Fraser Nelson, our most pressing foreign policy problem is what to do about Pakistan, a nuclear-armed state in which terrorists have taken sanctuary

    At a recent dinner party in the British embassy in Kabul, one of the guests referred to ‘the Afghan-Pakistan war’. The rest of the table fell silent. This is the truth that dare not speak its name. Even mentioning it in private in the Afghan capital’s green zone is enough to solicit murmurs of disapproval. Few want to accept that the war is widening; that it now involves Pakistan, a country with an unstable government and nuclear weapons.

    But in fact the military commanders know that they are dealing with far more than just a domestic insurgency. Weapons, men and suicide bombers are flooding in from Pakistan every day. Like it or not, war is being waged on Afghanistan from Pakistan.

    Consider the evidence: British forces in Helmand have achieved striking success in repelling the Taleban, but they can never eliminate the enemy entirely because of the constant stream of new recruits flowing over the border from the Pakistani town of Quetta. To Brigadier Mark Carleton-Smith, head of Taskforce Helmand, it is a source of deep frustration. ‘When pushed out of Helmand, the opportunities are there for the Taleban to recruit, equip and retrain on the other side of the border,’ he told me when I visited two months ago.
    Well worth a read
  2. Very Good read ( read the comments part as well )
  3. Yes i thought so and if it does go this way it will take the war into a whole new dimension. The Indians are also getting fidgety which of course complicates the picture even more.
  4. Just get the indians to nuke pakistan???
  5. This just strikes me as a bit off, not the striking successes part but the recruits flowing over the border bit. Now granted it's completely factual and you've got the local culture where they seem to see flitting backwards and forwards accross the border as a right and the geography is a complete bastard to work against but if places like the GDR or USSR can manage to seal up their borders to stop people trying to get out why can't Afghanistan stop people getting in? Now it'd take a lot more money to set up and then run plus increased Afghan manpower but why no build a chain of **** off massive guard bases/bunkers along the more porous/easily traversed stretches of the border to discourage the evil little *******? Maybe we could give them some pointers, well we do have experience of building watchtowers along borders and all that. :)
  6. That's something you can't do until you've got a large enough army to man fortification AND man a mobile force to go after those already in country - 200,000 has been a number banded about for Afghanistan. They now have 80,000 - good troops by all accounts but it will be 2012 before you've got the numbers needed.

    Then you have to look at the law of unintentional consiquences - less opportunity for extreamists in Afghanistan = more time and resources to spend on the talabanisation of Pakistan. THEN you've got the issue of terrorists operating in NW Pakistan to deal with...
  7. I didn't know they were still that far down in regards to numbers. Some interesting points made.