Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Osama bin Laden killed by US forces in Pakistan

krtek a houby said:
Kindly elaborate, dear sir
Click to expand...

whilst the WOT was ongoing and Pakistan were assisting US in their efforts Pakisatn recieved a fuckton of dosh from the US in the form of military and non military aaid. If the WOT ceases then the US will no longer need Pakistan as an ally as much and so some or most of that iad will be withdrawn.

so whilst the capture\death of bin fella isnt going to end the WOT its one less thing for the US to need Pakistans help over.

So perversly it was in Pakistans interest (in this aspect - nort so sure from a total pov) to keep bin fella alive and out of harms way

ita all a bit CT tbh but stranger things ahve happened.
 
butchersapron said:
I'm not sure that i buy all this shrine stuff. Bin laden was isolated - and had been for years, Mohamed Bouazizi had already killed him earlier this year. I've just read how the news was treated in Egypt - viewed as irrelevant. I see no reason why his burial ground would become a shrine - and if it did it would only be for the four lions types, and so could actually prove useful for the powers that be - if placed somewhere remote well monitored. That said, i'm not sure anyone official has said this is the reason for the burial at sea (if it took place) - that may be gap filling in on our part.
Click to expand...
If that tiny, hotheaded/mental and irrelevant minority of muslims & arabs who'll support jihadism want a shrine/memorial, they'll build one regardless. And most others will ignore it, or feel deeply embarrassed, given that the vast majority in both communities utterly condemn jihadism, for all the West's best efforts to drive them into Al-Q's arms
 
krtek a houby said:
Bin Laden's grave would have attracted a legion of nutters and would be jihadists - the man is revered by the terrorist nutjobs out there - he was the AQ figurehead for fuck' sake.

The only weepy madness is you crying over your half empty glass, as per usual.
Click to expand...
It would have attracted far less than you think - even in afghanistan, and they would have been massively outnumbered by those who detest Bin Laden and AL-Q
 
Remember. Pakistan nurtured, supported and armed the Taliban for almost a decade as a way of retaining a degree of control over Afghanistan. It was Musharraf who after sept 11 threw Pakistan behind the US war on terror. His motives are many, fear of Pakistan becoming a target itself, wanting to divert criticism of the nuclear weapon programme, fear of what US enmity might mean for Pakistan's rivalry with India, financial incentives etc. Musharraf's move concealed an enormous and ongoing contradiction in Pakistani foreign policy because control over Afganistan has been a central tenent of Pakistans strategic defence planning in relation to possible conflict with India. For years Pakistan has tried to walk the tightrope of retaining its relations with the Taliban and meeting its "obligations" towards the USA. This contradiction has now been laid bare and it isn't pretty. My guess is that pressure is going to grow for Pakistan to decisively end this two faced policy and to act decisively against cross border militants within its borders and to allow American forces to operate across the border. In doing so Pakistan risks igniting a wave of opposition amongst its population. The result is civil war
 
Pingu said:
whilst the WOT was ongoing and Pakistan were assisting US in their efforts Pakisatn recieved a fuckton of dosh from the US in the form of military and non military aaid. If the WOT ceases then the US will no longer need Pakistan as an ally as much and so some or most of that iad will be withdrawn.

so whilst the capture\death of bin fella isnt going to end the WOT its one less thing for the US to need Pakistans help over.

So perversly it was in Pakistans interest (in this aspect - nort so sure from a total pov) to keep bin fella alive and out of harms way

ita all a bit CT tbh but stranger things ahve happened.
Click to expand...

This is correct

During the Russian invasion of Afghanistan Pakistan became the second biggest recipient of foreign aid after Israel. Following the Russian withdrawal Pakistan was dropped like a hot potato and the financial taps were turned off. Sept 11 gave Musharraf the opportunity to turn the taps back on and they have been on ever since. However, this doesn't come without price. The war in Afghanistan has increasingly begun to destabilise Pakistan itself. The Taliban have morphed into the Pakistan Taliban and are now threatening Pakistan itself, the cross border drone attacks are deeply unpopular and the gap between the demands of the population and the obligations of the elites are growing wider. My guess is that this increasing instability has convinced elements within the Pakistani military that the price is no longer worth paying and that Pakistan are growing weary of the Afghan war spilling into their territory. This is conjecture but it is very possible that they have tipped off the US about Bin Laden's whereabouts as a way of extricating themselves from the web they have spun around themselves. In short protecting him was no longer good value for money. They may however find they have opened a poisoned well that they find will find hard to close
 
dylans said:
There is no significant wahabi faction of the ISI. Pakistan's approach to the Taliban is strategic not ideological
Click to expand...

Have I fallen for a propaganda line about there being an Islamist faction? (OK, wahabi was sloppy.) Or just for lazy "analysis"?
 
dylans said:
Your all mad. US/Pakistan relations is about to go down the toilet. Billions of dollars in aid are under threat. A conflict is brewing between the US and a nuclear armed unstable state. Pakistan has been exposed as harboring senior members of Al Qaeda. A fundamental strategic alliance is in danger of falling apart and you want to talk about........Thatcher?
Click to expand...

This times a billion.
 
think dylans right and the Pakistani government has attempted to be too clever by half.
the CIA state department and president etc might understand the pressure the Pakistani Government is under and the games its playing to stay in existence. US congress won't so bye bye anymore aid cheques as it would be political suicide to bew caught signing those.
Even though not providing aid will only make things worse.
india must be loving this :)
 
likesfish said:
think dylans right and the Pakistani government has attempted to be too clever by half.
the CIA state department and president etc might understand the pressure the Pakistani Government is under and the games its playing to stay in existence. US congress won't so bye bye anymore aid cheques as it would be political suicide to bew caught signing those.
Even though not providing aid will only make things worse.
india must be loving this :)
Click to expand...

Indeed, a ten year policy of calculated duplicity comes to an end, big gamble when the brazenly Janus approach was with a super power.
 
laptop said:
Have I fallen for a propaganda line about there being an Islamist faction? (OK, wahabi was sloppy.) Or just for lazy "analysis"?
Click to expand...

I think we should see it like this. The Taliban was Pakistan's number one strategic choice for Afghanistan. It virtually created it, certainly nurtured it armed it and financed it. It was a fundamental part of Pakistans long term strategic policy in relation to India.. Why? Because Pakistan's strategic defence against possible conflict with India is predicated on retreeat to Afghanistan and the use of the mountains of the Hindu Kush as a front line defence against an invading Indian army. From there, presumably to wage war to drive India out. This strategy has been a central tenet of Pakistani defence policy for decades, certainly since the Bangladesh war. The Taliban were central to this because they were both a creation of Pakistan and because they shared significant cultural and ethnic commonality with many in the tribal areas of the North West of Pakistan. Therefore through the Taliban Pakistan hoped it would retain control of Afghanistan

Now, this relationship was deep strong and considered of vital importance to Pakistan.

Then came 9/11 and the Taliban found themselves under attack by the USA. What has followed can be considered a process of Pakistan being stripped, kicking and screaming with twisted arms, step by step of that carefully builit strategic alliance it had so carefully built with the Taliban. First Pakistan was forced to join the war on terror. This was acceptable to the degree that it was based on driving out Al Qaeda from Afganistan. Al Qaeda and Bin Laden never had the kind of direct relationship with the ISI that the Taliban had but once the Taliban came into the firing line Pakistan found itself facing uncomfortable choices forced on them.

Firs Musharraf was forced to support Bush war on terror.
Next Pakistan was forced to stand aside as Mullah Omar was driven out and Taliban were decisively driven from power.
Next it was forced to stand aside while the Northern Alliance and Karzai (who Pakistan detest) were shepherded to power in Kabul.
Next it was forced to stand aside while US forces bomb Pakistan territory, violate its sovereignty and kill Pakistani citizens
Now I think we can expect Pakistan to be forced to be far more proactive and to finally abandon its baby. The pressure arising from Bin Laden's embarrassing location will be used to give Pakistan a "with us or against us" ultimatum. Send thousands more troops into North Waziristan or else. By doing so Pakistan will be forced to abandon a strategic policy considered a vital area of national security, By not doing so it will not only lose the considerable financial aid from the USA but will face the enmity of a US that is presently bombing Pakistan territory and may well continue to do so regardless of Pakistans wishes. Pakistan is being dragged into the Afghani war.

Now this is the point. Faced with the defeat of everything they had built. the ISI switched from a process of overt support to a process of covert support for the Taliban while allowing Taliban fighters to cross the border. This is the situation we have today. A Pakistan government that is formally in alliance with the United States forced to fight its natural allies while covertly supporting the very same people who are killing its troops. Step by step the US has forced Pakistan's hand, So its not a case of pro Taliban and Pro American factions, rather it is a case of a pro Taliban military and intelligence establishment forced step by step to support the USA and abandon the very forces it helped create. That pressure is about to increase
 
if it had been in some mountain hideaway they'd have got away with it.
apparently isi raided the compound as it was being built so their either heroically rubbish or something smells really really bad.
now I've known military ops that were so unbelievably fuckwitted that if they had been made public or the squaddies caught nobody would have believed the truth:(
 
Tariq Ali on Democracy now raises some important questions. He states that it is "astonishing" that it took such a long time to capture Bin Laden. How was this information gained? Ali also thinks it's "risable" to think that Pakistan military intelligence didn't know where he was and that this information was kept secret from them. The Pakistani's had all the pat answers ready to celebrate the event, as did President Karzai of Afghanistan. What pressure was put on them? What about the timing of this? Why didn't they capture him alive and have him tried in a court? Now that would have been very interesting.

 
likesfish said:
think dylans right and the Pakistani government has attempted to be too clever by half.
the CIA state department and president etc might understand the pressure the Pakistani Government is under and the games its playing to stay in existence. US congress won't so bye bye anymore aid cheques as it would be political suicide to bew caught signing those.
Even though not providing aid will only make things worse.
india must be loving this :)
Click to expand...

That's right. Congress is going to grab at this as an opportunity to take the shine off Obama's glory. Pakistan can be used as a stick to beat him with. Of course they will sieze it.
 
IMO part of the reason for the burial at sea aside from to stop possible 'pilgrims' was to bury his body quickly, within 24 hours according to Islamic practise. Whilst he may have been isolated etc, and it's unlikely his grave would have been a massive tourist attraction, I would think most governments in the world would have kicked up a fuss if they'd been asked to take charge of the remains. He was moved from Pakistan to Afghanistan, but I would bet neither the Americans or the Afghan government wanted him buried in Jalalabad.

Apparently Islamic burials at sea are meant to be done so as to increase the chance of the body drifting to shore (strapped to wood etc), and being buried pointing towards Mecca etc. Choosing a sea burial was obviously going to annoy more radical Sunni theologians, but burying him at sea within 24 hours with an Islamic service is pretty good going tbh, and wont cause mass Muslim upset like if they'd hung his body from a gibbet at a US Airbase in Saudi Arabia....
 
Just found this comment in some godforsaken blog comments pit in one corner of the internet:

two other fascist mass murderers died during the last days: René Emilio Ponce who was defence minister of El Salvador, founder of killing squads and directly responsible for the killing of six liberation theologists in 1989 and Orlando Bosch Ávila who was involved in the terrorist attack on the Cubana Flight 455 in 1976 which murdered all 73 people on board … both had one thing in common with Bin Laden: being (at least) temporary allies of the US administration during the struggle against progressive movements in the 3rd world
Click to expand...
 
One other thing. Wasn't OBL's stated goal to trap the US in a long-term military struggle overseas, one that would do to the US what the war in Afghanistan did to the Soviet Union? Maybe the Saudi weird beard will have the last laugh after all.
 
dylans said:
Why? Because Pakistan's strategic defence against possible conflict with India is predicated on retreeat to Afghanistan and the use of the mountains of the Hindu Kush as a front line defence against an invading Indian army. From there, presumably to wage war to drive India out. This strategy has been a central tenet of Pakistani defence policy for decades, certainly since the Bangladesh war.
Click to expand...

Have you got any links where I can find more on this? Retreating to another country seems like an odd form of defence to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

PTK
Afghanistan: UK special forces 'killed 9 people in their beds'
Replies
24
Views
1K
Silas Loom
Silas Loom
kebabking
  • Poll
US 2028 election?
2
Replies
54
Views
1K
tim
tim
Bingoman
Iran Pakistan tensions
Replies
6
Views
483
yield
Y
Dystopiary
Three people killed, several injured after knife attack in Germany 23/08/24
Replies
14
Views
1K
Serge Forward
Serge Forward
N
Can US Supreme Court be reformed next time Democrats are in power?
Replies
8
Views
297
Yossarian
Yossarian
Back
Top Bottom