ForumsWEPRTaleban in Pakistan-Underestimated?

15 2556
FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

Let me set the scene for you.

Sitting at home tonight watching the 10pm news on the bbc. The main story being Alistair Darling's coontraversial new budget. Aside from Labour plunging the UK into a decade of debt, the second story was the one that really caught my attention. This was that Taleban forces are in Pakistan and only 60 miles from the capital.

The story went on to show how in the recent weeks, the Pakistani government had negotiated with ultra radical clerics in the Swat region in the North of the country giving them Sharia law in return for peace in the region. The Taleban have (unsurprisingly) dishonoured the agreement by moving into the Buner region, only 60 miles from the capital Islamabad.

With the world suffering from the worst financial crisis since the 1930s, it seems to me that the seriousness of this development was downplayed. This could have very serious implications for the Midddle Eastern peace process, and undermines the efforts of ISAF forces in Afghanistan.

Thoughts?

By the way.
Quick link to the full details of the story:

  • 15 Replies
Programpro
offline
Programpro
562 posts
Nomad

That seems pretty scary...

Is it British to spell it "Taleban," because I'm pretty sure it's "Taliban" in america.

I am assuming you live somewhere in Europe due to the BBC news source, so what--economically--is wrong there? I'm not saying I don't see anything wrong, I just haven't looked...

FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

Taliban is the original name. Taleban is the anglicised version.

Yep I am British, although, incidently I believe that the bbc is the most reliable large broadcaster.

My point was that because of the financial crisis, this event in Pakistan has been downplayed, and dangerously so in my opinion.

Zootsuit_riot
offline
Zootsuit_riot
1,523 posts
Nomad

We just talked about this in my government/contemporary issues class today; 60 miles away from possession of nuclear weapons seems to be playing it a bit close.

But, with wars already in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as an already-tense relationship with Pakistan, the U.S. probably couldn't find the troops or the support to intervene with the military. The best we can do is try to cut the funding for their operations somehow.

Pixie214
offline
Pixie214
5,838 posts
Peasant

But just beacuse it has been downplayed in the public surely it hasn't been on a poltical stage which can more directlky control the situation. As long as the Mod and Mr. Brown have heard I'll feel a bit better.

Mike412
offline
Mike412
332 posts
Nomad

I think its not being underestimated. The Taliban's attempt to expand beyond the agreed area has lead to Pakistani troops being moved into the area, so its not like its being ignored. The fact that they have been given land is worrying, but on the other hand they don't pose a threat to the world community. They number in the thousands at best, while Pakistan's military is in the hundreds of thousands. The only real threat is if the Taliban resort to guerrilla warfare, but even then its unlikely they'll obtain nuclear weapons that way.

Programpro
offline
Programpro
562 posts
Nomad

But, with wars already in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as an already-tense relationship with Pakistan, the U.S. probably couldn't find the troops or the support to intervene with the military. The best we can do is try to cut the funding for their operations somehow.


This is why I wish other countries would offer us some help (aside from ones who are busy fighting someone else and the ones already helping us)

The Taliban are a global threat (I think it's "are", and not "is&quot
FireflyIV
offline
FireflyIV
3,224 posts
Nomad

They number in the thousands at best, while Pakistan's military is in the hundreds of thousands.


So do ISAF forces, yet they are still on the backfoot in Afghanistan.

The fact that they have been given land is worrying,


Aside from the strategic advantage, it's not exactly an encouraging sign from the Pakistani administration.
TexanProvo
offline
TexanProvo
408 posts
Nomad

Yeah, this really should be better covered in the news, but it isn't. I don't know too much about the situation, but letting the Taliban getting any power or land is a bad thing, and if they can get it in a nuclear armed nation, then that is a really bad thing. However, the US really can't use military force due to the possibility of it starting a war with Pakistan. We can't handle a third war, especially now with trouble at the Mexican border, and although I'm sure nations like India would be more than happy to help in Pakistan, it's not something we need at this point in time. Perhaps a little special forces intervention if at all possible, but if that's a requirnment then I'm sure it's happening.

DDX
offline
DDX
3,562 posts
Nomad

Seriously the Taliban HATE the U.S. or that's what I heard. Let an enemy point nukes around willy nilly is a VERY bad thing. If they DO get a hold of them I think we are screwed.


well the US, did usurp the Taleban's rule in pakinstan ect.
Deth666
offline
Deth666
653 posts
Nomad

They number in the thousands at best, while Pakistan's military is in the hundreds of thousands.


it really doesn't take that many people for a coup it wouldn't be the first coup in Pakistan
Zootsuit_riot
offline
Zootsuit_riot
1,523 posts
Nomad

Well, the United States isn't in any direct territorial harm if the Taliban does get hold of nuclear arms from Pakistan; they don't have technology capable of inter-continental ballistics.

It does pose a threat to any surrounding countries, however, including Iraq, Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan itself. Something makes me want to say that Taliban doesn't know how to operate a nuclear arms launch device very well.

Showing 1-11 of 15