Yeah, this is why I was confused. Kobal2’s original statement was very random. 10,000 fighters(the lower estimate for the Haqqani/Taliban force) can’t just up and move across country borders. And they definitely can’t set up base there without significant local logistical support.
Didn’t say it’d be their first choice. That being said, and absent other choices, between hiding from the Indian army and hiding from the American army which one would *you *pick ?
Lets see. 10,000 people would have to make it across Pakistan, which would be noticed and make you a much better target than if you just stayed put in civilian areas and fought. You’d have to cross the border into India (which has recently been fenced and floodlit for most of its length), and the Indian army has had to deal with incursions of 10-20 person militant teams from Pakistan for two decades now. The Indian army speaks the local language, they have a set of informants in place, they’re aware of ethnic differences and local patterns of population. Add this to a hostile government, no ties with the local populace, and the huge logistics problem involved in moving upward of 10,000 people. I’m actually having trouble believing I have to spell out some of this stuff.
In short, it would be far easier for Afghani/Pakistani militants to hide in and fight the American army in Pakistan than to hide in and fight the Indian army in India.
And that should tell you something.
Namely, that your border patrols are not catching anywhere near all of those who try to cross. Else they would have stopped trying a long time ago. Even the most hardheaded mule stops charging headfirst into a brick wall at some point. The fact that they are trying to cross in the first place should also clue you in on the fact that they have somewhere to go (i.e. people to support them) once they’ve crossed.
Besides, we’re not talking about having every last fighter pick up sticks and go - that would be silly. The whole idea is to stay and fight the Americans. Which is why they’re staying and fighting in Afghanistan right now. It’s the logistics and support branches, the ammunition and explosives train and the training camps that are hiding in Pakistan. Hardly 10.000 men.
Now, again, I never said India would be their first pick. But I don’t think it would be as inconceivable as you seem to think, either.
xtisme brought up Iraq and I responded.
I’d rather hide from the American army in Pakistan than the Indian army in India (assisted by the Americans, no doubt). At least in Pakistan you have a sympathetic government.
At any rate, if you know anything about those guys and their goals, they are not going to move, en mass, to India to hide. That is laughable.
I posed the question (somewhat facetiously) because I cannot understand why we are continuing this war. There is ample evidence that we are funding the opposition ($6 billion unaccounted for). Plus, I read that so far, it has cost us $16,000,000 per insurgent killed. This has passed the bounds of insanity-why don’t we just offer them a ton of money and leave?
How much money is chaos next door to Pakistan worth to you?
Afghanistan has been in chaos for years-what has our tenure there accomplished?
As laughable as them moving their base of operations over to Pakistan you mean ? :dubious:.
Once again (and because I realize I wasn’t being clear earlier): the fighters and Allahu Akhbar types would stay and fight, like they stay and fight now. What I’m saying is that the logistics and support elements, which are currently operating out of Pakistan because it theoretically puts them out of arms reach* and would be the reason for extending the war into Pakistan in the first place ; would simply pick up sticks and set up shop elsewhere for a net result of zero. Well, zero and a new invasion with new costs, new enemies and new grudges. Fuck yeah !
All I’m saying is, ten years after the invasion of Pakistan a new report would come up stating “90% of IEDs in the Pakistani theatre of operations come from X”, where X is a neighbouring country of your choosing. It doesn’t have to be India, if that’s your major hangup with that general concept.
- theoretically because in practice America gives surprisingly few fucks about lobbing drones or flying commandos into sovereign Pakistani airspace, but that’s another topic I suppose.
It’s not great, but it’s not like it would be if the U.S. gave the government a moneybomb and ran for the hills.
[QUOTE=Mosier]
It would be a logistical nightmare, which we would surely be forced to retreat from in short order. Pakistan can do literally whatever it wants, because we need them much more than they need us.
[/QUOTE]
With certain assurances, India would probably be quite happy to allow US forces to stage within its borders; logistical nightmare solved.
Of course, many Indians (like bldysabba) would rather retain the current unstable-but-tolerable Pakistani government than risk a real basket case on their borders.
Kashmir is pretty friendly to Islamist terrorists, although it would probably be less so if they couldn’t operate from Pakistan.