Terrorist Talk

One other tidbit about HQN: their power base is in the P2K region (Paktika, Paktia, Khost) of Afghanistan. During the Soviet "Occupation" some guy named Usama bin Laden built a huge cave complex (Jaji?) and earned his wartime street cred there in 87 or 88. That cave complex is in the P2K.

I have a hard time buying that the HQN wasn't involved in UBL's post-9/11 life.
 
No, I'm well aware of our role and that of the ISI's in the HQN, I just also don't believe in coincidences when it comes to this place. Very little is unrelated around here, no matter how wild the story it seems.
 
HQN could possibly survive without the ISI by way of poppy sales/growing but I'm not sure what their views are on that.

ISI is a rogue elephant that's even a threat to the Pakistani government. Problem is they can't dismantle it.
 
I'm not quite so sure that the HQN could survive without the ISI. From my understanding there are really only a few major players in that poppy trade (outside of U.S. backed crops), those players being Iran, TB, AQ, and the ISI. Now I can only guess that if the ISI were to let go of HQN, that the HQN would then be nothing more than a threat to everyone else that is making their money off of the heroine. I agree that the HQN is a strongly religious organization, however without the organization and financing that the ISI provides, they'll be nothing but an armed group of religious nut jobs. If the HQN strikes than there is a purpose behind it. I don't see the ISI EVER letting the HQN go though. If the HQN is dismantled than Iran is going to go into Afghanistan and control everything. They need the HQN to fight their own little proxy against Iran if/when the situation arises again.
 
lindy said:
Without ISI, HQN would be broke and left to picking up cans and bottles on the side of the road. If this admin was strong enough, they should convey to Pakistan, knock the shit off or we'll back the Indians in Kashmir and then you'll feel the pain. Pakistani food gives me the shits anyway...and it burns the o-ring.

IRGC: they are the real threat and have been since Iraq.

I strongly believe we should go BACK to Somalia, facilitate the end to the famine, and kill every jihadist that wants to go to paradise: just like we did in Iraq. "If you build it, they will come." Yes, alot of our brothers were killed in Iraq however IF the goal was to kick Saddam's butt off the throne and redirect attention from hitting the Homeland, then it was a success. There are still alot of underwear bombers out there. So let's get down to their level and kill them violently in the streets where they're buddies have second thoughts. This TTP was extremely effective.

Wait...did FF just type "Electric Boogaloo"?
Click to expand...

Good post!
 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44627163/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

The Haqqani militant network is a "veritable arm" of Pakistan's powerful ISI intelligence service, which supported the group as it launched a startling attack last week on the U.S. Embassy in Kabul, the top U.S. military officer said on Thursday.

Mullen, CIA director David Petraeus and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton all have met with their Pakistani counterparts in recent days to demand Islamabad take action against the Haqqani network.
"The Haqqani network ... acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence Agency," Mullen told the Senate panel.
Mullen's charges, which are sure to heighten tensions, come amid mounting exasperation in Washington as the Obama administration struggles to curb militancy in Pakistan and end the long war in Afghanistan.
Before Mullen spoke,
Pakistani​
​
Interior​
​
Minister​
​
Rehman​
​
Malik​
​
​
 told Reuters the ISI had no part in the embassy attack.
"If you say that it is ISI involved in that attack, I categorically deny it," he said. "We have no such policy to attack or aid attack through Pakistani forces or through any Pakistani assistance."
Click to expand...


I wonder when we're going to stop complaining about this and start doing something about it.
 
This thread has been very informative. I do have one question though. How can we win this war? Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're not battling nations who will give up by bombing the hell out of them, but rather people deeply motivated by their religious beliefs. From an outsider's point of view, it seems like we kill 1 and 2-3 more pop up. It seems like we will always be at war with them, maybe just not a grandeur scale like in AFG or Iraq.

Just wondering what your guys' thoughts are on that and how we can defeat these bastards.
 
TH15 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're not battling nations who will give up by bombing the hell out of them, but rather people deeply motivated by their religious beliefs.

Just wondering what your guys' thoughts are on that and how we can defeat these bastards.
Click to expand...

Dude, you're swallowing the populist line of crap that the media is feeding you. This war, just like all the others, is about power and money. Sure, there are some that truly believe in the Islamic-fascist line of garbage (e.g. Muhamad Atta) but the majority of young jihadists are no different than the inner city kids in the US: hopeless, unwanted, and unemployed. So they see a gangbanger with cash, chicks, and perceived power in the form that they are feared by others. Once they join up (Blood, Crip, MS-13, Taliban, etc), they're needs are met: money, structure, wanted by the group, and power in the form of a mac-10, glock, AK, etc. All they gotta do is a drive by (spray and pray), steal some stuff, etc and their needs get met.

Iraq, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Detroit, LA, Philly...seriously, what's the difference other than US-based gangs don't use suicide bombers or VBIEDs?

It's all about hookers and blow. Some of them only understand violence so those f-tards require purification through deep lead injections.

Civil Affairs is the key in my opinion.
 
TH15 said:
This thread has been very informative. I do have one question though. How can we win this war? Correct me if I'm wrong, but we're not battling nations who will give up by bombing the hell out of them, but rather people deeply motivated by their religious beliefs. From an outsider's point of view, it seems like we kill 1 and 2-3 more pop up. It seems like we will always be at war with them, maybe just not a grandeur scale like in AFG or Iraq.

Just wondering what your guys' thoughts are on that and how we can defeat these bastards.
Click to expand...

It depends on what kind of "win" we're looking for. If it's an Afghanistan that is (relatively) stable to the point that terrorist groups like AQ can't use it as a base to attack the U.S., then yeah, I think we can do that. If it's nationbuilding or whatever, that's going to be a bit harder to accomplish.

Personally, I'm totally good with crushing AQ (which has already been done, IMO) scuffing up the Taliban, doing the best we can with whatever government we can prop up inside Afghanistan, and then wiping our hands of the place. Afghanistan didn't matter a damn when the Taliban had it pre-AQ, and it won't matter much more than that post-AQ. There are only a couple of good reasons to maintain a presence inside AFG, one of them being putting PK's nuke sites within range of our helos... the Paks can read a map too and don't really dig that idea, which is probably one of the reasons they're running the HQN so hard against us.
 
There are hundreds if not thousands of Pakistani "nuke sites"- they're disassembled. It's part of the status quo with India. If you have people in range of some of the sites you could never secure all of them. Not even close to half IMO.
 
SpitfireV said:
There are hundreds if not thousands of Pakistani "nuke sites"- they're disassembled. It's part of the status quo with India. If you have people in range of some of the sites you could never secure all of them. Not even close to half IMO.
Click to expand...

I don't see that at all. If you have to gather parts for your nukes like some insane quest in World of Warcraft then they aren't doing you much good, especially with the perceived threat of India just miles and an easy strike away. Also, the more you spread out your components the more risk you run in losing control of them; PK is paranoid about that. I can see have a dozen or so sites (maybe less) with assembled pret-a-porter nukes and maybe even some of them without nuke stocks so they can move around their weapons.
 
Freefalling said:
I don't see that at all. If you have to gather parts for your nukes like some insane quest in World of Warcraft then they aren't doing you much good, especially with the perceived threat of India just miles and an easy strike away. Also, the more you spread out your components the more risk you run in losing control of them; PK is paranoid about that. I can see have a dozen or so sites (maybe less) with assembled pret-a-porter nukes and maybe even some of them without nuke stocks so they can move around their weapons.
Click to expand...

No, the status quo is that both sides won't use them first. Hence they don't keep them assembled and then if one side does assemble both know it's time to have a chat.
 
I'm kind of reminded of an old commercial:

"You got your Haqqani Network in my Inter-Services Intelligence!"
"You got your Inter-Services Intelligence in my Haqqani Network!"
"Two great terrorist groups that terrorize together."
 

Similar threads

R.Caerbannog
Economic shifts in Central America and China
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
R.Caerbannog
R.Caerbannog
Marauder06
Team Rubicon
Replies
7
Views
862
x SF med
x SF med
AWP
Review Several Book Reviews in One Thread
Replies
0
Views
453
AWP
AWP
Archangel27
Star Wars: Andor - Antifascist, not Anticonservative
Replies
0
Views
419
Archangel27
Archangel27
AWP
Code Over Country by Matthew Cole
4 5 6
Replies
109
Views
14K
Devildoc
Devildoc
Back
Top