- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
POTUS Trump Begins Familiar Strategic Process – Pakistan Assigned Ownership of Afghanistan
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:00 am
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:00 am
Important read. I snipped some important excerpts and provided a TL/DR but click this link to read it all.
quote:
A very familiar pattern is emerging as President Trump turns his attention toward solving the ongoing issues within Afghanistan. A very uniquely Trumpian geopolitical strategy based on assigned ownership, economics and self-interest.
Last night as President Trump addressed the nation to discuss the ongoing conflict within Afghanistan he took the first step: Trump assigned strategic ownership to Pakistan:
quote:
“The next pillar of our new strategy is to change the approach in how to deal with Pakistan. We can no longer be silent about Pakistan’s safe havens for terrorist organizations, the Taliban, and other groups that pose a threat to the region and beyond.
“Pakistan has much to gain from partnering with our effort in Afghanistan. It has much to lose by continuing to harbor criminals and terrorists. In the past, Pakistan has been a valued partner. Our militaries have worked together against common enemies.
“The Pakistani people have suffered greatly from terrorism and extremism. We recognize those contributions and those sacrifices, but Pakistan has also sheltered the same organizations that try every single day to kill our people. We have been paying Pakistan billions and billions of dollars, at the same time they are housing the same terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change. And that will change immediately.
“No partnership can survive a country’s harboring of militants and terrorists who target U.S. service members and officials. It is time for Pakistan to demonstrate its commitment to civilization, order, and to peace.
If anything President Trump stated was not the brutal reality the placement of strategic ownership would not work. However, the entire international community knows that Pakistan, including their intelligence service ISI, has a great deal of hidden sympathy toward Islamic extremists within Afghanistan.
Never was that reality more stark than when the international community realized that 9/11 terrorist Osama Bin Laden held refuge inside Pakistan for almost a decade. Within the governing systems inside Pakistan there is a large contingent of Taliban sympathy. This reality has been the 800lb gorilla amid public discussions of international national security for several years.
Last night President Trump called it out, publicly.
This is where those who follow Trump closely will note a familiar pattern emerging.
The Taliban in Afghanistan are to Pakistan, as the DPRK is to China.quote:
Trump has made North Korea China's problem, and now he's made Afghanistan Pakistan's problem.
— Cari Kelemen ???? (@KelemenCari) August 22, 2017
Remember, the solution to the threat that is Kim Jong-un was to assign direct responsibility toward Beijing. In a similar approach, the solution toward eliminating the threat of extremist violence from the Taliban is to assign direct responsibility toward Pakistan. President Trump began that process last night.
However, those who have followed closely will note there’s additional references.
* When the threat is Sunni Extremism, the problem was/is the Muslim Brotherhood and the enabling of Qatar. Trump assigned responsibility for solving that issue to Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Cooperation Council. It is the GCC who are confronting Qatar, not the United States.
* When the threat is Syria’s chemical weapon, the problem was/is the Assad regime and ISIS. Trump assigned responsibility for solving that issue to Russia; Russia initially refused to solve it, so Trump bombed the shite out of Assad – Russia/Assad took ownership, the chemical weapon use stopped; further action was not needed by the United States.
* When the threat is DPRK’s nuclear weapons, the problem was/is Kim Jong-un and the enabling China. Trump assigned responsibility for solving that immediate threat to China. It was Beijing who told Kim Jong-un to stand down. Not the United States.
See the pattern? In each example President Trump assigns responsibility. However, the important element is the underlying ownership must be based entirely on truth. In each of the examples the truth was/is that Gulf States/Qatar, Assad/Russia, and China/Beijing were manipulating and enabling the problem behavior. By calling out that truth, each enabler was forced to take ownership and corrective action.
The same approach extends here with Afghanistan. However, the solution is not Pakistan eliminating the Taliban per se’; the solution lies in leveraging Pakistan to force the Taliban into negotiations with the legitimate Afghan government. Like the previous examples of Saudi Arabia and China, Trump has now assigned ownership of this objective to Pakistan.
The U.S. Military can/will engage the Taliban and Pakistan is on notice it better not act to enable the extremists.
quote:
So what can we anticipate as next steps? Well if the familiar pattern repeats:
Look for Pakistan to attempt to avoid ownership.
Look for President Trump and Secretary Tillerson to keep pulling Pakistan into each discussion point when referencing Afghanistan.
Look for President Trump tweets aimed at creating and affirming the U.S. expectations of Pakistan. Each time this happens the ownership gets stronger.
Look for our diplomatic team to talk about Pakistan helping to solve the problem.
Look for any affirming U.S. signals of warmth and friendship toward India.
These will all be indications of the ongoing strategy. So far, this economic geopolitical approach has worked well with Syria/Russia, Qatar/Saudi Arabia and DPRK/China. No reason not to be optimistic about Afghanistan (Taliban)/Pakistan.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:05 am to GumboPot
If you haven't noticed....it's been almost two decades. We can't make Pakistan do anything. It's awful policy
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:08 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
If you haven't noticed....it's been almost two decades. We can't make Pakistan do anything. It's awful policy
Two decades of Bush and Obama. TRUMP is not those guys.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:08 am to GumboPot
It's a brilliant strategy that working.
Unfortunately Trump won't get an ounce of credit for it.
Unfortunately Trump won't get an ounce of credit for it.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:09 am to GumboPot
Everything will be different this time!
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:09 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
We can't make Pakistan do anything.
Pakistan had never been truly pressured by us. We give them a good bit of money and support. If we start cozying up to India, their eternal rivals, they will start sweating. This has needed to happen for years.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:09 am to GumboPot
The shift to India and away from Pakistan is just about three decades too late. Not to mention that Hinduism and Christianity are culturally compatible in a way Islam and Christianity are not.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:09 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
If you haven't noticed....it's been almost two decades. We can't make Pakistan do anything. It's awful policy
We will never be able pull troops out of Afghanistan. Our troops are not only there to control a potential safe haven for terrorists they are there to provide a strategic military force against a nuclear Pakistan.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:09 am to GumboPot
You can't let these dumb fricks choose to vote on their leaders. We've seen this like 5 times - they will vote to elect radical Muslim clerics and things will be as bad as ever.
This is infuriating. We failed over 7 years with Bush. We failed over 8 years with Obama. Now you're saying that because Trump is using Bush's tactics again (with about 1/5th the military backing) it will somehow work? Insanity. Utter insanity.
THIS MONEY SHOULD BE GOING TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE. HEALTHCARE. THE WALL. ANYTHING BUT BLOWING UP MOSLEMS AND REBUILDING THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE SO THAT THEY CAN DESTROY IT AGAIN IN 30 YEARS.
This is infuriating. We failed over 7 years with Bush. We failed over 8 years with Obama. Now you're saying that because Trump is using Bush's tactics again (with about 1/5th the military backing) it will somehow work? Insanity. Utter insanity.
THIS MONEY SHOULD BE GOING TOWARDS INFRASTRUCTURE. HEALTHCARE. THE WALL. ANYTHING BUT BLOWING UP MOSLEMS AND REBUILDING THEIR INFRASTRUCTURE SO THAT THEY CAN DESTROY IT AGAIN IN 30 YEARS.
This post was edited on 8/22/17 at 8:11 am
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:10 am to GumboPot
All I read was "broken campaign promise"
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:10 am to GumboPot
Which is expensive and completely ineffective. Hence, terrible policy
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:13 am to Lsupimp
quote:
The shift to India and away from Pakistan is just about three decades too late.
Agree.
quote:
Not to mention that Hinduism and Christianity are culturally compatible in a way Islam and Christianity are not.
I alluded to this in another thread a couple of days ago. If the U.S. is going to import immigrants I would love to see more Indians. They practically instantly assimilate. Dunkin' Donuts everywhere.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:14 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
The Soviet Union couldn't even take over and indoctrinate these people. They were far more brutal than we'll ever be. We aren't willing to truly do what it takes over there, and never have been. GTFO of that entire area of the planet
This post was edited on 8/22/17 at 8:15 am
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:17 am to GumboPot
I can't be the only one on this board amused by the desperation of some of you to cling to the "Trump is anti-establishment" charade.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:19 am to SirWinston
quote:
Now you're saying that because Trump is using Bush's tactics again (with about 1/5th the military backing) it will somehow work? Insanity. Utter insanity.
It's not Bush's tactics. Read the article. Bush never applied economic pressure to Pakistan and certainly never twisted India's arm.
shite, I know it falls on deaf ears to say it's going to be different this time...so I won't. But we are in a quagmire. If we leave we will be right back in, in two years after terrorist hit the U.S. and the west.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:20 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
hey were far more brutal than we'll ever be.
Russia never applied economic pressure to the surrounding countries to help solve the problem.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:22 am to GumboPot
quote:Or, we could go with what campaign Trump said and GTFO of the middle east, secure our borders, and increase our already stringent vetting process letting these cavemen in our country.
If we leave we will be right back in, in two years after terrorist hit the U.S. and the west.
But nah, let's spend our money elsewhere
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:22 am to GumboPot
quote:shite like this is why nobody should take articles like this seriously. The "incredible business man, master negotiator, only hires the best!" myth is done. It's over.
Fortunately creating “leverage” is almost a uniquely Trumpian life-skill. Throughout Trump’s business career he’s been a master at leverage.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:23 am to JuiceTerry
quote:
Everything will be different this time!
It sure is different from an American leadership position. They have been dealing with a spineless regime here for way too long.
Posted on 8/22/17 at 8:26 am to GumboPot
Bookmark this post if you want. We will change nothing (0) about Pakistan's behavior. The biggest state sponsor of terrorism in the history of the world is our biggest ally in that horrible region, and we have done nothing.
4,000 troops cannot secure the border with a nuclear state with a capable military and intelligence infrastructure. And neither can frickin Tweets.
4,000 troops cannot secure the border with a nuclear state with a capable military and intelligence infrastructure. And neither can frickin Tweets.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News