Role of India in the Anti-terror campaign

[shobhit 10]

It seems that that a nation with over 50 years of counter-insurgency and anti-terrorist experience has not been involved in current operations in Afghanistan. Is this a because of reluctance of the Indian government or because the NATO nations have sidelined India due to it's not too friendly relations with Pakistan (a nation which is still supported by the US) is not clear but don't you think that India's involvement may help speed up the dismantling of the Al Qaida-Taliban nexus?

Advantages

1. Extensive experience in counter-terrorist operations against Pakistan trained militants, foreign insurgents from Chechnya, Afghanistan, etc.

2.Intelligence sources and contacts

3. Well trained military, veterans of COIN operations with experience in operating in terrain similar and in many ways harsher than that of Afghanistan

SO what are your opinions on India's involvment? Can you think of better ways to combat terrorism in Afghanistan?

[maturin 12]

If Pakistan isn't happy about the state of affairs in Afghanistan, there is never going to be any peace. So yes, that's the primary factor deciding India's involvement. Counter-terrorism is one thing, but counter-terrorism translating to peacetime influence is another.

It's sort of superfluous to say that Pakistan is supported by the U.S. when India is favored to much more. They have a superpower-endorsed nuclear arsenal now, while the U.S. is always trying to negotiate how Pakistan's weapons would be seized and secured by U.S. specialists in case of a coup.

[vilas 473]

why put another nation into war , killing, victims, suffering , costs ???

combat terrorism , haha, maybe leave people live in their land they way they want instead of going everywhere in the world to police them , every culture has its tradition, world cannot be one McDonald CocaCola Madonna/BritneySpears popmusic, Hollywood "shoot and kill" movies , Tom and Jerry violent cartoons and gangsta-rap etc.

if people wanna live in peace, dont push them for another dirty war for oil

NWO rich greed men wanna rule whole globe, thats all, thats why we have some terrorism acts and wars instead of living in peace and in social safety

Edited November 17, 2010 by vilas

[HyperU2 11]

If we wanted to rule the globe we already would.

[4 IN 1 0]

More like trying hard and failing for the last 60 years:p

Edited November 17, 2010 by 4 IN 1

[orson 0]

If we wanted to rule the globe we already would.

What "we" is that then ?

[Zipper5 74]

I'll take this opportunity to stop the likely derailing of this thread that's emerging. Please stay on topic.

[kyfohatl 10]

What "we" is that then ?

I think he's talking about CODEMASTERS...

why put another nation into war , killing, victims, suffering , costs ???

Completely agreed. Why would India want to participate? What benefit would it bring them? Why would they spend so much money for a war that doesn't even concern them anyway (I don't think the Taliban would pose a threat to India, though I'm happy to be proven wrong), when they could instead spend the money on some of poor people in the rural areas of their own land?

Besides, they already have their own problems with pakistan. According to an Indian friend of mine, the Indian-Pakistani borders aren't as peaceful as I thought they were (though I'm not sure which militia groups are fighting over there and what their purpose is). Though I guess the Indian army might be happy to move in to some of the Pakistani territory and "help the Pakistani government stabilize against possible terrorist threat" :rolleyes:

[vilas 473]

Poland in this war on terror only lost, lots of money, money spent on war, money spent on US equipment and spare parts

this war for oil is only US money profit - first profit is they take oil, second they push other countries governments to buy their equipment (Poland get for nothing ex-Bundeswehr M113, what is effect ? our workers who could produce our own equipment gone unemployed in factory that was producing our APC/tanks, for those 230 M113 we must take spare parts from USA, just like some old helicopters etc. )

only bigger crisis and from my taxes money are wasted for US, not for my own civil needs in my country

i don't want work for my government to spend money for USA

now they rise taxes in Poland and plan to put to unemployment some people in civil-service (prime minister plans fire 10% of clerks , they say about crisis and lack of money for retired people etc.) cause "not enough money" , while army wastes a lot of money for stupid unjust war (few years is probably billion (10^9) dollar lost , for poor country where men earn 400-500 euro it is horrible money )

buying F16, buing a lot of stuff only because of this war :/

do India also must take cost ? what for ? for someone who has 6 liter engine pickup, cause cannot ride Daewoo Tico or small Citroen ??

when they could instead spend the money on some of poor people in the rural areas of their own land?

i seen TV broadcast about India , people living on the street, people begging for food, something unimaginable

spending money on war when society need money is last thing to do

war with terrorism cannot be won, until in the world there is poverty, big inequality, big economical problems, religions (not important Muslim or Jewish in this region, where everyone tries to push his "god" above another "god" ) - there will be always war

the only thing west world must do is defend against "not war" immigration , where "without shot" problems appear like in France (near big towns)

you want win such war until from one side you allow people with very religious beliefs to live here and from other side you push your army (taxes) there

cause next war we will have in Europe when someone will told us to hide womens' face in 50 years , like French people have problems now

you want win war when you allow "god" to exist, just like in Iraq now they have problems with religious violence

problem is not in Taliban, it is a matter of mixing cultures , not keeping away from other , but mixing by force (begun in colonialism)

Edited November 18, 2010 by vilas

[ray243 11]

They just dealt with Sri Lanka, and they have to go to Afghanistan?

[Big Mac 19]

Vilas is funny when he talks about things he doesn't know squat about..

[shobhit 10]

If Pakistan isn't happy about the state of affairs in Afghanistan, there is never going to be any peace. So yes, that's the primary factor deciding India's involvement. Counter-terrorism is one thing, but counter-terrorism translating to peacetime influence is another.

It's sort of superfluous to say that Pakistan is supported by the U.S. when India is favored to much more. They have a superpower-endorsed nuclear arsenal now, while the U.S. is always trying to negotiate how Pakistan's weapons would be seized and secured by U.S. specialists in case of a coup.

If such is the case why doesnt the US pressure Pakistan into dismantling terror training camps across the LOC in the north? why does it not insert its forces into pakistan to take more DA against the Terror networks as Pakistan apparently cannot (willnot) handle it..I mean both Pak and US have a long hstory of cooperation then why does not the US get more directly involved in Pak?

Coup? The situation is Pakistan is perfect for the Military junta to maintain control. The pakistani Military is the administrative backbone over there and is also the largest Political party. They have democratic governance as a tool to keep the public and the world complacent "look nice stable democracy!" its a brilliant Maskirovka on their part. Its safe to say that the only organisation able to undertake a coup is actually pretty happy with the way things are.

---------- Post added at 09:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:04 PM ----------

More like trying hard and failing for the last 60 years:p

Failing? how is that may I ask. The infitration routes in the North have been stemmed, the insurgent parties in the NE are conducting ceasefires and peace talks thanks to Indian military pressure, and the successful tackling of maoist threats in the centre although with initial failure (some HUGE ones)

but all in all it has been a succesful campaign. So I would like you to elaborate on your point

---------- Post added at 09:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:10 PM ----------

I think he's talking about CODEMASTERS...

Completely agreed. Why would India want to participate? What benefit would it bring them? Why would they spend so much money for a war that doesn't even concern them anyway (I don't think the Taliban would pose a threat to India, though I'm happy to be proven wrong), when they could instead spend the money on some of poor people in the rural areas of their own land?

Besides, they already have their own problems with pakistan. According to an Indian friend of mine, the Indian-Pakistani borders aren't as peaceful as I thought they were (though I'm not sure which militia groups are fighting over there and what their purpose is). Though I guess the Indian army might be happy to move in to some of the Pakistani territory and "help the Pakistani government stabilize against possible terrorist threat" :rolleyes:

The benefits would be enormous! A concentrated effort by both India and the US would likely destroy the terror nexus within pakistan within 3 years! imagine the costs saved by us (India) when we can pull away our paramilitary and army forces from stop-gap duties on the border...we would save millions in maintainence funds!! these very funds could be diverted to rural development programs and other more important areas. The amount of manpower freed from CI ops and the money saved would be immeasurable in the future. So spending some money now to eradicate extremism would save millions, possible billions every nation involved! the US could actually invest more in the development of afghanistan with the savings. As for "helping" out our neighbours (pak) well, we'd love to!

---------- Post added at 09:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:18 PM ----------

They just dealt with Sri Lanka, and they have to go to Afghanistan?

Sri Lanka was a botched operation by any standards..something akin to India's own Somalia, but on a larger scale. That was just ANOTHER foreign country policing gone wrong. The events in Sri Lanka would not have had a direct impact on the internal security of India. But the recent spate of events do have an impact on our National security, so in this case if helping rebuild afghanistan and eradicating extremist presence there helps in India then why not?

---------- Post added at 09:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:25 PM ----------

@ Vilas

Dude, I agree with your opinions on the US's "foreign policing" policy and that is probably the biggest reasons why they draw a lot of flak. They should mind their own business but in a uni-polar world with the US as the current super-power it has no other option but intervene in foreign matters where ASKED to. India did not just land in Sri Lanka it was asked by the locally elected government to intervene. But the paper thin reasons that the US government gave to invade Iraq and then storm into Afghanistan really destroys their credibilty in the world's eyes. You have the biggest gun so show some restraint. All this just leads me to belive that US is transforming into The EMPIRE from the peaceful REPUBLIC a la STAR WARS ;)

Second, I am slightly offended by your views of India. Sure we have poverty here, sure there are slums but it does not portray the whole of India. we have a come a long way in the past 60 years (we were independent of British rule 60 yrs ago). I do not deny the existence of social problems in India but I also would not like everyone to think that it's as bad as the media portrays it to be. I have seen numerous net videos and Tv programs showcasing obese, ignorant Americans...but do I base my opinions of Americans on these portrayals? Absolutely not! No country is almost completely composed of Intelligent athletic persons!

As for wasting money refer to my posts above to see why it would be a cost effective operation in the long run..also the Indian involvement would be limited to Special forces operations and intelligence operations...not a full blown conventional war!

[Big Mac 19]

All this just leads me to belive that US is transforming into The EMPIRE from the peaceful REPUBLIC a la STAR WARS

Britain did the same thing when they were a superpower; I don't see any reason why the US shouldn't have it's time to shine. It's human nature for the biggest nations to have their own empire and I'm all for it. It's better than a bunch of 3rd world hell holes who are loose cannons and butcher their own people..

With that being said I did not agree with Iraq I thought it was a fool's move and unlike most Americans I was saying that when the tanks were crossing the border into Iraq in march of 03. Saddam was a bad man yes, he killed his own people yes, but invading Iraq opened the door to AQ and it put the US on a two front war and any one who has studied history knows that you don't fight a two front war unless you have to.

Two thirds of Africa could benefit greatly from being under control of a more sane government or just being under control by another country's government altogether. You can deny human history and how empires are formed all you want but the fact of the matter is the world could use another empire. I get sick and tired of countries butchering their people for no good reason and the US and europe just standing by and the UN doing next to nothing because they're afraid of being seen as imperialists. In Liberia they were pleading for the US to intervene to stop the blood shed and what did the US do? Send in a USMC FAST team and a team of SEALs to secure the US Embassy. They did next to nothing for the people of Liberia and we created that nation. I personally believe we should have invaded Liberia and ousted Charles Taylor and left the UN in NYC..

Edited November 19, 2010 by Big Mac

[katipo66 94]

It's human nature for the biggest nations to have their own empire and I'm all for it.

Its also human nature to resist...

[HyperU2 11]

Its also human nature to resist...

And to sit online and bitch while doing nothing.

[shobhit 10]

Britain did the same thing when they were a superpower; I don't see any reason why the US shouldn't have it's time to shine. It's human nature for the biggest nations to have their own empire and I'm all for it. It's better than a bunch of 3rd world hell holes who are loose cannons and butcher their own people..

With that being said I did not agree with Iraq I thought it was a fool's move and unlike most Americans I was saying that when the tanks were crossing the border into Iraq in march of 03. Saddam was a bad man yes, he killed his own people yes, but invading Iraq opened the door to AQ and it put the US on a two front war and any one who has studied history knows that you don't fight a two front war unless you have to.

Two thirds of Africa could benefit greatly from being under control of a more sane government or just being under control by another country's government altogether. You can deny human history and how empires are formed all you want but the fact of the matter is the world could use another empire. I get sick and tired of countries butchering their people for no good reason and the US and europe just standing by and the UN doing next to nothing because they're afraid of being seen as imperialists. In Liberia they were pleading for the US to intervene to stop the blood shed and what did the US do? Send in a USMC FAST team and a team of SEALs to secure the US Embassy. They did next to nothing for the people of Liberia and we created that nation. I personally believe we should have invaded Liberia and ousted Charles Taylor and left the UN in NYC..

You know when Im debating with friends and family and when the topic comes to America almost everyone starts condemning the US for it aggressive expansionist foreign policy calling it Imperialism. I ALWAYS defend the US by saying that what if India was a superpower..or China..or Russia you think they would behave any different? it is a country's prerogative to maintain supremacy but to do it within certain parameters respecting sovereign powers and human rights. It comes off hypocritical and hollow when Barrack Obama talks about Freedom, Peace and chocolate unicorns while there are US troops in Iraq, I do not blame the US in trying to extend its geopolitical reach through strategic presence in the mid-east. It's looking out for itself. But let it be known that empire building has not been viewed with kindness. It is natural for the US to flex it's Muscles but a really strong Nation interested in "world peace" (CHEESE BOMB!) would show constraint and more responsibility when it comes to deploying its forces. I believe that the US has been callous in the way it has approached foreign conflicts. I am inclined to believe They did not send troops to Liberia mostly because that geographical are was of no strategic concern to them. If the US really wants to be a world player then it should HELP Pakistan back to it's feet...engage in military and diplomatic talks with the BRIC countries to create a Nexus of stable and powerful countries instead of invading whatevers next on their 'To-Invade' list ;)

But let us get back to the topic..How do you see Indo-US (if any) inovolvement in the anti-terror campaign 2 years down the line?

---------- Post added at 05:05 AM ---------- Previous post was at 05:01 AM ----------

And to sit online and bitch while doing nothing.

Which is precisely what you are doing. Either counter his point with a valid argument or stop posting inflammatory remarks, please. Thanks

[vilas 473]

I don't see any reason why the US shouldn't have it's time to shine. It's human nature for the biggest nations to have their own empire and I'm all for it.

and thats why you had 9/11

cause people hate when someone wants to rule them, people love freedom, not "McFreedom under stars flag"

each has his own freedom

when someone tries to rule others - he has revenge

simple :]

US played great role in WW2, but after cold war it lost "freedom moral rule" , cause if you say about :

It's better than a bunch of 3rd world hell holes who are loose cannons and butcher their own people..

than first to slaughter should be rich greed businesmen who build their palaces on people's suffering (including big multinational concerns, whole NWO)

if America want to be just police, let they invade banks owners, big chemical concerns etc.

but it seems that US behave like someone who not understand 3-rd Newton rule - every action causes reaction

i looked through topics here, even in 2005 , many topics "why people hate America"

answers were : many military actions, foreign politics

and still questions remains , like not aswered

why than put India to suffering, cost, big money spend

Poland, my country, was put into those 2 wars in mid-east, only money lost, crisis, big money spend and now they say that 10% of clercs must be fired because they have crisis, now they say i will not have bigger salary in 3-5 years period cause there want be only cuts in public service

India is huge country, but for them such intervention would be also money cost and dealing together with not friendly Pakistan...

btw. again :

It's better than a bunch of 3rd world hell holes who are loose cannons and butcher their own people..

when in Saudi Arabia someone stones woman to death it is okay cause they buy Bradley, F16, M113

when in Iran someone stones woman to death it becomes evil ? why ? all Arabic countries behave almost the same way, so one is evil, other is okay , although all behave in similar way when it comes to human rights (no matter if i am for death penalty or not)

America is hipocritical , you say it is funny when i talk and i know nothing, well

i am public servant, ex police, MSc education degree, i speak 2 foreign languages, i watch and read independent news , not only "How they dance, what actor sleeps with what actress MTV news"

do you think i know nothing when i talk about politics ? maybe you not know about CIA foreign actions durring cold war , Latin America people suffering because of some US companies that make business there when socialists elected in free elections wanted quit it ?

It's better than a bunch of 3rd world hell holes who are loose cannons and butcher their own people..

when there is slaughter in country A, B or C , but this country has no OIL , will you send US soldiers to defend freedom of those people ?

or only where there is OIL and MONEY

will you send soldiers to shoot greed owner which treats people like slave in some countries ? if you would than okay, than you are freedom-human-rights-defender

-----------

Second, I am slightly offended by your views of India.

i am sorry, but that is what i see in TV, i see people on the streets , clanes , "unthouchables" , maybe TV cheats using old material from 70s ?

sorry, but i can only build my view on pictures i see

it is like my country

when you are in big city center, you see Lexus, Porshe Caynne, newest Volvo, highrising building

when you will enter this building you will see personel that must work 12 hours for 300 Euro for month (law codex say 8 hours), while boss has milion Euro for year

when you will go further from that building you will see people who have no money for goods, clothes, cause must pay for flat, you will see people who hire ROOM (not flat) to live and work, cause in their city there is no work, cause all was privatised and deleted after "communism fall"

Poland in folders look like beauty nature country with some old castles and some business buildings, from YT you see that we drink a lot, but untill you not live here, you not know

so , all view is build on what eyes see

India is so far, so i can only see it in TV, if it is false view, sorry

i know that India has great culture , architecture, ancient temples, nice and polite people who are not arrogant but are sensitive, people who respect soul etc.

but when i hear about war - i think about "money spent not on hospitals"

cause i think that wars should remain in games as virtual fun after day of boring work in office, from real it should be vanished

cause every war = big money lost , that could be spent in good way (example better hospitals, better social care, less work hours and more enjoy life - listening to music, sex, playing sport, reading books, reading novels, watching films in free time, dancing, whatever)

i like military technology, but i always hated army activity

there is a joke :

what is medicine ? it is human activity opposite to war

it is hard to translate to English, it is from serie about "stupidity of army jokes"

as :

"what is POODLE" ?

"it is reservoir of low strategic meaning, for crossing it land forces do not need special equipment "

so this medicine was one of this serie "całokształt działań zmierzających do eliminacji skutków działania broni" (whole activity which meaning is to vanish effect of using armament)

what is cost of jet fighter and some rockets ? probably hospital can be built of those money

in Poland some hospitals were defunct/liquidated cause they had debts for example 1 milion dollars

what is 1 milion ? it is 5% cost of one F16

people have no care in city A or B or C, cause of 5% of stupid F16

thats why "not join war" is for me best answer, cause 5% of single F16 can help many many people

what is cost of cancer-treatment in hospital ? how many people cannot get medicines cause country has no budget for say 20 000 USD ? army would lost 20 000 USD in one shot of missle , or even more, how much cost missle for Bradley (TOW-2/3) ?

mother of my friend died cause they had no money for medicals , 20 000 USD for year to heal cancer

when man is young , he not understand it

when i was young (18-24) i also thought about enlist, army, whatever , country etc.

now i know it was naive, cause politicians use army to make profits, not to :

bunch of 3rd world hell holes who are loose cannons and butcher their own people

it is bulshit, it is lie of politicians, it is lie of rulers , who have companies and big money and want individuals to die for their money and profits and hunger for power

and result of politicians hunger for power and big business hunger for money is one - human suffering and tears of mothers who lost child or husband, tears of sons and daughters who lost father in whatever-named country

while politicians, big company owners float in dollars

to destroy Taliban no cannons, but education is needed , to show them better life

until they have poor life - they die for "god"

but of course making others people life will downgrade profits of big owners and so called NWO

of course army is needed in case if "anyone want to visit us without flowers" , but joining operation that cannot be won (cause maybe they are not Talib freaks , but people who joined seeing foreign troops on own ground, i also would join if foreign soldier was on my home land, it is natural reaction, that you fight against foreign activity on your own land where you were born )

the more foreign soldiers on foreign territory - the bigger resistance, 3-rd Newton rule again

the real enemy and cause - are our "elites" and their hunger for money, power (no matter, west world and people with private jets, Arabic countries, African slaughter Hutu and Tutsi, always )

and of course we must defend our own house, but not joining invading other man house

Talibs will be destroyed when local people will see that no-war life is more fun and would go more life-fun activity and when their afraid of being invaded will not be serious for them

Edited November 19, 2010 by vilas

[HyperU2 11]

Which is precisely what you are doing. Either counter his point with a valid argument or stop posting inflammatory remarks, please. Thanks

I have no desire to change anything except a few blood pressures.

[shobhit 10]

@Vilas

I respect and also understand your views on India's non-involvement in the ongoing conflict and also your criticism of the hypocrisy of US foreign policy but sometimes measured violence is needed to achieve a higher goal, in this case regional stability and development. There were several projects in Afghanistan during the Taliban reign to introduce education apart from the usual quranic studies but this was brutally repressed by the Talibs, which is ironic considering that Taliban literally means "students". The thing is that an ideology or beliefs is nigh impossible to eradicate. The Taliban can only be defeated through constant military effort and by cutting off their recruitment pool through development of Afghanistan. Like I said the monetary gains in the long term if regional stability was to be achieved in Af-Pak for all countries involved is tremendous!

Sometimes you just have to take action. Now getting back on topic. Dont you think that India's involvement would hasten things and lead to the end of the conflict sooner and if so dont you think that it's worth it?

[katipo66 94]

And to sit online and bitch while doing nothing.

and to be a bitch online and say nothing :p

[shobhit 10]

@HyperU2

So you have no views regarding the topic? absolutely no opinions? come on lets hear em. You could argue against my points and that would probably..maybe..raise my Blood pressure a lil ;)

---------- Post added at 10:24 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:20 AM ----------

and to be a bitch online and say nothing :p

What do you think of India's involvement? and please refrain from getting into a dirt slinging match with Hyper. I'd like your opinions on the thread topic

[vilas 473]

shobhit - yes, i said that

i believe than war is good when has moral, ethical, just revenge, freedom cause

when someone hurt my family, i will make revenge and it is okay,

but when i had stolen something from someone 10 years ago and few years ago he punched me in face, i cannot now be angry on him, cause he had his right,

but i dont see it in this here, cause i see it more like fighting resistance caused by our "white man" (althought west world and east europe, Slavic culture was different, century ago we had different goals in past , they had profits , we had religion) previous activity (we had crusades to bring our Christ, we had colonialism , now we want oil etc.)

regarding Talibs rules - why they appeared in power ? why ex not-religious government failed? why ? maybe someone helped to destroy not-religious government and help Talibs to get to power ???

i don't look at tree only, i look at roots

something had begun in the past before something happened later, right ?

there is general problem in "profits life attitude" which causes problems between Arabic and Jewish culture in Middle East

for one culture "borrow money for percent" is bad and not moral , for another it is good interest activity

there will always be problems , thats why i said that biggest enemies are our own greed elites

probably many countries could live in harmony, if not some rich greed fat pigs with jewelery lock in water closet made of gold

Edited November 19, 2010 by vilas

[HyperU2 11]

I can't complain about anyone wanting to join us, but I'd worry that India's motives might be too heavy handed against Pakistan as a whole.

I just enjoy getting Vilas worked up. :p

PS having dealt with India for tech support, I can only imagine calling for air or arty. :)

[shobhit 10]

shobhit - yes, i said that

i believe than war is good when has moral, ethical, just revenge, freedom cause

when someone hurt my family, i will make revenge and it is okay,

but when i had stolen something from someone 10 years ago and few years ago he punched me in face, i cannot now be angry on him, cause he had his right,

but i dont see it in this here, cause i see it more like fighting resistance caused by our "white man" (althought west world and east europe, Slavic culture was different, century ago we had different goals in past , they had profits , we had religion) previous activity (we had crusades to bring our Christ, we had colonialism , now we want oil etc.)

regarding Talibs rules - why they appeared in power ? why ex not-religious government failed? why ? maybe someone helped to destroy not-religious government and help Talibs to get to power ???

i don't look at tree only, i look at roots

something had begun in the past before something happened later, right ?

The thing is that the terror networks in Af-Pak have a tremendous effect on India and we have every reason imaginable to Nuke everything west of us! the sheer loss of human lives due to terrorist activity is horrendous. Now I am not talking about the AMERICAN campaign, I beleive that that US intelligence has made up the whole Al-Qaeda thing to use as a scapegoat, a reason to plant boots on ground in Afghanistan just like they did in Iraq. Steve Coll's book "ghost wars" has shed light on how the US let go Osama B. Laden on several occasions despite of him being implicated in anti US activites. The evidence of sabotage (explosive demolition of the towers) during 9/11 further compunds the theory that the US just needed a foreign attack to raise Public opinion and invade Afghanistan. But in this case there have been legitimate terror attacks on Indian soil so dont you think it is justified?

[VanhA-ICON 11]

regarding Talibs rules - why they appeared in power ? why ex not-religious government failed? why ? maybe someone helped to destroy not-religious government and help Talibs to get to power ???

i don't look at tree only, i look at roots

something had begun in the past before something happened later, right ?

Maybe this will shed some light:

http://www.terrorismanalysts.com/pt/index.php?option=com_rokzine&view=article&id=38

offtopic:

I was in Krakow at my friends wedding. Not sure about the economy/drinking but I saw people who enjoyed life very much.Very refreshing visit.