Whoa: More than a dozen Taliban leaders seized by Pakistan intel
posted at 10:30 pm on February 18, 2010 by Allahpundit
Strange things are afoot at the Circle K.
The arrests of more than a dozen Taliban leaders, including known associates of Osama bin Laden, came as militants fought to keep a grip on their southern stronghold of Marjah…
Some of those apprehended included key figures in the Afghan insurgency, while others are members of militant groups that operate just across the border in Pakistan.
Among those arrested were Ameer Muawiya, a bin Laden associate who was in charge of foreign al-Qaida militants in Pakistan’s border areas, and Akhunzada Popalzai, also known as Mohammad Younis, a one-time Taliban shadow governor in Zabul province and former police chief in Kabul, according to Mullah Mamamood, a tribal leader in Ghazni province.
Others captured in Karachi included Hamza, a former Afghan army commander in Helmand province during Taliban rule, and Abu Riyad al Zarqawi, a liaison with Chechen and Tajik militants in Pakistan’s border area, Pakistani officials said.
Also among the captured: Mullah Mir Mohammed, the second Taliban “shadow governor” to be pinched by Pakistan in the past few weeks. A senior U.S. official told the Times that Mohammed’s capture was unrelated to the capture of Mullah Baradar, the Taliban’s number two, and he’s probably telling the truth. According to a new AP report, Baradar has tons of info about the Taliban but has provided “limited information” thus far.
Or has he?
Senior government officials claimed both Mullah Baradar and those arrested with him were giving information they believed would lead to others in the Taliban’s new Karachi and Sindh headquarters. They are understood to be in the custody of the country’s ISI intelligence agency in the city.
“We’re now confident we can bust the whole network they’ve established in Karachi and Sindh. We’re expecting some more arrests in the days to come,” a senior military official told The Daily Telegraph.
Another AP report claims Baradar has provided “useful” information. The $64,000 question remains why Pakistan is suddenly so intent in rolling these guys up. I’ve been speculating about sticks and carrots that Obama might have used to get them to cooperate, but maybe neither are the case. Maybe instead Pakistan feared that the Taliban was about to go rogue by striking a peace deal with Karzai that would have reduced Islamabad’s influence inside the country to an unacceptable degree. (Baradar is reputed to be open to negotiations.) For more on that possibility, I recommend J.E. Dyer’s post this morning in the Greenroom. If his/her theory is correct, we’ve now reached a surreal moment in which Pakistan is pursuing the Taliban for possibly being too friendly to the United States. More from CSM:
Details are emerging that Pakistan feared losing influence within peace overtures between the United States and the Afghan Taliban. It may have nabbed Baradar so it would control the strongest potential peace negotiator, while currying US favor with its multiple arrests. But experts on the Taliban are divided over whether the country’s recent intervention has moved Islamabad to the center of peace talks – or scuttled them entirely.
“There were reports that Mullah Baradar had been in covert contact with the Americans, and that may not have gone down well with certain people in Pakistan,” says Rustam Shah Mohmand, a former Pakistani ambassador to Afghanistan now based in Peshawar. “The Taliban’s trust of the Pakistani government is now absolutely finished [and] the prospects for any negotiations are now completely dim.”…
But Mohmand doubts such fear could be used at this point by Pakistan to broker a peace deal. Trust is gone, and few potential peace partners of Baradar’s stature remain within the Taliban. While some analysts have suggested Baradar could be turned – or had possibly agreed to be captured so he could broker talks – Mohmand says he’s damaged goods.
Exit question: If this is all a ploy by Pakistan to restore its leverage over the Taliban when negotiating with Karzai, why start rounding up lower level Al Qaeda capos? Why not just go get Mullah Omar and Bin Laden and Zawahiri and lean on them?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
It is about time to get serious and get the job done.
indypat on February 18, 2010 at 10:33 PM
Joetox’s take:
More than a dozen Taliban leaders seized by Obama strategy
jgapinoy on February 18, 2010 at 10:34 PM
Is it just me, or are all of these bas^@#*$ crazy?
HAnthonyWayne on February 18, 2010 at 10:36 PM
The cynic in me wonders if much of our stimulus money is going directly into The Central bank of Karachi to pay for the one thing Obama can claim a success.
katy on February 18, 2010 at 10:36 PM
Because a Billion Dollars a head after a while adds up to some real money…
Seven Percent Solution on February 18, 2010 at 10:37 PM
Phones….phones….every where phones.
Blocking out the ether, blocking out my mind
Do this…don’t do that…
don’t answer that phone.
Skandia Recluse on February 18, 2010 at 10:38 PM
So what is this about an Irish tourist group headed to Karachi?
WashJeff on February 18, 2010 at 10:41 PM
Ding Ding Ding! Winner!
I think you may be on to something.
portlandon on February 18, 2010 at 10:41 PM
P.S. The Pakistan intel created the Taliban in the first place…
… They know who is expendable, and who is not to satisfy their needs.
We are being played like the chumps they take us for.
Just read our “Rules of Engagement” in this “war”…
Seven Percent Solution on February 18, 2010 at 10:42 PM
good, or they are safer in Pakistan’s hands rather then getting killed by a drone.
rob verdi on February 18, 2010 at 10:42 PM
If that will lead up to getting MBL head on a pike (well after they dig it out from the rocks in Tora Bora) I am willing to stand out in the cold and clap for Obama at his victory parade.
talking_mouse on February 18, 2010 at 10:42 PM
So I assume Pakistan is holding these guys. All these recent pick-ups should be in GITMO.
WashJeff on February 18, 2010 at 10:44 PM
Pakistan is rolling them up because they have been turning on them and bombing their cities. the Taliban was useful, until it became a danger. Stupid terrorists, they should realize they have no friends.
Good.
archer52 on February 18, 2010 at 10:44 PM
Wait a tic,wasn’t Obama friends with a Packistani in
the Breitbart video,and,I thought Hopey wanted to bomb
Puck-ee-Stan!!
Jus sayin!!
canopfor on February 18, 2010 at 10:45 PM
Bring in mullah Omar and I’ll believe this is a real push by Pakistan; they have too much to lose by wiping out the Taliban to any large degree. Arresting a bunch of low-level thugs who were previously unknown to anyone but the ISI is not convincing.
Bishop on February 18, 2010 at 10:45 PM
Good stuff Allah…
Zorro on February 18, 2010 at 10:46 PM
If that will lead up to getting MBL head on a pike (well after they dig it out from the rocks in Tora Bora) I am willing to stand out in the cold and clap for Obama at his victory parade.
talking_mouse on February 18, 2010 at 10:42 PM
talking_mouse: This spike you speak of,I hope its displayed
near ground zero!(i kid):)
canopfor on February 18, 2010 at 10:47 PM
Exactly.. why DO you give up your pawns in chess?
There’s something… not right about this…
Skywise on February 18, 2010 at 10:48 PM
This is awesome news.
And thanks Allah for fixing my HA password so I can publically rejoice in Islamic terrorists being captured. Humduallah!
Mr. Joe on February 18, 2010 at 10:49 PM
I’m not impressed. This is a “come home to momma” kind of thing. ISI created the Taliban. Are we supposed to get excited because they set up a meet with 12 Taliban and call it a “seizure”? I don’t think so. If they turn the Taliban over to India! Now! That’s when I’ll get excited. Right now, they’re all busy screwing a bunch of little boys together.
SilentWatcher on February 18, 2010 at 10:51 PM
I wonder if this is being done to cover-up homeland attacks that are imminent. Hello, Fort Jackson (in my beloved home town of Columbia, SC).
SouthernGent on February 18, 2010 at 10:51 PM
This is a planning meeting. We’ve got to watch out for bombings and such after this.
SilentWatcher on February 18, 2010 at 10:52 PM
My first thought. Just where did all that $800B bailout money go to exactly?
BowHuntingTexas on February 18, 2010 at 10:52 PM
You’re on your own there mouse. I have ZERO trust in this man and his motives and intentions.
With Obama there is always a dark underbelly to everything he does and I’m having a hard time believing OBL is what he wants on a stick. He could cares less!
He wants a victory. Any victory. OBL’s head would not stop the global Jihad but it would give Obama a page in the history books and a powerful piece of political meat to chew on for years to come.
katy on February 18, 2010 at 10:53 PM
Obama will catch Osama. You watch.
Denverslim on February 18, 2010 at 10:54 PM
Perhaps it’s mother Duck ISI gathering in her Taliban chicks under her wings till the storm passes. I’ll retract that if the Pakistanis have handed any of these golden ones over to American hands. Would they turn them over and risk their torture at Gitmo? It’s doubtful, especially when the Pakis plan to force them to be Water colour painting on Bristol Board and thus by a miracle of Islam, cured faster than you could imagine possible.
BL@KBIRD on February 18, 2010 at 10:56 PM
I agree! Something smells fishy, and it’s not the fish. I can see Obama, and company pulling a fast one, to get Obama back up in the polls.
capejasmine on February 18, 2010 at 10:56 PM
Hiding them from the drones.
OldEnglish on February 18, 2010 at 11:00 PM
It would be the best thing ever if they were caught up in “Operation: Wyld Stallyns”.
zamoose on February 18, 2010 at 11:02 PM
One can only hope. Or, can The One only hope?
boomer on February 18, 2010 at 11:02 PM
Well, I wouldn’t be too confident after running your mouth. Great way to let them know you’re on the way and they’d better get outta dodge.
boomer on February 18, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Sorry, Rob. I posted in haste.
OldEnglish on February 18, 2010 at 11:09 PM
Thanks for the cite, AP. It’s “her,” BTW. Strange doings are indeed abroad in the land, which I’m not sure aren’t all related.
The hit on Hamas’ al-Mabhouh last month doesn’t pass the smell test as an Israeli job, with its cartoonish Big Foot footprint and neon signs saying “This way to the assassination.” There’s a possibility it was executed by an AQ-affiliated Gaza group (Jaish al-Islam, etc), since the AQ extremists there are homicidally on the outs with both Hamas and Fatah. But frankly the profile of the hit doesn’t fit those groups either, since they don’t tend to have the well-established tentacles in Europe to come up with half a dozen white European assassins.
The Taliban/AQ roll-ups in Pakistan, coming in the same few week period as the al-Mabhouh assassination in Dubai and the new Iranian push in Iraq, look like something much bigger going on. The thing we should bet on is that we’re not behind it. I wonder if bin Laden has died for good this time, and we’re seeing the scramble to capture the flag.
J.E. Dyer on February 18, 2010 at 11:19 PM
I’d gotten the impression that the soccer bombing a while back had really freaked Pakistan out, and that from that and thing the Taliban has done since then, they’ve be going from “religion nutjob/minor annoyance” to “too dangerous to let live” in the minds of the Pakistani government and citizenry.
The Taliban tends to kill a lot of people for stupid reasons. You can do that for a while, and people will simply fear you, but do it enough, and randomly enough, and eventually those people will figure, you’re just going to kill them anyways, so they’re take a piece of you with them when they go, and if you don’t have a heck of a lot of armor and firepower when that happens, they’re going to tear you into tiny chunks. That sort of thing is a lot of the reason why Anbar flipped the way it did. They would shoot people for carrying different “gendered” fruits in the same basket. They were requiring sheep herders to put diapers on the rams, lest they see the male organ.
They are crazy, and they kill people, and they aren’t organized enough to actually oppress anyone who is willing to fight back.
Voyager on February 18, 2010 at 11:20 PM
Perhaps because as long as they’re free it ensures a continued flow of cash from the US?
FloatingRock on February 18, 2010 at 11:20 PM
Protective custody, ISI style.
Christien on February 18, 2010 at 11:28 PM
The ISI has a long history of giving up expendable elements within the jihadist networks to keep US money coming and to curry favor with the stronger Taliban tribes.
If these Taliban are not handed over to US custody…they will see daylight soon enough.
The jihadist at the Red Mosque were released and A.Q. Kahn never missed a meal and slept like a baby.
India has been kicked to the curb and Pakistan has been given the green light to increase their influence in Afghanistan.
Pakistan is receiving big money,weapons,and political clout by the west to help with their grivances against India (Kashmir for one).
I would sure like to hear the Obama administration’s :
Exit strategy ….
…..and what they consider is a “victory” in Afghanistan .
The idea of them becoming a de-facto Pakistan is not my idea of success.
All we have heard (especially from liberals) is that Pakistan’s financing and support of the jihadist was a top foreign policy problem….
…How can Pakistan help keep Afghanistan from becoming “Talibanized” when they themselves are Talibanized.
….now the Obama administration wants to allow Afghanistan to become Pakistan II,essentially allowing them to pretty much be the same Taliban dominated country that they were before we invaded.
If Afghanistan has not had the radical Taliban elements destroyed and Pakistan’s jihadist training camps and support destroyed…..then I don’t see how anyone can claim this war as a “success”.
Baxter Greene on February 18, 2010 at 11:35 PM
Sorry, doesn’t pass the smell test to me.
Gotta ask why the Pakastanis have suddenly gotten bullish on rounding up bad guys instead of cutting very lucrative deals with them under the table.
One thing fur chur: it ain’t because the US of Aye is rattling sabres and promising to send a can of whoopazz to the region.
Now, fellow hotairians, why, pray tell, do y’all think is going on? I certainly have my theory, and it doesn’t reflect well on our leadership.
Chewy the Lab on February 18, 2010 at 11:36 PM
It’s funny that AP put O’s picture on this. Is Obama going to get credit for this stuff?
It has nothing to do with him at all.
The TaaaleeeBahnn are bombing the people that have supported them.
Can’t fix stupid.
B Man on February 18, 2010 at 11:37 PM
Wonder if this had anything to do with anything…just saying…
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/04/world/fg-afghan-suicide-bombers4
Or maybe this:
http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2010/01/10/pakistani-spy-agency-isi-linked-to-suicide-bombing-that-killed-7-cia-agents/
lovingmyUSA on February 18, 2010 at 11:42 PM
“Also among the captured: Mullah Mir Mohammed, the second Taliban “shadow governor” to be pinched by Pakistan in the past few weeks.”
Looks the Taliban shadow government is a shadow of its former self.
Tantor on February 18, 2010 at 11:51 PM
Lots of firing by Pakistan and India across the LoC recently. Also, Pune bombing. Kinda hard for Hillary to get involved when Pakistan’s making such a big show of being helpful.
Christien on February 18, 2010 at 11:52 PM
Until they are hanged, they are simply in Muslim Pakistan’s version of “double secret probation“
profitsbeard on February 18, 2010 at 11:54 PM
I’d be very fine with that. At least, it would be money well spent and on a legitimate function of the federal government.
Unfortunately, I don’t think that this current spate of activity has anything to do with the US, but with internal Pakistani dealings. If it turns out to help us, then I’m fine with that, too, but most internal Pakistani politics don’t end with the US getting anything substantive.
There’s not nearly enough information on what’s going on for me to form a good judgement – to my own satisfaction. I’m waiting to see how it unfolds. But, I can’t reconcile these actions with our hyper-restrictive ROE in Afghanistan. Too dissonant, at least from the outside, and the Pakistanis have too much of a history. We’ll see.
neurosculptor on February 19, 2010 at 12:13 AM
The Taliban are made up of many tribes and factions…
…the faction that attacked the ISI is a younger,smaller,and weaker group that was formed in response to the ISI’s attack on the Red Mosque:
the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan came into existence after the Lal Masjid raid.
The sweep being carried out is much bigger than dealing with this smaller faction that launched attacks on the government, so I don’t think this is entirely what this is all about.
The ISI still has enormous loyalty from many Taliban tribes who have committed no attacks against the government or military.
The Neo-Taliban are the ones most loyal but many others have contacts and supporters all through the Pakistani government and military.
Why the Taliban is attacking the ISI
May 29, 2009 14:35 IST
http://news.rediff.com/column/2009/may/29/guest-why-the-taliban-is-attacking-the-isi.htm
What becomes apparent is that to help maintain stability in Pakistan….the government needs to allow certain Taliban elements within their country to exert more control in Afghanistan.
So allowing Pakistan more “control” in Afghanistan helps control their radical problems while exporting to Afghanistan the very elements we came there to defeat.
…and the bonus for Pakistan is a big fat check, weapons from the west,India out in the cold,and major influence in Afghanistan.
Baxter Greene on February 19, 2010 at 12:13 AM
YOU ASK:
ANSWER HERE.
reliapundit on February 19, 2010 at 12:38 AM
This one’s tricky. Which devil do you trust?
Mojave Mark on February 19, 2010 at 12:47 AM
That would be a miracle. It’s very interesting.
neurosculptor on February 19, 2010 at 12:47 AM
Just a little skeptical, but why now? Sorry if I don’t trust Pakeeeeston or Obama on this. How is it that all of a sudden these”important” Taleeeban” leaders are being rounded up?How much is this costing us and how valuable are these “terrorists”? Something is rotten in the State of Pakeeeston.
sandee on February 19, 2010 at 1:14 AM
Put them in the iron maiden!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jfE5ApizU6c
EarthToZoey on February 19, 2010 at 1:26 AM
That will be a happy day!
I still hate Obama’s politics so I hope he is a one termer regardless.
Bush laid the ground work… at least as much as he did for any of the financial stuff if Obama lucks into Osama… good for the country, but Obama needs to go.
Americans are not socialist leeches.
petunia on February 19, 2010 at 1:30 AM
YOU ASK:
The $64,000 question remains why Pakistan is suddenly so intent in rolling these guys up.
ANSWER HERE.
reliapundit on February 19, 2010 at 12:38 AM
Interesting speculation, but a better indicator would be 6 or 7 carrier groups in position. Don’t think that’s happened yet.
Meremortal on February 19, 2010 at 1:38 AM
ya Mama…mood
urbancenturion on February 19, 2010 at 2:04 AM
I think this is more about the relationship between Pakistan and the Taliban than it is about us. And I also think that Obama will get a lot of credit he never earned, just like Carter has been claiming credit for Middle East peace talks that were actually initiated by the two sides way back when.
Regardless, I’m sure not complaining about the Taliban leaders we’re getting. The more the merrier. If Obama gets a little undue credit for it, I can live with that.
There Goes The Neighborhood on February 19, 2010 at 2:26 AM
/rant on
Don’t worry these newly detained “ALLEGED” Taliban leaders will be read their rights and enjoy the full privileges of any U.S. citizen such as Miranda Rights, Habeas Corpus, access to American courts, and state funded attorneys. And, oh yes, beach front Uighur condos in Bermuda at U.S. taxpayers expense of course. They won’t even have to suffer a dripping faucet much less water boarding. Allah forbid they feel the least bit uncomfortable or become offended by our racist capitalist Judeo-Christian culture and rule of law.
Just to dispense some economic justice, why don’t we throw in Section 8 housing subsidies, S-chip insurance for each of their 16 wives and 47 rugrats, WIC cards for their wives and toddlers, food stamps, child care vouchers, free primary and secondary education for all their offspring, college tuition, affordable housing loans, green job training to become ACORN organizers, etc..etc..etc…
/>rant off
DeathB4Tyranny on February 19, 2010 at 2:55 AM
Would be a bold and daring move…everything Obama is not:
1.Obama making a preemptive strike (act of war) is very unlikely.He is far left.A faction of democrats may be cheering these latest successes on but the left wing base is not happy about Obama looking like a warmonger.
2.Obama treats the War on Terror like it is a thorn in his side.He views it as a stumbling block to his socialist agenda here.Remember,this is the guy that wanted to cut and run in Iraq even if it meant genocide was on the way.
He is bringing the troops home from Iraq as quick as he can and is setting the stage for “surrendering with style” in Afghanistan.
The UN and international community would label him “Bush II” for a preemptive strike…plus Obama would not put his head on the chopping block based on intelligence that has burned other Presidents in the past.
3.A military strike (from the air) on Iran at best will set back their program…not destroy it.It is to spread out and deep underground.
4. Opening another front in the War on Terror is seriously risky….an attack could actually rally many Iranians who would view it as more American Imperialism
,thus vindicating all of dinner jackets rhetoric.
The Republican guard and Quds forces could pour into Iraq to take oil fields and align with Sadar/Shia elements to ignite sectarian violence on a large scale.They could also ignite Hezbollah/Hamas to arms.
5.Attacking Iran could also cause serious trouble for the very fragile government in Iraq.If it were to collapse it would create another power vacuum there leaving the door open for Sadar and other jihadist groups to fight for the oil fields.
The uprising by the people of Iran was a perfect opportunity for the West to finance and support the movement and opposition leaders to overthrow the government. The mullahs were taken by surprise at the size and ferocity of the movement but nobody came to help.
As a matter of fact,the Obama administration cut off funding to them in one of many attempts to “reach out” to dinner jacket.It failed.
We could have gotten plenty of Arab support(behind the scenes) for the right opposition leader from the likes of Saudi Arabia,Egypt,Jordan to name a few because none of them want to see the Shia/Persians gain anymore power in the region.
The mullahs have now rallied and gotten back control of the streets.
It seems to me we have two choices……
…accept Iran as a nuclear power that will almost certainly use it to try and destroy Israel(or sneak something into the US)….or
A serious commitment to Military strikes backed up by ground forces to ensure that all Nuclear sites are destroyed,and their military ability crippled.
The only thing I see Obama doing is not interfering with Israel as it takes the risks to launch strikes.
Baxter Greene on February 19, 2010 at 3:09 AM
ISI loves his assets. Nothing wrong to get your friendly Taliban under protection and get some billions in return, too.
Watch for a spectacular jail break-up Yemeni style when things are getting cooler.
Rookie on February 19, 2010 at 3:15 AM
codependent relationship.
ted c on February 19, 2010 at 5:26 AM
Bingo!
conservnut on February 19, 2010 at 7:13 AM
Gee, it just seems to me the push by the troops was more successful than expected, and a bunch of the Taliban failed to leave.
That’s one negative of being integrated into the communities for them that isn’t often discussed. It does mean that they are more reluctant to leave fast.
AnninCA on February 19, 2010 at 7:27 AM
Our worst nightmare is knocking at the door;
Osama is captured…Obamas popularity rises….Obamacare,Cap-n-trade pass….and a second term….
NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!
percysunshine on February 19, 2010 at 7:42 AM
Hmmmmmm. Also, didn’t they recently capture some AQ guy connected to AQ in Yemen who had a motherlode of phone numbers/contacts?
Buy Danish on February 19, 2010 at 7:58 AM
So what does seized mean?? Taken off the street just to molify Obama? My guess is that they are basically taking a short vacation to fool this dumbass US administration.
If these folks are not turned over to the CIA then taking them off the street means nothing…it is all hype
georgealbert on February 19, 2010 at 8:10 AM
Big ups to our men and women on the ground. Keep runnin’ up the score.
Red Cloud on February 19, 2010 at 8:14 AM
Exactly. Why does leadership see fit to release this kind of info? I cannot imagine a situation in which singing out would actually help the mission. Smacks of pure politics to me, which makes all of it rather suspect.
JusDreamin on February 19, 2010 at 8:30 AM
That sounds more likely than anything else. Years and years go by without any captures or arrests and now all of a sudden they’re rounding up enemy leaders as if they were lost sheep? Very fishy.
scalleywag on February 19, 2010 at 8:38 AM
I now have absolutely no clue as to what’s going on.
1) Are these legitimate arrests/captures?
2) Is this merely a smokescreen, to bring the Taliban into the negotiation tent?
3) Are friendly ISI agents “arresting” these people in order to keep them safe from predator drones during the latest US attack on Marjah?
4) Rumsfeld’s unknown unknown?
rbj on February 19, 2010 at 8:42 AM
Or maybe after a long series of bombings, murders, attacks and last years military campaign by the Taliban which came within 40 miles of Karachi, the Pakistani’s have realized that supporting the Taliban endangers their future existence as a state? Admittedly they should have figured this out before, but obviously some elements in Pakistan are very slow learners. Clearly support for the Taliban has not led to greater stability or security for the Pakistanis.
I don’t think you have to do illogical loops (i.e., “the Pakistani’s are attacking the Taliban because the former have become too friendly with America”) to explain why a country ultimately does something in it’s own interest.
Kasper Hauser on February 19, 2010 at 8:53 AM
We’ve got deeper pockets and better weapons?
citrus on February 19, 2010 at 8:56 AM
Pakistan may just have confidence in McCrystal. It may have little to do with Obama.
AnninCA on February 19, 2010 at 9:24 AM
Clearing the decks for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is Iran.
MarkT on February 19, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Will it be a “catch and release” program?
albill on February 19, 2010 at 9:33 AM
Why is Barry’s photo on this article? People here know he has nothing to do with this offensive. He’s too dumb to be giving any instructions of this nature.
We know who is really in charge, and it sure as hell ain’t him.
Cybergeezer on February 19, 2010 at 9:39 AM
Exit question: If this is all a ploy by Pakistan to restore its leverage over the Taliban when negotiating with Karzai, why start rounding up lower level Al Qaeda capos? Why not just go get Mullah Omar and Bin Laden and Zawahiri and lean on them?
I suspect they are “Sweating” them, into making a desperate move.
I think the attack on the Khost C.I.A. base, was the tipping point, I think ultimatums were issued. Imagine what the C.I.A. could do about tipping power inside of Pakistan. I mean it’s what they do they topple governments -it’s like their specialty, and after the Khost attack they became extremely motivated:)
Reminds me of the Movie “War Games” C.I.A. to Pakistan leadership….Shall We Play A Game?
Dr Evil on February 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM
“War Games” that’s a classic right there.
Dr Evil on February 19, 2010 at 10:08 AM
C.I.A. – How about Global Thermonuclear War?
WOPR/Pakistan: Wouldn’t you prefer a good game of chess?
Dr Evil on February 19, 2010 at 10:11 AM
Something about this is fishy.
Ortzinator on February 19, 2010 at 10:49 AM
You know that there\’s a website for that, right?
Nonfactor on February 19, 2010 at 11:13 AM
I think this is the best and logical analysis here.
The Taliban never understood the lesson that you don’t bite the hand that feeds you because that very same hand and slap you in the face.
And boy, are the Taliban getting slapped hard.
Conservative Samizdat on February 19, 2010 at 11:27 AM
When he first said that, the Pakistanis probably treated it as mere rhetorical bluster in an intense political contest … an annoying rudeness but of no real concern.
However, after a year of observing him at the controls, perhaps the Pakistanis have concluded that Mr Obama is so utterly clueless, narcissistic and eager to be impressive and important that he might really choose their country as the place to leave his (scorch) mark.
YiZhangZhe on February 19, 2010 at 12:42 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/18/AR2010021800434_pf.html
Anyone good at reading between the lines? The C.I.A. is good at toppling governments- destabilizing…We are supposed to believe after the KHOST attack, they just went back to business as usual…they didn’t decide to employ any of their dirty tricks? Hmmm so the Pakistanis think the Taliban is responsible for the Khyber Agency Bombing…maybe they were who knows.
I am just saying that some how the Mossad reached out, and touched an arms dealer in Dubai…but our own C.I.A. isn’t capable of orchestrating multiple scenarios and outcomes?
C.I.A. to Pakistan “Shall We Play A Game” LOL!
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?id=169012
Dr Evil on February 20, 2010 at 11:53 AM