Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A battle lost in the War on Terror
Jewsih world review ^ | September 27, 2006 | Tony Blankley

Posted on 09/27/2006 5:48:49 AM PDT by RDTF

With little reporting, and almost without media or governmental comment, the United States has suffered a substantial defeat in the war against radical Islam. Three weeks ago, Pakistan signed the terms of the Waziristan Accord with the northern region of its country called North Waziristan. It was, effectively, the terms of surrender by Pakistan to the Taliban and al Qaeda, which dominate North Waziristan. Pakistan has negotiated a separate peace the eternal danger to any wartime alliance.

With the exception of a superb article in the Weekly Standard by Daveed Gartenstein-Ross and the redoubtable Bill Roggio and a few blogs, such as Flopping Aces, The Fourth Rail and The Belmont Club (apologies to some other blogs I surely have missed) there has been little comment. This column is based largely on the reporting from those sources.

The event itself was reported by the major newspapers, but the abject nature of the surrender passed with almost no comment. But surrender it was.

According to intelligence sources cited by The Fourth Rail and other sources above, the Accord includes: (1) Pakistan to abandon its garrisons in Waziristan, (2) Pakistan military to not operate in or monitor actions in the region, (3) Pakistan to turn over weapons to Waziris, (4) Taliban and al Qaeda to set up a Mujahideen council to administer the region, (5) region to be called "The Islamic Emirate of Waziristan, (6) unknown but substantial amount of money paid by Pakistan to the Taliban, (7) al Qaeda and other jihadis to be allowed to stay in region, (8) 2,500 foreign fighters linked to al Qaeda and Taliban released by Pakistan from their prisons (this fact also confirmed by London's Daily Telegraph), and (9) Taliban to refrain from violence in Pakistan only; the agreement doesn't stipulate refraining from violence in Afghanistan.

(Excerpt) Read more at jewishworldreview.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: pakistan; waziristanaccord

1 posted on 09/27/2006 5:48:50 AM PDT by RDTF
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cindy; Knitting A Conundrum; Txsleuth

ping


2 posted on 09/27/2006 5:49:30 AM PDT by RDTF ("We love death. The US loves life. That is the big difference between us two.” Osama Bin laden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

might make it easier to conduct covert operations...


3 posted on 09/27/2006 5:50:19 AM PDT by thejokker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

This might be a good thing if Pakistan now no longer claims sovereignity of the new country.


4 posted on 09/27/2006 5:52:28 AM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (I would never belong to any club that would have someone like me as a member.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thejokker
might make it easier to conduct covert operations...

Forget covert, I'm thinking overt -- if Pakistan declares that this region is no longer a part of Pakistan, but an independent state, what's to stop the US or other allied force from invading?

5 posted on 09/27/2006 5:53:00 AM PDT by kevkrom (War is not about proportionality. Knitting is about proportionality. War is about winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

So, it seems like Pakistan, like Saudi Arabia before, has made a deal with the devil. We will pay you and concede to you and pay you if you do not attack us. The old feed everyone else to the alligators in hopes that the allegators eat you last. Sad. But at least they are concentrated now for an easy bombing run!


6 posted on 09/27/2006 5:58:52 AM PDT by Obadiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom

Exactly, I'm betting Rumsfeld is quite pleased over this.


7 posted on 09/27/2006 6:04:42 AM PDT by johnny7 (“And what's Fonzie like? Come on Yolanda... what's Fonzie like?!”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: thejokker
might make it easier to conduct covert operations...

I speculated something similar on Wretchard's Belmont Club: turning the area over to the locals and removing the Pakistani military gives the government some cover for not stopping our hot pursuit of terrorists from Afghanistan and our covert operations in the area. By abandoning responsibility, it makes the locals responsible for what happents to them: don't want to be attacked? Don't harbor Taliban terrorists.

8 posted on 09/27/2006 6:09:20 AM PDT by CatoRenasci (Ceterum Censeo Arabiam Esse Delendam -- Forsan et haec olim meminisse iuvabit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: johnny7

I agree. Let's isolate these murderers and then bomb the hell of them.


9 posted on 09/27/2006 6:09:46 AM PDT by Fishface (teach a man to fish...he eats for a lifetime.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Fishface

Think of it as a hunting preserve.


10 posted on 09/27/2006 6:11:50 AM PDT by RedStateRocker (Nuke Mecca, Deport all illegals, abolish the IRS, ATF and DEA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fishface
Good tagline...


11 posted on 09/27/2006 6:17:29 AM PDT by johnny7 (“And what's Fonzie like? Come on Yolanda... what's Fonzie like?!”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

Perfect. Since the Pakis have surrendered that region it opens a new front just in time for the elections. Since it will be the Taliban that we are attacking we get to kill terrorists and pound the Dems at the same time.


12 posted on 09/27/2006 6:21:12 AM PDT by MattinNJ (The West has been fighting the war on terror for 1300 years.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thejokker

simple math question....what is a crapload of terrorists in one location, divided by a single B-52 strike with 25 fully loaded aircraft equal?


13 posted on 09/27/2006 6:22:29 AM PDT by joe fonebone (Israel, taking out the world's trash since 1948.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

I don't see it that way. It was a chess move. Now Pakistan has even less of an excuse to keep us out of the Tribal areas. Frankly I think that is where the war on terror should go next. NO EXCUSES, NO APOLOGIES.


14 posted on 09/27/2006 6:23:39 AM PDT by steel_resolve (Do you know what a bigot is? Someone winning an argument with a liberal.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thejokker

Exactly. Makes it easy to drop a Daisy Cutter!


15 posted on 09/27/2006 6:23:55 AM PDT by angcat ("IF YOU DON'T STAND BEHIND OUR TROOPS, PLEASE, FEEL FREE TO STAND IN FRONT OF THEM !")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve

Agreed


16 posted on 09/27/2006 6:48:35 AM PDT by RDTF ("We love death. The US loves life. That is the big difference between us two.” Osama Bin laden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

Waziristan?............Think Spock said that was in what system?.....LOL....Not part of the civilized world lately.


17 posted on 09/27/2006 6:52:58 AM PDT by litehaus (A memory tooooo long)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joe fonebone
simple math question....what is a crapload of terrorists in one location, divided by a single B-52 strike with 25 fully loaded aircraft equal?

One golden opportunity.

18 posted on 09/27/2006 7:01:54 AM PDT by kevkrom (War is not about proportionality. Knitting is about proportionality. War is about winning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RDTF

The US did not loose that battle, Pakistan did. It is a mistake to think that the United States is responsible to win the war with terrorists globaly. Though it is understandable as the United States is about the only country not surrendering in mass. Each country is responsible for its own survival, and Pakistan will pay a very heavy price for its surrender.

Besides, the US is mainly in Pakistan to keep its thumb on the "Islamic Bomb". If Pakistan wants to chop of its arm and hand it to terrorists, that is their problem. As long as the part we control has the bombs, suicide is ok.


19 posted on 09/27/2006 7:22:17 AM PDT by American in Israel (A wise man's heart directs him to the right, but the foolish mans heart directs him toward the left.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kevkrom

There is that bit of wiggle room...but I don't know if it's going to work...Don't know how Pak would react...


20 posted on 09/27/2006 9:35:57 AM PDT by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: All
Pakistan is really 4 or 5 countries that have been held together by military intimidation and Islamic ideology / theology. There is a large Shia minority that is sympathetic to Iran (just as in Afghanistan).

Think about this, the military is walking away from this region because it cost in terms of politics is too high. This is the same military that has sponsored a low intensity conflict in Kashmir against a powerful neighbor.

Pakistan will eventually turn on us, when it does, it is going to be very dangerous for the US and India. Do not forget the Red Chinese are allied with Pakistan and are trying to create closer ties with Iran.

A new power realignment is happening in South Asia.
21 posted on 09/27/2006 3:25:32 PM PDT by fatez (Euthanasia - GenX's retirement plan for the boomers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: fatez

Unfortunately many folks on FR can't seem to grapple with the reality you talk about & consider that an illegitimate Dictator's autobiography will give an authentic description of Pakistan & it's future.The Punjabi dominated army is not the solution to Pakistan's problems-it is THE PROBLEM.


22 posted on 09/28/2006 5:35:51 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RDTF
I am really surprised by the lack of postings on this article.

It is scary to think that this is happening and the Maim Stream Press is asleep at the wheel.

I do not trust President Musharraf simply because...well... he is Muslim heading up some of the most radical people on the face of this earth.

I am waiting for some smart individual to tell how I am wrong?

I think before it is all said and done and history is written, that this will be one of President Bush's major failings, trusting Muslims is never a good idea.

I pray for our president but now is not the time to play both sides of the street with the religion of PIECE.
23 posted on 10/02/2006 9:28:29 PM PDT by OKIEDOC (Kalifornia now a certified socialist state reporting to Mexico City for further instructions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OKIEDOC

I am surprised too at the lack of interest


24 posted on 10/03/2006 6:41:46 PM PDT by RDTF (Iraq: terrorist flypaper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: RDTF
Could it be that the Democrat Dirty Tricks Squad has finally driven the conservative moderate to the sidelines for the coming election.

Tell a big lie long enough and uninformed voters will buy into the scam.

If the Democrats do take back both houses it will be a sad day for all those who thought they would get a better government.
25 posted on 10/03/2006 9:57:22 PM PDT by OKIEDOC (Kalifornia now a certified socialist state reporting to Mexico City for further instructions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson