Taliban do not want to lose the "TTP card" against Pakistan

Why would Afghans give up TTP? they use them to create war and chaos in the region, Afghan's have no future so war is what they thrive on, their women give birth and treated like animals, more we kill more they will reproduce, so rather than signing these stupid cease-fire which will not last anyway, use intel from air/ground and target TTP and if they are hanging out with AT then take them out too. We don't need to take Afghan territory we just need kill their top leaders and arm/support the Afghans who wants to get rid of Afghan Taliban Terrorists.
 
Loll I don't know what planet some of you live on.
So you're telling me that you were expecting the Afghan government at the time to guard the Durand Line because of infiltration by TTP? All while supporting the Afghan Taliban against them. How do you make sense of this?
Changing the goalposts now I see: first you said that Pakistan supports ISIS against Afghan Taliban, when I gave you a lesson in facts, you weren’t capable of responding.
 
Loll I don't know what planet some of you live on.
So you're telling me that you were expecting the Afghan government at the time to guard the Durand Line because of infiltration by TTP? All while supporting the Afghan Taliban against them. How do you make sense of this?
i had to stop myself because i almost called you brother.
i realize you people are not brothers, you never were.
but you need to tell your friends and relatives - that ordinary Pakistanis have never been this angry and you will face our wrath if you don't change your ways.
 
It has nothing to do with any "cards" or leverage or depth, this is all just ignoring the elephant in the room which is Afghan expansionism.

Everything is downstream from there, TTP is the weapon for expansionist goals the state is built on.
 
Changing the goalposts now I see: first you said that Pakistan supports ISIS against Afghan Taliban, when I gave you a lesson in facts, you weren’t capable of responding.
WTF are you on about? Maybe wrong person, I never said what you're claiming. Facts? I asked you a question that you couldn't answer. Seriously? Delulu
 
The Pakistani economy is in dire straits. A prolonged war could bleed its economy further.

By Ahmadullah Archiwal
November 07, 2025

thediplomat_2025-11-07-205524.webp

Pakistan and the Taliban regime have kicked off a new round of negotiations in Istanbul. The talks are ostensibly aimed at preventing further escalation of their violent clashes over the past month. However, both sides are already accusing each other of violating the ceasefire. War clouds are hovering over the Durand Line, their disputed border.

Should a war erupt, would Pakistan gain? Pakistan is militarily stronger than the Taliban and therefore, it has many reasons to believe that it can gain a lot from the war with the Taliban. However, a protracted war with the Taliban might not yield Pakistan the outcome it expects.

Legitimizing its war with the Taliban is a significant hurdle for Pakistan. In the past, Pakistan drew on religion to legitimize its proxy wars in Afghanistan and Kashmir. Now, however, it is becoming difficult for the Pakistani state to use religion to legitimize its war against the Taliban.

Recently, Amir Khan Muttaqi, the Taliban regime’s foreign minister, visited the Deoband seminary in India, which is considered the source of religious guidance for South Asian Muslims. The visit has significantly changed the dynamics on the ground. The visit has emboldened the Taliban to claim that they are the actual heir of the Deobandi school, and they are the ones who have more religious legitimacy. It will be close to impossible for prominent Pakistani religious scholars to justify a war with the Taliban based on religion.

Besides, Pakistani politicians are divided over the war against the Taliban. Many prominent politicians, including some nationalists, religious leaders, and some mainstream political parties, are openly opposing Pakistan’s war with Afghanistan. These include the Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI), the Awami National Party and the Pakhtunkhwa Mili Awami Party.

Indeed, some Pakistani political parties are opposed to the Pakistani military’s operations in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, a Pakistani province that borders Afghanistan. Foremost among them is the PTI, which heads the government in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The party is at loggerheads with the Shehbaz Sharif government and the military establishment over the counterterrorism operations in the province.

Securing religious legitimacy and political backing is important for Pakistan to win its war against the Taliban. At the moment, it appears to have got neither.

Ahead of its military strikes on Afghanistan, Pakistan would have calculated that it would have the support of sections of the Afghan population, especially those opposed to the Taliban regime. However, most Afghans have criticized Pakistan’s attacks. They see it as an attack not on the Taliban but on the Afghan state. They are also enraged over the military strikes in Kabul, especially since these have claimed many civilian lives.

Not only this, Pashtuns living on the Pakistani side of the Durand Line have not supported the Pakistani attack on Afghan soil. Commerce in the two Pakistani provinces of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Baluchistan depends solely on Afghanistan. Industrialists and traders are unable to compete on a national level with their Pakistani counterparts, particularly with Punjabis and Sindhis. Hence, their dependence on Afghanistan for their economic survival. It is because of this reason that traders from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa protested during the recent military clashes between the Taliban and Pakistan. Therefore, Pakistan’s endeavor to enter into a prolonged war will face resistance at home.

Although Pakistan has achieved considerable success on the diplomatic front—relations with the United States have improved in recent months and Islamabad signed a Strategic Mutual Defense Agreement with Saudi Arabia in September—this has not translated into economic gains. According to a recent Financial Times report, the domestic situation in Pakistan reflects a nation grappling with worsening poverty, declining investment, and a stagnant economy that has not benefited its 250 million people. With its economy in dire straits, Pakistan cannot afford a protracted war with the Taliban.

More importantly, Pakistan’s paradoxical behavior and foreign policy rhetoric towards Afghanistan over the last forty years has left ordinary Pakistanis confused and questioning their rulers. During Imran Khan’s term as prime minister, Pakistan resettled a large number of TTP fighters in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. The Pakistan army was not only aware of this, but it was part of the deal that paved the way for their resettlement. In fact, former ISI chief Faiz Hamid played an active role in clinching the agreement.

As for the Afghan Taliban, Pakistan’s close ties with the group are well known. Pakistan’s Defense Minister Khwaja Asif, who has taken a hawkish stance on the Taliban now, in a tweet, which has been apparently deleted now, had celebrated their victory when they captured power in Kabul on August 15, 2021. Khan, who was then Pakistan’s prime minister, praised the Taliban for “breaking the shackles of slavery.”

Ahead of its launching military strikes on Afghanistan, Pakistan would have calculated that the international community would rally behind it. This has not happened. Almost all governments that have reacted to the war have called for a ceasefire.

Importantly, Afghanistan’s rugged terrain will make a potential ground war between Pakistan and the Taliban a hard one for Islamabad to win. Afghanistan could bleed Pakistan, leaving it struggling to recover from the damage inflicted over an extended period.
 
These cockroaches ran into the hills in two months in 2001, surrendered Kabul two weeks before first convoys crossed into Afghanistan from Pakistan. If we can work with Persian afghanistan, I believe that goal of n independent khorasan isn't a complicated one.
A less extreme option can be to find any and all ways to improve intelligence networks in Afg - then find a way to create some form of quick strike system. Ground launched - potentially ballistic - CEP 5m or so - that can be launched in a 5 minute window or less to repeatedly hit command individuals of TTP whenever they surface.

If you permanently either kill or force their leaders(and successors) underground and couple that with lets say 25-50 TTA elements killed for every attack faced by Pakistan you will force a situation where either the lower commanders of TTA will try conventional attacks coupled with TTP out of frustration or they will turn on the TTP elements themselves.

The goal must be to prevent TTP moving east and force them into potentially trying to go Southwest where you can then kill them.

Not an easy ask - requires first this system which is likely going to have its own costs and induction time - it will require having millions thrown into greater surveillance needs.
It will require multiple branches coordinating with competent people ideally having little political or egoistic appointees.

So I do realize I "scuttled" the idea based on the needs but the other option is to continue this tit for tat and half baked UCAV and drone approach which really is not causing any damage to true centers of gravity for the TTP or TTA.

There is a certain "voldemort" in the middle east whose name gets everyone here to say "astaghfirullah" - but if you really look at their approach it is effective. Yes, you dont have those unlimited resources nor total support from the most powerful nation on earth but at the same time you also have much less "care" from the world regarding events in Afghanistan.

The danger is actually from actors like current CM KPK and PTM types more than any external actors.
 
War is good for no one

We understand all this, Pakistan GHQ made a logical and calculated decision to destroy the Afghan Republic, remove the USA, NATO and India in favor of the Taliban, understanding that the Taliban and Afghanistan was dependent on Pakistan, Pakistani good will, open borders and port access and thus could not afford to continue supporting terrorists attacks against Pakistan

That line of thinking was entirely logical and reasonable

The problem is afghans are a harami m, backwards, donkey people, so even though they desperately required Pakistani support and goodwill they also repeatedly gave space to anti-pakistan actors who used the long porus border to attack Pakistan


Pakistan has been patient, it has been reasonable
But no longer can Pakistan remake quite whilst afghans behave like animals

So regardless of the costs, Pakistan has now drawn a line in the sand and it's up to afghans to comply

Destroy BLA and TTP or let us do it and then concentrate on trade and peaceful relations
 
Full blown war not needed for that cesspit.

Just periodically bomb the shit out of them. Drones are fine.

Monitor movement.

Stop trade / transit.

Whats the problem with that? You see, they were hedging all their bets on Pakistan not doing anything on Afghan soil. Camps / bases right on the border is a good example of their stupidity.
 
This guy knows a lot about Pakistan-Afghanistan issues.
English captions available.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.


A less extreme option can be to find any and all ways to improve intelligence networks in Afg - then find a way to create some form of quick strike system. Ground launched - potentially ballistic - CEP 5m or so - that can be launched in a 5 minute window or less to repeatedly hit command individuals of TTP whenever they surface.

If you permanently either kill or force their leaders(and successors) underground and couple that with lets say 25-50 TTA elements killed for every attack faced by Pakistan you will force a situation where either the lower commanders of TTA will try conventional attacks coupled with TTP out of frustration or they will turn on the TTP elements themselves.

The goal must be to prevent TTP moving east and force them into potentially trying to go Southwest where you can then kill them.

Not an easy ask - requires first this system which is likely going to have its own costs and induction time - it will require having millions thrown into greater surveillance needs.
It will require multiple branches coordinating with competent people ideally having little political or egoistic appointees.

So I do realize I "scuttled" the idea based on the needs but the other option is to continue this tit for tat and half baked UCAV and drone approach which really is not causing any damage to true centers of gravity for the TTP or TTA.

There is a certain "voldemort" in the middle east whose name gets everyone here to say "astaghfirullah" - but if you really look at their approach it is effective. Yes, you dont have those unlimited resources nor total support from the most powerful nation on earth but at the same time you also have much less "care" from the world regarding events in Afghanistan.

The danger is actually from actors like current CM KPK and PTM types more than any external actors.
Khorasan works better long term. It robs Kandahar/khost of Kabul and half the population to tax and recruit from. It robs Kandahar/ khost of 60-70% of Afghanistan territory. Smaller territory for us to find targets in. Also gives pakistan a permanent partner against Afghanistan on its northern flank.
 
Khorasan works better long term. It robs Kandahar/khost of Kabul and half the population to tax and recruit from. It robs Kandahar/ khost of 60-70% of Afghanistan territory. Smaller territory for us to find targets in. Also gives pakistan a permanent partner against Afghanistan on its northern flank.

A policy of dividing Afghans against Afghans, as far as I know, has never been Pakistan's long term policy. If you are able to dig up a recent public presentation of Pakistan's former ISI Chief General Ehsanhullah: Pakistan's policy wrt to Afghanistan, since 1947, has always been 'strategic patience'.
And thus most of MY own posts about Afghanistan lean toward some enlightenment of Afghan population. That's the only path forward on practical, moral, and ethical way. The Afghan civilian population is stuck in a time-warp of backwardness, bypassed by History and its movers and shakers: But they are not the culprit for that!
 
A policy of dividing Afghans against Afghans, as far as I know, has never been Pakistan's long term policy. If you are able to dig up a recent public presentation of Pakistan's former ISI Chief General Ehsanhullah: Pakistan's policy wrt to Afghanistan, since 1947, has always been 'strategic patience'.
And thus most of MY own posts about Afghanistan lean toward some enlightenment of Afghan population. That's the only path forward on practical, moral, and ethical way. The Afghan civilian population is stuck in a time-warp of backwardness, bypassed by History and its movers and shakers: But they are not the culprit for that!
Dividing Afghans against Afghans is the only time we come together, unfortunately. That's when we show our true force.
He thinks this strategy of breaking up Afghanistan will benefit Pakistan, merely 2 years ago he was Taliban boy, cheering Taliban on. We now know how that turned out.

While I appreciate your "strategic patience"(strategic depth?) , madrasas aren't enlightening us. You see the outcome in front of your eyes brother.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top