[Marxism] Af-Pak is Obama?s War

[Michael Friedman]

I hope you will take the comrades' point to heart, that applying the
term -- itself a derogatory term for women drawn from a mysogynistic
view equating women and their genitalia -- as an epithet is degrading
to -- does violence to -- you and other women. But, I also agree that
it detracts from your main points, a) a condemnation of the Taliban,
and b) the assertion that they are a tool of U.S. destabilization of
Pakistan. On point a), my understanding is that there is no one
"Taliban". There are various organizations that fall under that
rubric, and, even more confusing, there is the U.S. government's use
of the term, which tends to lump together all Pushtun people and any
Pakistani nationalist or dissident that opposes U.S. control over
Pakistan. And this leads to the second point: the Taliban was indeed a
U.S. creation in its war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. But,
given the ensuing U.S. war against the Taliban, the simplest
explanation is not that the Taliban is a U.S. puppet, but that the
Taliban is a convenient excuse for the U.S. government to impose its
policies in Pakistan. Manan Ahmed pointed out in an interview with
Democracy Now on May 7 that the Pushtun-based Taliban was in no
position, either numerically or militarily to pose a threat to the
Pakistani state, and the U.S. knows this well. He underlined this by
pointing out how ridiculous it would be to imagine the 10,000 or so
Taliban fighters marching through the streets of Karachi, a city of,
what, 30 million people? Ahmed also pointed out that Washington
considers the MAIN threat to its interests in Pakistan to be the
massive pro-democracy movement, which had succeeded in restoring some
democracy after 12 years of military rule, and has continued its
trajectory by forcing the current government to reinstate the justices
fired and jailed under military rule. He warned that the U.S. might
seek the restoration of military rule.


> Message: 24
> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 22:36:12 +0000
> From: Muneeb Sikander <muneebsikander at hotmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [Marxism] Af-Pak is Obama?s War
> To: <marxism at lists.econ.utah.edu>
> Message-ID: <BLU139-W63E38DE17F7AFC2A30EA2D65A0 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1256"
>
>
> first of all its not a big an issue as every one is creating it.
>
> Back to the original topic.The US has always always been against a nuclear armed Pakistan they hung are president Zulfiqar Ali bhutto there is actually a qoute from Kissinger threatening Bhutto if he doesn't stop  the nuclear program he would be killed and exactly that happened there was a coup led by General Zia Ul Haq supported by the US.so it was a situtation similar to Peru,Cuba and Iran where the US would put in its dictators to make sure they went there way.Unforutnately for the US Zia was the clown for a short time but his authoratarian rule in Pakistan raised many questions and the main problem was still un resolved Zia continued the nuclear program and he too died in a plane crash "under mysterious circumstances".The problem is our nuclear assets are not in danger from the taliban but actually from the US.Pakistan is US'S main ally yet we are the ones who are called terrorists.More pakistanis have died then US citizens.Pakistan has always been against a nuclear armed Pakistan and will always be.A lot of ISI cheifs including Hamid Gul (ISI is the biggest intelligence service in Pakistan)Have openly said that the US wants to destabalize Pakistan.
>
>> Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 16:47:34 -0400
>> From: sam.b.ann.arbor at gmail.com
>> Subject: Re: [Marxism] Af-Pak is Obama?s War
>> To: muneebsikander at hotmail.com
>>
>> 2009/5/18 Muneeb Sikander <muneebsikander at hotmail.com>:
>> >
>> >  in my view the taliban is controled to date by the US it self.With the main aim of destablizing Pakistan.
>>
>> This seems like a far-fetched conspiracy theory. What would be the
>> USA's motivation in doing this?